Making care primary: a renewed investment into primary care
The Making Care Primary (MCP) model represents a sharp shift in Medicare’s approach to primary care, yet its current design risks duplicating failures from prior alternative payment models. Our editorial suggests refinements to address these gaps. To prevent early provider dropout from MCP’s rigid t...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press
|
| Series: | Health Economics, Policy and Law |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S174413312510011X/type/journal_article |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849720438029025280 |
|---|---|
| author | Cameron J. Sabet Bhav Jain Sandeep Palakodeti |
| author_facet | Cameron J. Sabet Bhav Jain Sandeep Palakodeti |
| author_sort | Cameron J. Sabet |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The Making Care Primary (MCP) model represents a sharp shift in Medicare’s approach to primary care, yet its current design risks duplicating failures from prior alternative payment models. Our editorial suggests refinements to address these gaps. To prevent early provider dropout from MCP’s rigid track-based system, we propose a sliding-scale infrastructure payment model that adjusts based on practice needs rather than abrupt phase-outs. Given MCP’s reliance on community-based organisations (CBOs) for social determinants of health interventions, we also advocate for direct, outcomes-based contracts between providers and CBOs, ensuring accountability for patient outcomes rather than passive referrals. We recommend that MCP enforce data-sharing mandates for commercial insurers and Medicaid agencies, drawing from Washington State’s successful Multi-Payer Collaborative, to avoid payer disengagement that plagued previous multi-payer models. To expand beyond conventional quality measures, we propose integrating patient-centred outcomes from the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, making sure MCP captures meaningful clinical impact. Finally, we propose programme adjustments frequently at two- to three-year intervals to refine risk adjustment methodologies. These approaches could enhance MCP’s sustainability, preventing the financial instability and misaligned incentives that undermined past value-based care initiatives. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-ea17824c623a4e93b3d9272c60323abb |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 1744-1331 1744-134X |
| language | English |
| publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Health Economics, Policy and Law |
| spelling | doaj-art-ea17824c623a4e93b3d9272c60323abb2025-08-20T03:11:55ZengCambridge University PressHealth Economics, Policy and Law1744-13311744-134X11110.1017/S174413312510011XMaking care primary: a renewed investment into primary careCameron J. Sabet0https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2299-1426Bhav Jain1Sandeep Palakodeti2Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USAStanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USAMishe Health, New York, NY, USAThe Making Care Primary (MCP) model represents a sharp shift in Medicare’s approach to primary care, yet its current design risks duplicating failures from prior alternative payment models. Our editorial suggests refinements to address these gaps. To prevent early provider dropout from MCP’s rigid track-based system, we propose a sliding-scale infrastructure payment model that adjusts based on practice needs rather than abrupt phase-outs. Given MCP’s reliance on community-based organisations (CBOs) for social determinants of health interventions, we also advocate for direct, outcomes-based contracts between providers and CBOs, ensuring accountability for patient outcomes rather than passive referrals. We recommend that MCP enforce data-sharing mandates for commercial insurers and Medicaid agencies, drawing from Washington State’s successful Multi-Payer Collaborative, to avoid payer disengagement that plagued previous multi-payer models. To expand beyond conventional quality measures, we propose integrating patient-centred outcomes from the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, making sure MCP captures meaningful clinical impact. Finally, we propose programme adjustments frequently at two- to three-year intervals to refine risk adjustment methodologies. These approaches could enhance MCP’s sustainability, preventing the financial instability and misaligned incentives that undermined past value-based care initiatives.https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S174413312510011X/type/journal_articleeconomicspolicyhealth disparities |
| spellingShingle | Cameron J. Sabet Bhav Jain Sandeep Palakodeti Making care primary: a renewed investment into primary care Health Economics, Policy and Law economics policy health disparities |
| title | Making care primary: a renewed investment into primary care |
| title_full | Making care primary: a renewed investment into primary care |
| title_fullStr | Making care primary: a renewed investment into primary care |
| title_full_unstemmed | Making care primary: a renewed investment into primary care |
| title_short | Making care primary: a renewed investment into primary care |
| title_sort | making care primary a renewed investment into primary care |
| topic | economics policy health disparities |
| url | https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S174413312510011X/type/journal_article |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT cameronjsabet makingcareprimaryarenewedinvestmentintoprimarycare AT bhavjain makingcareprimaryarenewedinvestmentintoprimarycare AT sandeeppalakodeti makingcareprimaryarenewedinvestmentintoprimarycare |