Table 7.

Effects of switching to a more intensive PCPs within the same physician practice.

	(1) Primary care $	(2) All physician $	(3) Pharma drug $	(4) Outpatient $	(5) Inpatient $
Δ_i ^* Post_it	0.666^*** (0.0239)	0.481^*** (0.0253)	0.369^*** (0.100)	0.498^*** (0.0598)	0.414^*** (0.0505)
	(6) Post-acute $	(7) Total $	(8) # Primary care visits	(9) # All office visits	(10) # Diagnoses

Δ_i ^* Post_it	0.370^*** (0.0488)	0.344^*** (0.0420)	0.662^*** (0.0283)	0.440^*** (0.0268)	0.366^*** (0.0242)
	(11) # Chronic conditions	(12) # ED visits	(13) # Avoidable hosp.	(14) Pr(flu vaccine = 1)	(15) Pr(diabetes care = 1)

Δ_i ^* Post_it	0.387^*** (0.0225)	0.324^*** (0.0445)	0.391^*** (0.0671)	0.556^*** (0.0263)	0.728^*** (0.0380)

Notes: This table shows difference-in-difference estimates for the average effects of switching to PCPs with more intensive practice styles for patients who did not switch physician practices following their original PCP’s exit. Each cell is an estimate for θ from Eq. (1) for a different utilization outcome y, which is the parameter on the interaction between the change in PCP practice style (Δ_i) for that outcome and an indicator for the post-event period (Post_it). To summarize the average longer-run effects, we include years 2–6 in the post-event periods (and we include years −4 to −1 in the pre-event periods). We control for patient fixed effects, time-varying patient characteristics, a post-event time indicator, and calendar year fixed effects. The standard errors are clustered at the HRR-level.

^***

p < 0.001

^**

p < 0.01

p < 0.05.