Search

Introduction: The Renal or Ureteral Stone Surgical Treatment Episode-based Measure in the Quality Payment Program evaluates clinicians' cost to Medicare for beneficiaries who receive surgical treatment for stones. The measure score is calculated from Medicare claims according to a complex methodology. This paper seeks to describe the stone treatment patterns of urologists and establish benchmarks for 2 surrogate measures-preoperative stenting and postoperative infection-which may predict clinician performance on the episode cost-based measure., Methods: The study data were drawn from the adjudicated claims of 960 providers who performed at least 30 surgical stone treatments between January 1, 2020, and June 30, 2022. To allow for the correlation of procedures performed by the same providers, generalized estimating equations logistic regression models were used to evaluate the rate of preoperative stenting and postoperative infection., Results: A total of 185,076 surgical episodes (113,799 [61.5%] ureteroscopy, 63,931 [34.5%] extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, and 7,346 [4.0%] percutaneous nephrolithotripsy) were identified over the study period. Preoperative stenting was performed in 35,550 episodes (19.2%) and postoperative infection was documented in 13,114 episodes (7.1%). Preoperative stenting and postoperative infection were significantly more common in patients who were female (adjusted OR 1.42, 1.38), in those undergoing ureteroscopy vs extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (adjusted OR 3.24, 1.66), and in patients on Medicare vs commercial insurance (adjusted OR 1.19, 1.17)., Conclusions: This large study of surgical stone treatments documents rates of events and associated attributes of patients that may increase episode cost and be relevant to urologists participating in the Quality Payment Program.

Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest Dr Grant-Kels serves as Deputy Editor of Journal of the American Journal Academy of Dermatology; is Chief Medical Officer and member of the Board and stockholder of VeraDermics, Inc; and is a consultant and stock holder for DermaSensor, Inc. Dr Feng is a consultant for Cytrellis Biosystems, Inc and Soliton, Inc. Dr Kodumudi has no conflicts of interest to declare.

New payment models have been introduced by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to move medicine away from volume-based care toward value-based care. Most models focus on changes for primary care, but specialists like otolaryngologists are wise to familiarize themselves with this changing payment landscape to take advantage of the opportunities and avoid the pitfalls associated with each model., Competing Interests: Disclosure S.P. Cragle is a member and former chair, board of governors of Central Minnesota Health Network, an Accountable Care Organization and Clinically Integrated Network., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Lumbar Spine MRI Use for Low Back Pain (OP-8) is calculated by dividing the number of patients who received lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI-L) before receiving alternative treatments (e.g., physical therapy) by the total number of patients receiving MRI-L in the outpatient setting at a given institution. Since the passage of the Post-Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA), OP-8 scores became tied to hospital finances. This study aims to determine how MACRA has impacted OP-8 scores since its implementation. We also aim to investigate how regional designation, profit status (for-profit, government, and nonprofit), and hospital setting (critical access, non-critical access) affect OP-8 scores., Methods: Data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Compare database were used to extract information on the national trends in OP-8 scores from 2014 to 2020. A multivariable linear regression model was fit to isolate the impact of hospital characteristics on OP-8 scores., Results: After a decrease from 2015 to 2016, the mean national OP-8 score plateaued, staying around 40% from 2017 through 2020. A critical access setting increased OP-8 scores by 5.41 (95% confidence interval, 3.51-6.77; P ≤ 0.001), compared with a non-critical access setting. Governmental status increased scores by 1.27 (95% confidence interval, 0.28-2.27; P = 0.012), compared with a nonprofit status., Conclusions: The implementation of MACRA seems to have been unsuccessful in altering practice patterns, given the minimal change in OP-8 scores over the last 4 years. Furthermore, institutional factors are clearly correlated with a lack of adherence to magnetic resonance imaging guidelines. Given these findings, there is a need to modify health policies., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: CMS implemented Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) policies to cap points and remove "topped out" quality measures having extremely high national performance. We assess such policies' impact on quality measure reporting, focusing on diagnostic radiology., Methods: Data regarding MIPS 2019 quality measures were extracted from the CMS Quality Benchmarks File and the Quality Payment Program Explore Measures search tool and summarized by collection type and specialty., Results: Among 348 MIPS measure-and-collection-type combinations, 40.5% were topped out (56.6% of those with a benchmark) and 23.3% were capped. Among measures with a benchmark, the percent topped out varied (P < .001) by collection type: claims 82.7%, qualified registry 60.4%, electronic health record 11.6%. The percent capped was also greatest for claims measures (52.3%). Among 699 Qualified Clinical Data Registry (QCDR) measures, 63 had a benchmark, of which 44.4% were topped out. The percent of measures topped out also varied significantly (P < .001) by specialty, ranging from 0.0% (electrophysiology) to 95.0% (diagnostic radiology). Among 20 unique measure-and-collection-type combinations for diagnostic radiology, only one was not topped out, and 30.0% were capped. Among 20 radiology QCDR measures, 5 had a benchmark, of which 3 were topped out., Conclusion: CMS topped out measure scoring and removal policies disproportionately impact radiology, which has the highest topped out percentage among all specialties and only a single non-topped out measure. This asymmetry disproportionately impairs radiologists' MIPS flexibility and is anticipated to progress in ensuing years. Current CMS policies create a looming crisis for radiologists in MIPS. The high risk of an insufficient number of available quality measures creates an urgent need for new radiology measure development., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In 2015, Congress passed the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA), a policy intended to transition Medicare away from pure fee-for-service care to value-based care. MACRA does this by evaluating the cost and quality of providers, resulting in financial bonuses and penalties in Medicare reimbursement. MACRA offers two tracks for participation, the Merit-based Incentive Payment System and the Advanced Alternative Payment Models. Although the payment rules are different for each of the tracks, common to both is an emphasis on holding providers accountable for high-quality, cost-efficient care. Early data suggest that the End-stage renal disease Seamless Care Organizations, an Advanced Alternative Payment Model, resulted in cost-savings concurrent with improved care quality. Additionally, on July 10th 2019, the President signed an executive order that further attempts to improve kidney disease care by shifting its focus away from in-center hemodialysis toward chronic kidney disease care, home-based dialysis, kidney transplantation, and innovating new therapies for kidney disease. These changes to nephrology reimbursement present a unique opportunity to improve patient outcomes in a cost-effective way. A multidisciplinary effort among policy makers, nephrology providers, and patient advocacy groups is critical to ensure these changes in care delivery safeguard and improve patient health., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

The American Academy of Pediatrics provides this technical report as supplemental background to the accompanying coding and valuation system policy statement. The rapid evolution in health care payment modeling requires that clinicians have a current appreciation of the mechanics of service representation and valuation. The accompanying policy statement provides recommendations relevant to this area, and this technical report provides a format to outline important concepts that allow for effective translation of bedside clinical events into physician payment., Competing Interests: POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2019 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 was signed into law on April 16, 2015, fundamentally altering the way clinicians are reimbursed for the treatment of Medicare patients starting in 2017. Under this new pay-for-performance model, reimbursement will be tied to multiple metrics related to quality and cost of care. A scaled scoring system will require providers to compete for positive reimbursement adjustments, while also penalizing poor performers with negative adjustments. A firm understanding of this new system will be essential for all physicians looking to maximize their reimbursement, particularly diagnostic radiologists and members of other highly focused fields where special considerations lead to alterations in the scoring system., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Quality management in American health care is in crisis. Performance measurement in its current form is costly, redundant, and labyrinthine. Increasingly, its contribution to achieving the Quadruple Aim is under close examination, especially in the domain of primary care services, where the burden of measurement is heaviest. This article assesses the state of quality management in primary care in the United States, particularly the 2015 Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act, in comparative perspective, drawing lessons from the Quality and Outcomes Framework in the United Kingdom. The health care delivery function specific to primary care is pivotal to crossing the quality chasm, yet prior efforts to improve the quality of this function have failed more often than succeeded. These failures are the result of quality programs unguided by core principles of primary care. Quality management in primary care requires a more disciplined approach, adherent to 4 foundational principles: optimizing holistic patient and population health; harnessing the Quadruple Aim as a dynamic whole; applying measurements as tools for quality, not outcomes of quality; and prioritizing therapeutic relationships. These principles serve as the foundation for a bridge to high-functioning primary care that will lead American health care closer to the Quadruple Aim., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: none declared., (© Copyright 2018 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Value-based care is evolving with a focus on improving efficiency, reducing cost, and enhancing the patient experience. Interventional pulmonology has the opportunity to lead an effective value-based care model. This model is supported by the relatively low cost of pulmonary procedures and has the potential to improve efficiencies in thoracic care. We discuss key strategies to evaluate and improve efficiency in interventional pulmonology practice and describe our experience in developing an interventional pulmonology suite. Such a model can be adapted to other specialty areas and may encourage a more coordinated approach to specialty care., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We surveyed a national sample of internal medicine physicians in March-May 2017 to explore their beliefs about the newly implemented Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS). Respondents believed that their efforts in the four focus areas identified in the survey would ultimately improve the value of care. When informed that those areas represented the four MIPS domains, the majority remained positive about the likely impact on value. However, expectations varied by physicians' characteristics and sense of control over the desired outcomes, and many respondents believed that unintended consequences could occur. Moreover, respondents generally reported low familiarity with the policy and disagreed with program guidelines for weighting domains in the composite score. These findings indicate the need to educate physicians about MIPS and suggest potentially fruitful approaches. Moving forward, policy makers should monitor for unintended consequences and explore ways to better align program guidelines with physicians' perspectives.

Purpose: To optimize the flexibility and relevancy of its Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), CMS exempts selected physicians and groups from participation and grants others relaxed reporting requirements. We assess the practical implications of such special status determinations., Methods: For a random sample of 1,000 Medicare-participating radiologists, the CMS MIPS Participation Lookup Tool was manually searched. Individual radiologists' and associated groups' participation requirements and special statuses were assessed., Results: Although only 55% of radiologists were required to participate in MIPS as individuals when considering only one associated taxpayer identification number (TIN), 83% were required to participate as individuals when considering all associated TINs. When using the group reporting option, 97% of radiology groups were required to participate. High participation requirements persisted across generalist and subspecialist radiologists, small and rural, and both academic and nonacademic practices. Non-patient-facing and hospital-based statuses were assigned to high fractions of individual radiologists (91% and 71%, respectively), but much lower fractions of group practices (72% and 25%). Rural and health professional shortage area statuses were assigned to higher percentages of groups (27% and 39%) than individuals (13% and 23%). Small practice status was assigned to 22% of individuals versus 16% of groups., Conclusion: Although not apparent if only considering individual radiologist-TIN combinations, the overwhelming majority of radiologists will be required to participate in MIPS, at the individual or group level. Radiology groups are strongly encouraged to review their physicians' MIPS participation requirements and special statuses to ensure optimal performance scores and payment bonuses., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) provides CMS flexibility to evaluate radiologists using hospital outpatient quality measures in place of conventional physician measures. We explore radiologist characteristics associated with variation in performance in two such measures: abdomen and chest CT "double scan" rates (percentage of total examinations performed both with and without intravenous contrast)., Methods: Radiologists' claims for abdomen and chest CT examinations in a facility setting were identified using 2014 Medicare Physician and Other Supplier data. Individual radiologist double scan rates were computed. Associations were explored between rates and radiologist characteristics extracted from the CMS public data sets using multivariable regression with cross-validation., Results: Radiologists' double scan rates averaged 5.9% ± 10.0% (0.0% for 52.8% of radiologists) for abdomen CT (19,867 radiologists) and 1.0% ± 4.7% (0.0% for 91.3% of radiologists) for chest CT (18,684). At multivariable analysis, abdomen rates were best predicted by geography (lowest in Northeast, greatest in West), practice size (greatest for small practices), and specialty practice pattern (lowest for general radiologists; greatest for nuclear medicine physicians). Agreement for double scan rates among radiologists within the same practice was moderate, though slightly higher for chest (intraclass correlation = 0.70) than abdomen (0.59)., Conclusion: Radiologists' facility double scan rates vary systematically based on an array of professional characteristics. MACRA grants CMS the authority to use these measures for evaluating radiologists, thereby aligning Medicare's hospital and physician performance programs and better incentivizing population radiation dose and cost reduction. Greater variation in abdomen CT double scan rates, compared with ubiquitously excellent chest CT performance, supports a particular role for abdomen rates in distinguishing disparities in radiologist performance., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) Quality performance category is the successor to the Physician Quality and Reporting System (PQRS) program and now contributes to physicians' income adjustments based upon performance rates calculated for a minimum of six measures. We assess radiologists' frequency of reporting PQRS measures as a marker of preparedness for MACRA., Methods: Medicare-participating radiologists were randomly searched through the Physician Compare website until identifying 1,000 radiologists who reported at least one PQRS measure. Associations were explored between the number of reported measures and radiologist characteristics., Results: For PQRS-reporting radiologists, the number of reported PQRS measures was 1 (25.2%), 2 (27.3%), 3 (18.2%), 4 (19.3%), 5 (8.3%), and 6 (1.7%). The most commonly reported measures were "documenting radiation exposure time for procedures using fluoroscopy" (64.3%) and "accurate measurement of carotid artery narrowing" (56.8%). Reporting at least two measures was significantly (P < .001) more likely for nonacademic (77.3%) versus academic (44.9%) radiologists, generalists (82.7%) versus subspecialists (59.1%), and radiologists in smaller (≤9 members) (84.7%) versus larger (≥100 members) (39.7%) practices. Reporting six measures was significantly (P < .05) more likely for generalists (2.6%) versus subspecialists (0.4%)., Conclusion: Most PQRS-reporting radiologists reported only one or two measures, well below MACRA's requirement of six. Radiologists continuing such reporting levels will likely be disadvantaged in terms of potential payment adjustments under MACRA. Lower reporting rates for academic and subspecialized radiologists, as well as those in larger practices, may relate to such radiologists' reliance on their hospitals or networks for PQRS reporting. Qualified clinical data registries should be embraced to facilitate more robust measure reporting., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Despite its complexity and swarm of new acronyms, MACRA seems like a habitable dry land in comparison to the turbulent waters of the rest of health care-predictable, supported by both parties, and adjusted in the final rule so its effect on providers in 2017 will be milder than feared.

Understanding the current selection of CMS-approved alternative payment models is critical for providers in the current healthcare policy climate who wish to pursue alternatives to traditional reimbursement schemes. This has become a topic of increasing interest with the recent passage of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015, as traditional fee-for-service payments will be altered-either positively or negatively-by criteria defined under the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS). This article offers a framework for current and proposed models being implemented or investigated by the CMS. Further exploration of the topic can be carried out through supplementary or primary sources to determine best fits for specific practice environments.

Most physicians and physician practices will opt for being measured on quality under Medicare's new payment system since they're not ready to assume the downside risk of alternative payment models.

It took 17 years and more than a dozen acts of Congress before the Medicare sustainable growth-rate formula was replaced by the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act in April 2015.