Search

Objective: To characterize the development and performance of a cataract surgery episode-based cost measure for the Medicare Quality Payment Program. Design: Claims-based analysis. Participants: Medicare clinicians with cataract surgery claims between June 1, 2016, and May 31, 2017. Methods: We limited the analysis to claims with procedure code 66984 (routine cataract surgery), excluding cases with relevant ocular comorbidities. We divided episodes into subgroups by surgery location (Ambulatory Surgery Center [ASC] or Hospital Outpatient Department [HOPD]) and laterality (bilateral when surgeries were within 30 days apart). For the episode-based cost measure, we calculated costs occurring between 60 days before surgery and 90 days after surgery, limited to services identified by an expert committee as related to cataract surgery and under the influence of the cataract surgeon. We attributed costs to the clinician submitting the cataract surgery claim, categorized costs into clinical themes, and calculated episode cost distribution, reliability in detecting clinician-dependent cost variation, and costs with versus without complications. We compared episode-based cost scores with hypothetical “nonselective” cost scores (total Medicare beneficiary costs between 60 days before surgery and 90 days after surgery). Main Outcome Measures: Episode costs with and without complications, clinician-dependent variation (proportion of total cost variance), and proportion of costs from cataract surgery-related clinical themes. Results: We identified 583 356 cataract surgery episodes attributed to 10 790 clinicians and 8189 with ≥ 10 episodes during the measurement period. Most surgeries were performed in an ASC (71%) and unilateral (66%). The mean episode cost was $2876. The HOPD surgeries had higher costs; geography and episodes per clinician did not substantially affect costs. The proportion of cost variation from clinician-dependent factors was higher in episode-based compared with nonselective cost measures (94% vs. 39%), and cataract surgery-related clinical themes represented a higher proportion of total costs for episode-based measures. Episodes with complications had higher costs than episodes without complications ($3738 vs. $2276). Conclusions: The cataract surgery episode-based cost measure performs better than a comparable nonselective measure based on cost distribution, clinician-dependent variance, association with cataract surgery-related clinical themes, and quality alignment (higher costs in episodes with complications). Cost measure maintenance and refinement will be important to maintain clinical validity and reliability. Financial Disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

This article discusses the implementation of a new Merit-Based Incentive Payment System Value Pathway (MVPs) applicable to elective total hip and total knee arthroplasty as created by Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) – the Improving Care for Lower Extremity Joint Repair MVP (MVP ID: G0058). We describe specific quality measures, surgeon-hospital collaborations, future developments with Quality Payment Program, and how lessons from early implementation will empower clinicians to participate in the refining of this MVP. The CMS has designed MVPs as a subset of measures relevant to a specialty or medical condition, in an effort to reduce the burden of reporting and improve assessment of care quality. Physicians and payors must be mindful of detrimental effects these measures in their current form may have on surgeons, institutions, and patients, including disincentivizing care for sicker or more vulnerable populations, and increased administrative costs. Early voluntary participation is crucial to gain valuable experience for the orthopedic community and in an effort to work alongside CMS to maximize care while minimizing cost for patients and burden for providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Competing Interests: The author certifies that there are no funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article related to the author or any immediate family members. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request.

Background: The Medicare Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) ties reimbursement incentives to clinician performance to improve healthcare quality. It is unclear whether the MIPS quality score can accurately distinguish between high-performing and low-performing clinicians., Questions/purposes: (1) What were the rates of unplanned hospital visits (emergency department visits, observation stays, or unplanned admissions) within 7, 30, and 90 days of outpatient orthopaedic surgery among Medicare beneficiaries? (2) Was there any association of MIPS quality scores with the risk of an unplanned hospital visit (emergency department visits, observation stays, or unplanned admissions)?, Methods: Between January 2018 and December 2019, a total of 605,946 outpatient orthopaedic surgeries were performed in New York State according to the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database. Of those, 56,772 patients were identified as Medicare beneficiaries and were therefore potentially eligible. A further 34% (19,037) were excluded because of missing surgeon identifier, age younger than 65 years, residency outside New York State, emergency department visit on the same day as outpatient surgery, observation stay on the same claim as outpatient surgery, and concomitant high-risk or eye procedures, leaving 37,735 patients for analysis. The database does not include a list of all state residents and thus does not allow for censoring of patients who move out of state. We chose this dataset because it includes nearly all hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers in a large geographic area (New York State) and hence is not limited by sampling bias. We included 37,735 outpatient orthopaedic surgical encounters among Medicare beneficiaries in New York State from 2018 to 2019. For the 37,735 outpatient orthopaedic surgical procedures included in our study, the mean ± standard deviation age of patients was 73 ± 7 years, 84% (31,550) were White, and 59% (22,071) were women. Our key independent variable was the MIPS quality score percentile (0 to 19th, 20th to 39th, 40th to 59th, or 60th to 100th) for orthopaedic surgeons. Clinicians in the MIPS program may receive a bonus or penalty based on the overall MIPS score, which ranges from 0 to 100 and is a weighted score based on four subscores: quality, promoting interoperability, improvement activities, and cost. The MIPS quality score, which attempts to reward clinicians providing superior quality of care, accounted for 50% and 45% of the overall MIPS score in 2018 and 2019, respectively. Our main outcome measures were 7-day, 30-day, and 90-day unplanned hospital visits after outpatient orthopaedic surgery. To determine the association between MIPS quality scores and unplanned hospital visits, we estimated multivariable hierarchical logistic regression models controlling for MIPS quality scores; patient-level (age, race and ethnicity, gender, and comorbidities), facility-level (such as bed size and teaching status), surgery and surgeon-level (such as surgical procedure and surgeon volume) covariates; and facility-level random effects. We then used these models to estimate the adjusted rates of unplanned hospital visits across MIPS quality score percentiles after adjusting for covariates in the multivariable models., Results: In total, 2% (606 of 37,735), 2% (783 of 37,735), and 3% (1013 of 37,735) of encounters had an unplanned hospital visit within 7, 30, or 90 days of outpatient orthopaedic surgery, respectively. Most hospital visits within 7 days (95% [576 of 606]), 30 days (94% [733 of 783]), or 90 days (91% [924 of 1013]) were because of emergency department visits. We found very small differences in unplanned hospital visits by MIPS quality scores, with the 20th to 39th percentile of MIPS quality scores having 0.71% points (95% CI -1.19% to -0.22%; p = 0.004), 0.68% points (95% CI -1.26% to -0.11%; p = 0.02), and 0.75% points (95% CI -1.42% to -0.08%; p = 0.03) lower than the 0 to 19th percentile at 7, 30, and 90 days, respectively. There was no difference in adjusted rates of unplanned hospital visits between patients undergoing surgery with a surgeon in the 0 to 19th, 40th to 59th, or 60th to 100th percentiles at 7, 30, or 90 days., Conclusion: We found that the rates of unplanned hospital visits after outpatient orthopaedic surgery among Medicare beneficiaries were low and primarily driven by emergency department visits. We additionally found only a small association between MIPS quality scores for individual physicians and the risk of an unplanned hospital visit after outpatient orthopaedic surgery. These findings suggest that policies aimed at reducing postoperative emergency department visits may be the best target to reduce overall postoperative unplanned hospital visits and that the MIPS program should be eliminated or modified to more strongly link reimbursement to risk-adjusted patient outcomes, thereby better aligning incentives among patients, surgeons, and the Centers for Medicare ad Medicaid Services. Future work could seek to evaluate the association between MIPS scores and other surgical outcomes and evaluate whether annual changes in MIPS score weighting are independently associated with clinician performance in the MIPS and regarding clinical outcomes., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study., Competing Interests: Each author certifies that there are no funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article related to the author or any immediate family members. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request., (Copyright © 2024 by the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons.)

Purpose: Merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS) is a payment model implemented to promote high-value care through performance-based adjustments of Medicare reimbursements. Higher scores indicate superior performance in healthcare quality, efficiency, and interoperability, which can result in financial advantages. Given the paucity of literature, we aimed to characterize plastic surgery performance in MIPS., Method: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) online data repository was queried for data on MIPS performance of plastic surgeons from 2019-2021. Descriptive analyses and multivariable logistic regression were conducted to identify predictors of receiving bonus payment for exceptional performance., Results: Approximately 1400 surgeons were sampled in each year. The median number of Medicare beneficiaries and percent of dually eligible beneficiaries-eligible for Medicare and Medicaid-were higher in 2019 (p<0.001). Beneficiary median HCC risk score, which measures expected healthcare costs and needs based on health status, was lower in 2021 (p<0.001). The most common reporting schema was reporting as a group. Total MIPS score increased from 2019 to 2020 to 2021 (90.2 vs 96.4 vs 98.3, p<0.001), but quality score progressively decreased (98.8 vs 95.5 vs 89.90, p<0.001). Fewer physicians received positive adjustment and bonus payments in 2020 and 2021. Predictors of receiving bonus payments were reporting as an alternative payment model, practice size >24, and having 10-49% of dually eligible beneficiaries (p<0.05)., Conclusion: Understanding performance of plastic surgeons in MIPS can guide future policy direction and ensure that high-quality care translates into improved patient outcomes across all fields and levels of social vulnerability., (Copyright © 2024 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.)

Background: The Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) seeks to promote value-based care through quality-adjusted Medicare payments., Objective: To assess 2020 MIPS performance and quality measure selection by Mohs surgeons., Methods: Retrospective, cross-sectional review of Medicare Quality Payment Program and Part B billing data sets., Results: In 2020, 8,778 dermatologists and 2,148 Mohs surgeons received a MIPS score. Mohs surgeons primarily participated through groups (51.6%) or individuals (36.4%). Most of them (77.4%) received a final score enabling a positive payment adjustment in 2022, with a notable proportion (22.3%) being eligible for a neutral payment adjustment in the setting of COVID-19 exemptions. The members of the American College of Mohs Surgery were more likely to meet the exceptional performance threshold (71.5% vs 59.0%, p < .0001), as were Mohs surgeons with <15 years of experience (73.3% vs 54.8%, p < .0001). Measures related to dermatology or Mohs surgery were reported by most individuals (92.0%) and dermatology groups (90.4%), yet less frequently by multispecialty groups (5.9%)., Conclusion: Many Mohs surgeons exceeded the performance threshold and used dermatology- or Mohs-related quality measures in 2020. Further assessments correlating quality measures with patient outcomes are needed to better understand the utility and appropriateness of the current value-based payment system and guide further policies., (Copyright © 2023 by the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, Inc. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: After‐hours documentation burden among US clinicians is often uncompensated work and has been associated with burnout, leading health systems to identify root causes and seek interventions to reduce this. A few studies have suggested quality programme participation (e.g., Merit‐Based Incentive Payment System [MIPS]) was associated with a higher administrative burden. However, the association between MIPS participation and after‐hours documentation has not been fully explored. Thus, this study aims to assess whether participation in the MIPS programme was independently associated with after‐hours documentation burden. Methods: We used 2021 data from the National Electronic Health Records Survey. We used a multivariable ordinal logistic regression model to assess whether MIPS participation was associated with the amount of after‐hours documentation burden when controlling for other factors. We controlled for physician age, specialty, sex, number of practice locations, number of physicians, practice ownership, whether team support (e.g., scribes) is used for documentation tasks, and whether the practice accepts Medicaid patients. Results: We included 1801 office‐based US physician respondents with complete data for variables of interest. After controlling for other factors, MIPS participation was associated with greater odds of spending a greater number of hours on after‐hours documentation (odds ratio = 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.06–1.95). Conclusions: MIPS participation may increase after‐hours documentation burden among US office‐based physicians, suggesting that physicians may require additional resources to more efficiently report data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

**Background:** Following the 2015 repeal of the Sustainable Growth Rate formula, the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' formula under which physicians were reimbursed, two payment systems were put in place to incentivize physicians, one of which was the Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS). MIPS emphasizes high-quality care that is accessible, affordable, and supports a healthier population. **Objectives:** This research aims to measure characteristics of MIPS relevant to National Quality Strategy (NQS) domains, quality measure types, and clinical specialties; categorize MIPS with NQS domains and quality measure types by MIPS specialty types; and quantify the relationship between MIPS specialties, measure types, and two NQS domains, Effective Clinical Care (ECC) and Efficiency/Cost Reduction (E/CR), for years 2017 through 2020. **Methodology:** The Pearson’s chi-square test examined distributions of the analyzed categorical variables. The Categorical Dependent Variable Method examined the association between the dependent and independent variables. **Results:** The Pearson’s chi-square test showed statistically significant distributions between ECC and E/CR when analyzed with the types of quality measures. There were more process measures (93.81% vs 89.64% \[*P*=.000]) in 2018 versus 2017. This changed minutely with significantly less process measures (93.75% vs 93.81% \[*P*=.000]) in 2019 versus 2018. Finally, measure types changed minutely but significantly with less process measures (93.81% vs 93.75% \[*P*=.000]) in 2020 versus 2019. The regression model showed that ECC was significantly associated with outcome measures through all analyzed years of this research. **Conclusion:** The above findings show scope for including additional outcome measures, given its importance in MIPS. There is potential to increase the percentage allocation for reporting more outcome measures in quality. This re-allotment infers reporting more outcome measures aligning with priority outcome measures (PROMs). Re-allocating the incentive formula to report more outcome measures aligned with PROMs shows potential to increase reporting of more outcome measures under MIPS.

Purpose: The Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is currently the only federally mandated value-based payment model for oncologists. The weight of cost measures in MIPS has increased from 0% in 2017 to 30% in 2022. Given that cost measures are specialty-agnostic, specialties with greater costs of care such as oncology may be unfairly affected. We investigated the implications of incorporating cost measures into MIPS on physician reimbursements for oncologists and other physicians., Methods: We evaluated physicians scored on cost and quality in the 2018 MIPS using the Doctors and Clinicians database. We used multivariable Tobit regression to identify physician-level factors associated with cost and quality scores. We simulated composite MIPS scores and payment adjustments by applying the 2022 cost-quality weights to the 2018 category scores and compared changes across specialties., Results: Of 168,098 identified MIPS-participating physicians, 5,942 (3.5%) were oncologists. Oncologists had the lowest cost scores compared with other specialties (adjusted mean score, 58.4 for oncologists v 71.0 for nononcologists; difference, -12.66 [95% CI, -13.34 to -11.99]), while quality scores were similar (82.9 v 84.2; difference, -1.31 [95% CI, -2.65 to 0.03]). After the 2022 cost-quality reweighting, oncologists would receive a 4.3-point (95% CI, 4.58 to 4.04) reduction in composite MIPS scores, corresponding to a four-fold increase in magnitude of physician penalties ($4,233.41 US dollars [USD] in 2018 v $18,531.06 USD in 2022) and greater reduction in exceptional payment bonuses compared with physicians in other specialties (-42.8% [95% CI, -44.1 to -41.5] for oncologists v -23.6% [95% CI, -23.8 to -23.4] for others)., Conclusion: Oncologists will likely be disproportionally penalized after the incorporation of cost measures into MIPS. Specialty-specific recalibration of cost measures is needed to ensure that policy efforts to promote value-based care do not compromise health care quality and outcomes.