Rita Numerof, in a FierceHealthcare essay, warns providers that their performance under the Merit-based Incentive Payment System can influence their overall patient volume.
She notes: “Though the program is not without its challenges and limitations, it does begin to give consumers some information they need to make informed choices and benefit from competition.
“The healthcare industry is in the position of having this transparency imposed upon it via federal action because the providers themselves have been slow to tackle true accountability. A lack of actionable information has led to a situation where the country’s largest payer must provide both carrots and sticks to collect performance information from providers.
“Over the long term, MIPS reporting has the potential to drive patient volume, either directly, through consumer choice, or indirectly, through network selections made by payers. There are significant implications for individual physicians, medical groups and the hospitals whose revenues depend on their referral streams.”
“Many physician groups have raised concerns about administrative burdens under MIPS, and the recent changes to the program were partially intended to address them. But this is still a heavy lift, and providers need to streamline the data collection that supports MIPS wherever possible in order to minimize overhead and ensure data integrity.”
To read more, please hit this link.
CMS is continuing to lighten the MACRA load after smaller and rural providers complained that their paucity of capital and other resources make complying with the reporting requirements too difficult.
Its latest proposed move would permit the exemption of small providers participating in the program by increasing the low-volume threshold to $90,000 or less in Medicare Part B charges or 200 or fewer Medicare patients annually. The original threshold was $30,000 in Medicare Part B charges or 100 Medicare patients. The agency believes that the move would let about 134,000 clinicians stay out of MIPS.
The proposal follows more than 800,000 clinicians in May being told that they will not be evaluated under the MIPS program
MACRA will replace Medicare’s Sustainable Growth Formula with a 0.5% annual rate increase through 2019. After that, CMS says, physicians are encouraged to shift to one of two Quality Payment Programs: 1) Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) or 2): Alternative Payment Model (APM).
Most physicians are expected to enter the MIPS.
“We’ve heard the concerns that too many quality programs, technology requirements and measures get between the doctor and the patient,” said CMS Administrator Seema Verma. “That’s why we’re taking a hard look at reducing burdens. By proposing this rule, we aim to improve Medicare by helping doctors and clinicians concentrate on caring for their patients rather than filling out paperwork. CMS will continue to listen and take actionable steps toward alleviating burdens and improving health outcomes for all Americans that we serve.”
American Medical Association President David Barbe, M.D., praised CMS. “Not all physicians and their practices were ready to make the leap, and many faced daunting challenges. This flexible approach will give physicians more options to participate in MACRA and takes into consideration the diversity of medical practices throughout the country.”
To read more, please hit this link.
The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) has proposed proposed changes in the Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) aimed at strengthening advanced alternative payment models and creating a prospective payment system for post-acute-care settings.
The commission also suggests that MIPS should be based on population- health measures.
The commission notes that growing consolidation of hospitals and physicians has generally increased prices without improving care. So, in response, the report’s authors recommend restraining Medicare prices to address horizontal consolidation and imposing site-neutral pricing in response to vertical consolidation.
The panel has also asked policymakers to consider cutting payment rates for emergency departments that aren’t on hospital campuses and ending exemptions to site-neutral payments for ambulatory services.
To read more, please hit this link.
An article in Physicians Practice looks at the pros and cons or hiring additional staff to address MACRA issues. Among the stuff:
The article asserts that Charles Saunders, M.D., who is CEO of Integra Connect, a technology and service provider specializing in value-based care, is one of the few experts who says that hiring more staff may be necessary.
The article reports: “He says this is the case if a practice chooses to participate in the other MACRA pathway, an advanced alternative payment model (APM). These models have requirements for certain activities such as care coordination and quality improvement programs, which can’t simply be automated. ‘To be successful in driving savings, some investments in these activities will be required for care coordinators and case managers,’ he says. This is because, as with MIPS measures, reporting on them can be a labor-intensive exercise requiring chart reviews, depending on the ability of the EHR to automate this process.”
“Other experts disagree, suggesting that MACRA shouldn’t radically change the way physicians staff their practice or collect information from their patients. ‘In effect, MACRA simply is a requirement that physicians document that they’ve actually performed the next step in terms of a slightly more complicated process of documentation,’ says Stuart Hochron, M.D., chief medical officer and co-founder of Uniphy Health, a physician’s communication and collaboration app. He says the changes won’t require new staff, just more staff education. He recommends turning to CMS’s extensive online resources on the topic, as well as medical societies that offer MACRA education as a start. ‘I’d either attend a respectable conference that was targeted as your organization is focused, or hire a consultant,’ he says.”
To read the whole article, please hit this link.
Cover by Sarah Wyman Whitman
Here’s some guidance in Hospitals & Health Networks for rural hospitals on how they can prepare for Medicare’s new Merit-based Incentive Payment System. Among the recommendations:
“Determine which clinicians are in and out’’
“A sizable percentage of small rural providers have been given a reprieve in 2017 from MIPS, which focuses on Medicare Part B. Exempt providers include Rural Health Clinics, Federally Qualified Health Centers and clinicians with low Medicare volumes. Specifically, clinicians who see fewer than 100 Medicare patients, or who bill less than $30,000 worth of Medicare services, will be exempt from MIPS participation in 2017.’’
“Identify who has to report what’’
“In 2017, eligible clinicians will be assessed in three MIPS categories: quality, improvement activities and advancing health information. Clinicians will be assessed on cost measures starting in 2018. CMS has also loosened reporting requirements for certain providers. For instance, rural providers can report two rather than four improvement activities.’’
“Avoid transition-year complacency’’
“CMS is allowing providers to choose how much data they report in 2017. While providers will receive a 4 percent penalty in 2019 if they don’t submit any data, they can avoid this penalty by reporting a minimum amount (for example, one quality measure). While small rural hospitals may welcome this respite, they need to be careful not to procrastinate and fail to get ready for 2018, when providers might have to submit a year’s worth of data or risk a 5 percent penalty in 2020.’’
“Determine the cost of participation’’
‘’Small rural hospitals should consider the costs and benefits associated with seeking MIPS bonuses, which will be at 4 percent or lower in 2017. ‘’ The cost could exceed the reward dollars organizations might potentially achieve.
To read more, please hit this link.
Many physicians are asking whether they can opt out of Medicare’s Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), which is replacing the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.
Well, probably not. But in any case, suggests Medscape, physicians can reduce their MIPS reporting burden by reporting with other physicians together in single submission.
“It would be administratively simple to report as a group,” says , founder and CEO of SA Ignite, a Chicago company that helps organizations manage value-based programs, told Medscape. Of course, this would be easier for a large practice or group of hospital-employed physicians with the staff and IT capabilities to centralize reporting.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) defines a clinical group as having at least two “eligible clinicians”. That could be a physician and a nurse practitioner or physician assistant in one practice.
Under its proposed rule, CMS would let solo and small practices to get together in “virtual groups,” but owing to the difficulties of implementing such arrangements, this wouldn’t be possible in the first year of MIPS reporting.
Dr. Lee told Medscape that a downside of reporting in a group is that “you would have limited ability to choose specific measures. You may be forced to accept measures for activities where you don’t perform that well.”
To read the full article, please hit this link.
In the Scottsdale Arts District.
This Physicians Practice article touts the care-coordination model of Scottsdale Health Partners (mostly serving the rich Phoenix suburb of Scottsdale) — a joint venture between the HonorHealth hospital system and about 700 physicians.
The publication says that “The clinical integrated network and Accountable Care Organization (ACO) is a primary example of how hospitals and physicians can successfully work hand-in-hand in a value-based environment. SHP has enjoyed success in achieving its goals of improving quality of care and lowering costs. In particular, it has reduced its hospital readmissions rate to 9 percent, well below the state average of 15 percent, and saved up to 10 percent in medical costs for its population of 40,000 patients.
“For physician practices looking to get a jump start on value-based care, before CMS’s Merit-Based Incentive Payment System’s (MIPS) likely first performance year in 2017, SHP can be a source of inspiration. Since starting up in 2012, it’s found a way to use technology and personnel to coordinate care almost seamlessly from the hospital to the practice-level.”
Impressive indeed, but a major factor in its success is that the Scottsdale patient population includes many very affluent people with lots of very good health insurance.