Cooperating for better care.

Society of Hospital Medicine

Tag Archives

5 building blocks for successful bundling

“Baby at Play,” by Thomas Eakins (1876).

Win Whitcomb, M.D., writing in Hospitals & Health Networks, presents what he calls five “building blocks of success” in bundled payments. He is chief medical officer at Remedy Partners, in Darien, Conn.; an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Massachusetts Medical School,  and a founder and a past president of the Society of Hospital Medicine.

Here are his building blocks, in abbreviated form:

1. Data

“For the first time, we are able to view cost data over the entire span of an episode, including acute care and the post-acute recovery period… Administrators and clinicians can identify variation in costs or quality, analyze processes underlying the variation and then implement new processes designed to mitigate such variation.”

“In addition, information systems are emerging that provide access to a patient’s location and clinical status over the entire course of an episode (something most electronic health records cannot do).”

2. Incentives

“Bundled payments disrupt the fee-for-service incentive to increase utilization. Medicare’s Bundled Payments for Care Improvement program enables hospitals, physician groups, post-acute facilities and home health agencies to bear first-dollar risk for an episode. The risk-bearing entity’s monetary reward for lowering costs can be invested in human resources (e.g., patient navigators) and technological resources (e.g., performance reporting and patient tracking software) that help the program succeed.”

“Gainsharing, most often offered to physicians, but also possible with hospitals, nursing facilities and other providers, can ensure that the risk-bearing entity and physicians or other providers have the same goal. Gainsharing in these programs can reward either internal cost savings (derived from, for example, bulk purchasing of implantable devices) or the net payment reconciliation amount (derived from, for example, lower post-acute facility utilization or fewer readmissions).”

3. Post-acute performance networks

“Successful risk-bearing entities build networks of post-acute facilities and home health agencies to ensure efficient and high-quality care for patients after an episode. Inclusion in such a network can be based on costs, readmissions or quality — such as star ratings, the availability of on-site providers and disease specialty programs. ”

4. Care redesign

“CMS promotes care redesign, or improving quality while cutting costs, as the defining feature of bundled payments. Successful organizations have redesigned care for specific bundles like joint replacement; others have redesigned care in an across-the-board fashion agnostic to bundle type.”

“Examples of across-the-board care redesign include deploying an early mobility program, using a decision-support tool to determine an optimal post-discharge location, applying rules to identify candidates for palliative care, having a structured goals-of-care conversation or using protocols to avoid unnecessary acute care transfers of skilled nursing patients. ”

5. Pooling knowledge

“BPCI  supports the role of a ‘convener,’ working with ‘episode initiators’ (providers) to deploy the program. Conveners can provide crucial support for healthcare organizations that aren’t able to go it alone because of a shortage of resources or expertise in data analytics, information technology, care redesign and, in some cases, the assumption of a portion of financial risk.”

To read more, please hit this link.


The future of hospitalists in ACOs

icu

Bradley Flansbaum, D.O.,  a hospitalist at Lenox Hill Hospital, in New York City, told Medscape that  hospitalists’ financial life generally hasn’t changed because of the arrival of Accountable Care Organizations.

“There is no difference in the way they get paid in an ACO. I don’t know of any hospitalist group that has changed its financial incentives for members in response to ACOs.”

He said that a hospitalist might not even know whether a  patient is part of an ACO at the time of admission.

But that will change.

“In 10 years, we’ll all be in the population health business,” says Ron Greeno, M.D.,  senior adviser for medical affairs at Team Health, North Hollywood, Calif., and  president-elect of the Society of Hospital Medicine.

“Hospitalists today are most involved with bundled-payment models. But in all models, they’ll see higher percentages of their revenue tied to performance metrics. Every healthcare organization in America is getting ready for this change,”  Dr. Greeno told Medscape.

To read the Medscape article, please hit this link.

 


Patients unimpressed by fancy new facilities

 

 

versailles2

By JORDAN RAU, for Kaiser Health News

The sleek hospital tower that Johns Hopkins Medicine built in 2012 has the frills of a luxury hotel, including a meditation garden, 500 works of art, free wi-fi and a library of books, games and audio.

As Dr. Zishan Siddiqui watched patients and some fellow physicians in Baltimore move from their decades-old building into the Sheikh Zayed Tower, the internist saw a rare opportunity to test a widespread assumption in the hospital industry: that patients rate their care more highly when it is given in a nicer place.

For decades, hospital executives across the country have justified expensive renovation and expansion projects by saying they will lead to better patient reviews and recommendations. One study estimated $200 billion might have been spent over a decade on new building. Hopkins’s construction of the tower and a new children’s hospital cost $1.1 billion.

Patient judgments have become even more important to hospitals since Medicare started publishing ratings and basing some of its pay on surveys patients fill out after they have left the hospital.

Siddiqui’s study, published this month by the Journal of Hospital Medicine, contradicts the presumption that better facilities translate into better patient reviews. Siddiqui examined how patient satisfaction scores changed when doctors started practicing in the new tower, which has 355 beds and units for neurology, cardiology, radiology, labor and delivery and other specialties.

Siddiqui discovered that for the most part, patients’ assessments of the quality of the clinical care they received did not improve any more than they did for patients treated in the older Hopkins building, which had remained open. Units there were constructed as early as 1913 and as late as 1980, Hopkins officials said. They functioned as the control group in the study, since a hospital’s satisfaction scores often change over time even when a hospital’s physical environment remains constant.

The study used the responses both to Medicare-mandated surveys and private ones from Press Ganey, a consulting company that administers surveys. In the study, Hopkins patient ratings about the cleanliness and quiet in new tower’s rooms — elements Medicare uses in setting pay — soared, as did views on the pleasantness of the décor and comfort of the accommodations. But patient opinions about their actual care — such as the communication skills of doctors, nurses and staff — did not rise any higher than they did in the older building.

“Despite the widespread belief among healthcare leadership that facility renovation or expansion is a vital strategy for improving patient satisfaction, our study shows that this may not be a dominant factor,” Siddiqui and his fellow authors wrote.

Newer buildings allow for some medical benefits, such as better organized nursing stations and private rooms that protect against the spread of infectious bacteria and diseases. But the Hopkins researchers said “hospitals should not use outdated facilities as an excuse for achievement of suboptimal satisfaction scores.”The study’s results were startling because previous studies have found that patients in older hospital buildings give lower scores on the quality of their care.

Hospital executives have noticed it anecdotally as well; for instance, when NYU Langone Medical Center relocated its cardiology unit to a renovated floor, its patient experience scores rose.

A nationwide survey from 2012 conducted by the consultants J.D. Power and Associates reached similar conclusions to the Hopkins paper about the influence of the physical environment on satisfaction scores. That survey found that communication by doctors, nurses and other staff was most important, while the facility accounted for a fifth of patient satisfaction.

After reading the Hopkins study, Dr. Bradley Flansbaum, a physician at Lenox Hill Hospital, in Manhattan, wrote on the blog of the Society of Hospital Medicine that “it just might be that what doctors do and say matters, and a first-class meal and green gardens cannot paper over, or in the converse, sully our evaluations.”


Contact Info

info@cmg625.com

(617) 230-4965

Wellesley, Mass