The use of value-based reimbursement, with its emphasis on supposed quality measures, has heightened providers’ awareness of factors outside their control that might affect their scores and reimbursement. A study in JAMA Internal Medicine examines whether the total annual cost of care measure used in part for Medicare reimbursement of physicians fails to take into account certain cognitive and other issues that may impact reimbursement. (JAMA Int. Med. Study) Medicare is rolling out the “MIPS” payment methodology for 2019 and it includes a cost measure. The researchers modeled the potential effect of the MIPS measure on reimbursement. While there is a general risk adjustment for the cost measure, it is not adjusted for patient functional status or some factors like local economic conditions or provider supply characteristics. The researchers believed these are largely outside a physician’s control, but could meaningful affect the cost measures that are used in part for the reimbursement formula. They were particularly concerned about lowering payments to already stressed safety-net providers, like community health centers. Using retrospective data from 2006-2013 they explored whether patient cognitive status in particular was inadequately accounted for in the payment formula. The overall average total cost of care per year was $9117. Even after applying the risk adjustment measure, depression and dementia were associated with $2740 and $2922, respectively, more average spending. Having three or more problems with activities of daily living was associated with $3121 greater average spending. Safety net clinicians were particularly impacted by the failure of the MIPS methodology to account for these factors, likely because they serve a larger population with these characteristics and conditions. Using the methodology as is would reduce payments to these clinicians. This study is the latest in a longer line of research finding that value-based payment schemes often fail to account for important patient and environmental differences which really are not the responsibility of or under the control of a physician or other clinician. CMS and other payers need to be responsive to this research by improving the payment method, particularly since providers serving the most needy populations and impacted the most.
Patient Cognitive Status and Health Spending
No Comments
✅ Subscribe via Email
About this Blog
Healthy Skeptic Podcast
Research
MedPAC 2019 Report to Congress
June 18, 2019
Headlines
Tags
Access
ACO
Care Management
Chronic Disease
Comparative Effectiveness
Consumer Directed Health
Consumers
Devices
Disease Management
Drugs
EHRs
Elder Care
End-of-Life Care
FDA
Financings
Genomics
Government
Health Care Costs
Health Care Quality
Health Care Reform
Health Insurance
Health Insurance Exchange
HIT
HomeCare
Hospital
Hospital Readmissions
Legislation
M&A
Malpractice
Meaningful Use
Medicaid
Medical Care
Medicare
Medicare Advantage
Mobile
Pay For Performance
Pharmaceutical
Physicians
Providers
Regulation
Repealing Reform
Telehealth
Telemedicine
Wellness and Prevention
Workplace
Related Posts
Commentary
October 4, 2023
Electric Cars for Everyone, so Rich People Can Get Richer
Everything about electric cars is expensive, including insurance, but rich people get richer from them.
Commentary
October 3, 2023
Minnesota’s Modeling Nightmare
Minnesota finally wants to figure out how epidemic modeling was so bad, but the Strib…
Commentary
October 3, 2023
Reality Intrudes Again on the Renewable Energy Delusion
Solar and wind power are the most expensive forms of electricity and the cost of…