Early Performance of Hospital Value-based Purchasing Program in Medicare: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Under the Affordable Care Act, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has greatly expanded inpatient fee-for-value programs including the Hospital Value-based Purchasing (HVBP) program. Existing evidence from the HVBP program is mixed. There is a need for a systematic review of the HVBP program to inform discussions on how to improve the program's effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: To review and summarize studies that evaluated the HVBP program's impact on clinical processes, patient satisfaction, costs and outcomes, or assessed hospital characteristics associated with performance on the program. DESIGN: We searched the MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest database for literature published between January 2013 and July 2019 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. RESULTS: Of 988 studies reviewed, 33 studies that met the selection criteria were included. A small group of studies (n=7) evaluated the impact of the HVBP program, and no impact on processes or patient outcomes was reported. None of the included studies evaluated the effect of HVBP program on health care costs. Other studies (n=28) evaluated the hospital characteristics associated with HVBP performance, suggesting that safety-net hospitals reportedly performed worse on several quality and cost measures. Other hospital characteristics' associations with performance were unclear. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the current HVBP does not lead to meaningful improvements in quality of care or patient outcomes and may negatively affect safety-net hospitals. More rigorous and comprehensive adjustment is needed for more valid hospital comparisons.

Fewer Bonuses, More Penalties At Skilled Nursing Facilities Serving Vulnerable Populations.

The first round of incentives and penalties under the Medicare Skilled Nursing Facility Value-Based Purchasing Program were distributed October 1, 2018. Our results show that facilities serving vulnerable groups were less likely to receive bonus payments and more likely to be penalized.

Is the trend of increasing use of patient-reported outcome measures in medical device studies the sign of shift towards value-based purchasing in Europe?

BACKGROUND: The recent update of the European Union's (EU) regulation on public procurement has created new opportunity for progress in the purchasing of medical devices by shifting towards focus on value from one purely on price. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may serve as additional tools for manufacturers to demonstrate value beyond traditional metrics of safety and performance and to differentiate their products in a market of increasing competition. The aim of our study was to investigate the extent to which PROMs are included in registered device studies in the EU and interpret the results in the context of the purchasing of medical devices. METHODS: Twelve device groups were searched in clinical trial registries to determine the frequency distribution of PROMs in related studies. RESULTS: Results indicate that clinical studies of the selected device categories are done predominately in the western EU nations and are increasingly including PROMs. In the United Kingdom 121 (65%) study, out of 186 included PROMs, and in Germany, 92 (52%) out of 178 between 1998 and 2018. Few device studies were done in the Central and Eastern European region, and out of 76 studies 27 (35%) included PROMs. Since there is no requirement to include PROMs in device studies for regulatory purposes, it seems probable that their increasing use is driven by competitive market pressures. CONCLUSION: The trend of increasing use of PROMs might be driven by the demand of purchasers to demonstrate value of devices, but is manifested at different levels in various regions of the EU.

Payment for Integrated Care: Challenges and Opportunities.

A multidisciplinary team approach to care and robust care coordination services are primary components of almost all integrated care delivery systems. Given that these services have limited reimbursement in fee-for-service payment arrangements, integrating care in a fee-for-service environment is almost impossible. Capitated payment models hold promise for supporting integrated behavioral and physical health services. There are multiple national examples of integrated care delivery systems supported by capitated payment arrangements.

The Impact of the Transition From Volume to Value on Heart Failure Care: Implications of Novel Payment Models and Quality Improvement Initiatives.

In response to wide variation in quality and outcomes as well as escalating health care costs, the U.S. health care system is moving away from a volume-based payment system to a quality- and value-based system. Medicare, the largest insurer and payer of health care, has accelerated the movement toward value-based care with the development and implementation of myriad alternate payment models and pay-for-performance programs as part of the Affordable Care Act. Given that heart failure affects a significant number of Medicare patients and that these patients account for a disproportionate amount of health care utilization and spending, heart failure has become a focal point for these initiatives. In this article, we highlight 4 such programs beyond the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) which financially penalizes hospitals for excess readmissions. Specifically, we focus on Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP), Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI), the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), and Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs). The HVBP and BPCI programs aim to improve quality and cost efficiency primarily among patients who are hospitalized, and the MIPS program has taken similar aim in the ambulatory setting. Finally, ACOs encourage active population health management across the continuum of care as providers bear financial risk for enrolled patients. Given broader discussions about health care reform, the specific policies and programs meant to accelerate the transition from volume to value may be altered. However, the underlying drivers for reform will persist, and heart failure is a clinical condition that by comparison will be subject to greater scrutiny.

The impact of value-based healthcare for inflammatory bowel diseases on healthcare utilization: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Value-based healthcare (VBHC) is considered to be the solution that will improve quality and decrease costs in healthcare. Many hospitals are implementing programs on the basis of this strategy, but rigorous scientific reports are still lacking. In this pilot study, we present the first-year outcomes of a VBHC program for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management that focuses on highly coordinated care, task differentiation of providers, and continuous home monitoring. METHODS: IBD patients treated within the VBHC program were identified in an administrative claims database from a commercial insurer allowing comparisons to matched controls. Only patients for whom data were available the year before and after starting the program were included. Healthcare utilization including visits, hospitalizations, laboratory and imaging tests, and medications were compared between groups. RESULTS: In total, 60 IBD patients treated at the VBHC Center were identified and were matched to 177 controls. Significantly fewer upper endoscopies were performed (-10%, P=0.012), and numerically fewer surgeries (-25%, P=0.49), hospitalizations (-28%, 0=0.71), emergency department visits (-37%, P=0.44), and imaging studies (-25 to -86%) were observed. In addition, 65% fewer patients (P=0.16) used steroids long term. IBD-related costs were 16% ($771) lower than expected (P=0.24). CONCLUSION: These are the first results of a successfully implemented VBHC program for IBD. Encouraging trends toward fewer emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and long-term corticosteroid use were observed. These results will need to be confirmed in a larger sample with more follow-up.

Current State of Value-Based Purchasing Programs.

The US healthcare system is rapidly moving toward rewarding value. Recent legislation, such as the Affordable Care Act and the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act, solidified the role of value-based payment in Medicare. Many private insurers are following Medicare's lead. Much of the policy attention has been on programs such as accountable care organizations and bundled payments; yet, value-based purchasing (VBP) or pay-for-performance, defined as providers being paid fee-for-service with payment adjustments up or down based on value metrics, remains a core element of value payment in Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act and will likely remain so for the foreseeable future. This review article summarizes the current state of VBP programs and provides analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for the future. Multiple inpatient and outpatient VBP programs have been implemented and evaluated; the impact of those programs has been marginal. Opportunities to enhance the performance of VBP programs include improving the quality measurement science, strengthening both the size and design of incentives, reducing health disparities, establishing broad outcome measurement, choosing appropriate comparison targets, and determining the optimal role of VBP relative to alternative payment models. VBP programs will play a significant role in healthcare delivery for years to come, and they serve as an opportunity for providers to build the infrastructure needed for value-oriented care.

Value-Based Emergency Management.

This article touches on the complex and decentralized network that is the US health care system and how important it is to include emergency management in this network. By aligning the overarching incentives of opposing health care organizations, emergency management can become resilient to up-and-coming changes in reimbursement, staffing, and network ownership. Coalitions must grasp the opportunity created by changes in value-based purchasing and impending Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services emergency management rules to engage payers, physicians, and executives. Hope and faith in doing good is no longer enough for preparedness and health care coalitions; understanding how physicians are employed and health care is delivered and paid for is now necessary. Incentivizing preparedness through value-based compensation systems will become the new standard for emergency management.

Validating pharmaceutical product claims: questions a formulary committee should ask.

Claims, justifying the acceptance and placement of new products on health system formularies, are all too often presented in terms that are either unverifiable or only verifiable in a timeframe that is of no practical benefit to formulary committees. One solution is for formulary committees to request that (i) all predictive claims made should be capable of empirical testing and (ii) manufacturers in making submissions should be asked to submit a protocol that details how their claims are to be assessed. Evaluation of claims can provide not only a significant input to ongoing disease area and therapeutic reviews, but can also provide a needed link to comparative effectiveness research and value-based healthcare. This paper presents a set of protocol standards (PROST) together will questions that should be addressed in a protocol review.

Design, implementation, and first-year outcomes of a value-based drug formulary.

BACKGROUND: Value-based insurance design attempts to align drug copayment tier with value rather than cost. Previous implementations of value-based insurance design have lowered copayments for drugs indicated for select "high value" conditions and have found modest improvements in medication adherence. However, these implementations have generally not resulted in cost savings to the health plan, suggesting a need for increased copayments for "low value" drugs. Further, previous implementations have assigned equal copayment reductions to all drugs within a therapeutic area without assessing the value of individual drugs. Aligning the individual drug's copayment to its specific value may yield greater clinical and economic benefits. In 2010, Premera Blue Cross, a large not-for-profit health plan in the Pacific Northwest, implemented a value-based drug formulary (VBF) that explicitly uses cost-effectiveness analyses after safety and efficacy reviews to estimate the value of each individual drug. Concurrently, Premera increased copayments for existing tiers. OBJECTIVE: To describe and evaluate the design, implementation, and first-year outcomes of the VBF. METHODS: We compared observed pharmacy cost per member per month in the year following the VBF implementation with 2 comparator groups: (1) observed pharmacy costs in the year prior to implementation, and (2) expected costs if no changes were made to the pharmacy benefits. Expected costs were generated by applying autoregressive integrated moving averages to pharmacy costs over the previous 36 months. We used an interrupted time series analysis to assess drug use and adherence among individuals with diabetes, hypertension, or dyslipidemia compared with a group of members in plans that did not implement a VBF.  RESULTS: Pharmacy costs decreased by 3% compared with the 12 months prior and 11% compared with expected costs. There was no significant decline in medication use or adherence to treatments for patients with diabetes, hypertension, or dyslipidemia. CONCLUSIONS: The VBF and copayment changes enabled pharmacy plan cost savings without negatively affecting utilization in key disease states.