Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 38
Filter
1.
Fed Regist ; 83(146): 36456-60, 2018 Jul 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30074735

ABSTRACT

The Secretary of Education (Secretary) amends the regulations implementing Parts B and C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). These conforming changes are needed to implement statutory amendments made to the IDEA by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), enacted on December 10, 2015. These regulations remove and revise IDEA definitions based on changes made to the definitions in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the ESSA, and also update several State eligibility requirements to reflect amendments to the IDEA made by the ESSA. They also update relevant cross-references in the IDEA regulations to sections of the ESEA to reflect changes made by the ESSA. These regulations also include several technical corrections to previously published IDEA Part B regulations.


Subject(s)
Insurance, Health/economics , Risk Adjustment/economics , Humans , Insurance, Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , State Government , United States
2.
Fed Regist ; 83(236): 63419-28, 2018 Dec 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30525339

ABSTRACT

This final rule adopts the HHS-operated risk adjustment methodology for the 2018 benefit year. In February 2018, a district court vacated the use of statewide average premium in the HHS-operated risk adjustment methodology for the 2014 through 2018 benefit years. Following review of all submitted comments to the proposed rule, HHS is adopting for the 2018 benefit year an HHS-operated risk adjustment methodology that utilizes the statewide average premium and is operated in a budget-neutral manner, as established in the final rules published in the March 23, 2012 and the December 22, 2016 editions of the Federal Register.


Subject(s)
Insurance Carriers/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance, Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Insurance Pools/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/methods , United States , United States Dept. of Health and Human Services/legislation & jurisprudence
3.
Fed Regist ; 83(219): 56406-638, 2018 Nov 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30457255

ABSTRACT

This final rule with comment period updates the home health prospective payment system (HH PPS) payment rates, including the national, standardized 60-day episode payment rates, the national per- visit rates, and the non-routine medical supply (NRS) conversion factor, effective for home health episodes of care ending on or after January 1, 2019. This rule also: Updates the HH PPS case-mix weights for calendar year (CY) 2019 using the most current, complete data available at the time of rulemaking; discusses our efforts to monitor the potential impacts of the rebasing adjustments that were implemented in CYs 2014 through 2017; finalizes a rebasing of the HH market basket (which includes a decrease in the labor-related share); finalizes the methodology used to determine rural add-on payments for CYs 2019 through 2022, as required by section 50208 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-123) hereinafter referred to as the "BBA of 2018"; finalizes regulations text changes regarding certifying and recertifying patient eligibility for Medicare home health services; and finalizes the definition of "remote patient monitoring" and the recognition of the costs associated with it as allowable administrative costs. This rule also summarizes the case-mix methodology refinements for home health services beginning on or after January 1, 2020, which includes the elimination of therapy thresholds for payment and a change in the unit of payment from a 60-day episode to a 30-day period, as mandated by section 51001 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018. This rule also finalizes changes to the Home Health Value-Based Purchasing (HHVBP) Model. In addition, with respect to the Home Health Quality Reporting Program, this rule discusses the Meaningful Measures Initiative; finalizes the removal of seven measures to further the priorities of this initiative; discusses social risk factors and provides an update on implementation efforts for certain provisions of the IMPACT Act; and finalizes a regulatory text change regarding OASIS data. For the home infusion therapy benefit, this rule finalizes health and safety standards that home infusion therapy suppliers must meet; finalizes an approval and oversight process for accrediting organizations (AOs) that accredit home infusion therapy suppliers; finalizes the implementation of temporary transitional payments for home infusion therapy services for CYs 2019 and 2020; and responds to the comments received regarding payment for home infusion therapy services for CY 2021 and subsequent years. Lastly, in this rule, we are finalizing only one of the two new requirements we proposed to implement in the regulations for the oversight of AOs that accredit Medicare-certified providers and suppliers. More specifically, for reasons set out more fully in the section X. of this final rule with comment period, we have decided not to finalize our proposal to require that all surveyors for AOs that accredit Medicare-certified providers and suppliers take the same relevant and program-specific CMS online surveyor training that the State Agency surveyors are required to take. However, we are finalizing our proposal to require that each AO must provide a written statement with their application to CMS, stating that if one of its fully accredited providers or suppliers, in good- standing, provides written notification that they wish to voluntarily withdraw from the AO's CMS-approved accreditation program, the AO must continue the provider or supplier's current accreditation until the effective date of withdrawal identified by the facility or the expiration date of the term of accreditation, whichever comes first.


Subject(s)
Home Care Services/legislation & jurisprudence , Medicaid/legislation & jurisprudence , Medicare/legislation & jurisprudence , Prospective Payment System/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , Accreditation/legislation & jurisprudence , Home Infusion Therapy , Humans , Quality of Health Care/legislation & jurisprudence , United States
4.
Fed Regist ; 83(74): 16930-7070, 2018 Apr 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30015469

ABSTRACT

This final rule sets forth payment parameters and provisions related to the risk adjustment and risk adjustment data validation programs; cost-sharing parameters; and user fees for Federally-facilitated Exchanges and State Exchanges on the Federal platform. It finalizes changes that provide additional flexibility to States to apply the definition of essential health benefits (EHB) to their markets, enhance the role of States regarding the certification of qualified health plans (QHPs); and provide States with additional flexibility in the operation and establishment of Exchanges, including the Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) Exchanges. It includes changes to standards related to Exchanges; the required functions of the SHOPs; actuarial value for stand-alone dental plans; the rate review program; the medical loss ratio program; eligibility and enrollment; exemptions; and other related topics.


Subject(s)
Health Insurance Exchanges/economics , Health Insurance Exchanges/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance Benefits/economics , Insurance Benefits/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance, Health/economics , Insurance, Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , Cost Sharing/economics , Cost Sharing/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Benefit Plans, Employee/economics , Health Benefit Plans, Employee/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Selection Bias , Small Business/economics , State Government , United States , United States Dept. of Health and Human Services
5.
Fed Regist ; 82(214): 51676-752, 2017 Nov 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29111624

ABSTRACT

This final rule updates the home health prospective payment system (HH PPS) payment rates, including the national, standardized 60-day episode payment rates, the national per-visit rates, and the non-routine medical supply (NRS) conversion factor, effective for home health episodes of care ending on or after January 1, 2018. This rule also: Updates the HH PPS case-mix weights using the most current, complete data available at the time of rulemaking; implements the third year of a 3-year phase-in of a reduction to the national, standardized 60-day episode payment to account for estimated case-mix growth unrelated to increases in patient acuity (that is, nominal case-mix growth) between calendar year (CY) 2012 and CY 2014; and discusses our efforts to monitor the potential impacts of the rebasing adjustments that were implemented in CY 2014 through CY 2017. In addition, this rule finalizes changes to the Home Health Value-Based Purchasing (HHVBP) Model and to the Home Health Quality Reporting Program (HH QRP). We are not finalizing the implementation of the Home Health Groupings Model (HHGM) in this final rule.


Subject(s)
Home Care Services/economics , Medicare/economics , Prospective Payment System/economics , Quality of Health Care/economics , Reimbursement Mechanisms/economics , Risk Adjustment/economics , Value-Based Purchasing/economics , Episode of Care , Health Services Accessibility/economics , Health Services Accessibility/legislation & jurisprudence , Home Care Services/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Mandatory Reporting , Medicare/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislation & jurisprudence , Prospective Payment System/legislation & jurisprudence , Quality of Health Care/legislation & jurisprudence , Rate Setting and Review/legislation & jurisprudence , Reimbursement Mechanisms/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , United States , Value-Based Purchasing/legislation & jurisprudence , Vulnerable Populations
6.
Manag Care ; 26(5): 12-13, 2017 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28661844

ABSTRACT

High-risk pools are not new. Before the ACA, 35 states had them. Today, only a handful still function. But in March, HHS Secretary Tom Price encouraged a comeback, sending letters to governors inviting them to apply for ACA innovation waivers to implement state-by-state high-risk pools and reinsurance programs.


Subject(s)
Insurance, Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Policy Making , Politics , Insurance, Health/economics , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , United States
7.
Fed Regist ; 81(112): 37949-8017, 2016 Jun 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27295736

ABSTRACT

Under the Medicare Shared Savings Program (Shared Savings Program), providers of services and suppliers that participate in an Accountable Care Organization (ACO) continue to receive traditional Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) payments under Parts A and B, but the ACO may be eligible to receive a shared savings payment if it meets specified quality and savings requirements. This final rule addresses changes to the Shared Savings Program, including: Modifications to the program's benchmarking methodology, when resetting (rebasing) the ACO's benchmark for a second or subsequent agreement period, to encourage ACOs' continued investment in care coordination and quality improvement; an alternative participation option to encourage ACOs to enter performance-based risk arrangements earlier in their participation under the program; and policies for reopening of payment determinations to make corrections after financial calculations have been performed and ACO shared savings and shared losses for a performance year have been determined.


Subject(s)
Accountable Care Organizations/economics , Accountable Care Organizations/legislation & jurisprudence , Benchmarking/economics , Benchmarking/legislation & jurisprudence , Cost Savings/economics , Cost Savings/legislation & jurisprudence , Medicare/economics , Medicare/legislation & jurisprudence , Fee-for-Service Plans/economics , Fee-for-Service Plans/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Quality Assurance, Health Care/economics , Quality Assurance, Health Care/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/economics , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , United States
8.
Fed Regist ; 81(246): 94058-183, 2016 12 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28068048

ABSTRACT

This final rule sets forth payment parameters and provisions related to the risk adjustment program; cost-sharing parameters and cost-sharing reductions; and user fees for Federally-facilitated Exchanges and State-based Exchanges on the Federal platform. It also provides additional guidance relating to standardized options; qualified health plans; consumer assistance tools; network adequacy; the Small Business Health Options Programs; stand-alone dental plans; fair health insurance premiums; guaranteed availability and guaranteed renewability; the medical loss ratio program; eligibility and enrollment; appeals; consumer-operated and oriented plans; special enrollment periods; and other related topics.


Subject(s)
Health Insurance Exchanges/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance Benefits/economics , Insurance Benefits/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance, Health/economics , Insurance, Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislation & jurisprudence , Cost Sharing/economics , Cost Sharing/legislation & jurisprudence , Eligibility Determination , Health Insurance Exchanges/economics , Humans , Insurance Coverage/economics , Insurance Coverage/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/economics , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , Small Business , State Government , United States
9.
Fed Regist ; 81(151): 52055-141, 2016 Aug 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27529901

ABSTRACT

This final rule will update the prospective payment rates for inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs) for federal fiscal year (FY) 2017 as required by the statute. As required by section 1886(j)(5) of the Act, this rule includes the classification and weighting factors for the IRF prospective payment system's (IRF PPS's) case-mix groups and a description of the methodologies and data used in computing the prospective payment rates for FY 2017. This final rule also revises and updates quality measures and reporting requirements under the IRF quality reporting program (QRP).


Subject(s)
Medicare/economics , Prospective Payment System/economics , Rehabilitation Centers/economics , Humans , Inpatients , Length of Stay/economics , Length of Stay/legislation & jurisprudence , Medicare/legislation & jurisprudence , Prospective Payment System/legislation & jurisprudence , Rehabilitation Centers/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/economics , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , United States
10.
Fed Regist ; 81(151): 51969-2053, 2016 Aug 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27529900

ABSTRACT

This final rule updates the payment rates used under the prospective payment system (PPS) for skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) for fiscal year (FY) 2017. In addition, it specifies a potentially preventable readmission measure for the Skilled Nursing Facility Value-Based Purchasing Program (SNF VBP), and implements requirements for that program, including performance standards, a scoring methodology, and a review and correction process for performance information to be made public, aimed at implementing value-based purchasing for SNFs. Additionally, this final rule includes additional polices and measures in the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program (SNF QRP). This final rule also responds to comments on the SNF Payment Models Research (PMR) project.


Subject(s)
Medicare/economics , Nursing Homes/economics , Prospective Payment System/economics , Value-Based Purchasing/economics , Humans , Medicare/legislation & jurisprudence , Models, Economic , Nursing Homes/legislation & jurisprudence , Prospective Payment System/legislation & jurisprudence , Quality of Health Care/economics , Quality of Health Care/legislation & jurisprudence , Reimbursement Mechanisms/economics , Reimbursement Mechanisms/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/economics , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , United States , Value-Based Purchasing/legislation & jurisprudence
11.
Fed Regist ; 81(45): 12203-352, 2016 Mar 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26964153

ABSTRACT

This final rule sets forth payment parameters and provisions related to the risk adjustment, reinsurance, and risk corridors programs; cost-sharing parameters and cost-sharing reductions; and user fees for Federally-facilitated Exchanges. It also provides additional amendments regarding the annual open enrollment period for the individual market for the 2017 and 2018 benefit years; essential health benefits; cost sharing; qualified health plans; Exchange consumer assistance programs; network adequacy; patient safety; the Small Business Health Options Program; stand-alone dental plans; third-party payments to qualified health plans; the definitions of large employer and small employer; fair health insurance premiums; student health insurance coverage; the rate review program; the medical loss ratio program; eligibility and enrollment; exemptions and appeals; and other related topics.


Subject(s)
Health Insurance Exchanges/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance Benefits/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance Coverage/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance, Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislation & jurisprudence , Cost Sharing/legislation & jurisprudence , Federal Government , Humans , Insurance, Dental/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Navigation/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Safety/legislation & jurisprudence , Rate Setting and Review/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , Small Business/legislation & jurisprudence , Student Health Services/legislation & jurisprudence , United States , United States Dept. of Health and Human Services
12.
Fed Regist ; 80(39): 10749-877, 2015 Feb 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25898427

ABSTRACT

This final rule sets forth payment parameters and provisions related to the risk adjustment, reinsurance, and risk corridors programs; cost sharing parameters and cost-sharing reductions; and user fees for Federally-facilitated Exchanges. It also finalizes additional standards for the individual market annual open enrollment period for the 2016 benefit year, essential health benefits, qualified health plans, network adequacy, quality improvement strategies, the Small Business Health Options Program, guaranteed availability, guaranteed renewability, minimum essential coverage, the rate review program, the medical loss ratio program, and other related topics.


Subject(s)
Health Insurance Exchanges/economics , Health Insurance Exchanges/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance Benefits/economics , Insurance Benefits/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/economics , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , Cost Sharing/economics , Cost Sharing/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Benefit Plans, Employee/economics , Health Benefit Plans, Employee/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Insurance Exchanges/standards , Humans , Insurance, Health/economics , Insurance, Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislation & jurisprudence , United States , United States Dept. of Health and Human Services
13.
Issue Brief (Commonw Fund) ; 26: 1-8, 2015 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26372970

ABSTRACT

The new health insurance exchanges are the core of the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) reforms, but how the law improves the nonsubsidized portion of the individual market is also important. This issue brief compares products sold on and off the exchanges to gain insight into how the ACA's market reforms are functioning. Initial concerns that insurers might seek to enroll lower-risk customers outside the exchanges have not been realized. Instead, more-generous benefit plans, which appeal to people with health problems, constitute a greater portion of plans sold off-exchange than those sold on-exchange. Although insur­ers that sell mostly on the exchanges incur an additional fee, they still devote a greater portion of their premium dollars to medical care. Their projected admin­istrative costs and profit margins are lower than are those of insurers selling only off the exchanges.


Subject(s)
Insurance Coverage/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance, Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Fees and Charges/statistics & numerical data , Health Care Reform/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Insurance Exchanges/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , United States
14.
Issue Brief (Commonw Fund) ; 7: 1-12, 2011 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21563348

ABSTRACT

To achieve the aims of the Affordable Care Act, state and federal regulators must construct an effective system of risk adjustment, one that protects health insurers that attract a disproportionate share of patients with poor health risks. This brief, which summarizes a Commonwealth Fund­supported conference of leading risk adjustment experts, explores the challenges regulators will face, considers the consequences of the law's risk adjustment provisions, and analyzes the merits of different risk adjustment strategies. Among other recommendations, the brief suggests that regulators use diagnostic rather than only demographic risk measures, that they allow states some but limited flexibility to tailor risk adjustment methods to local circumstances, and that they phase in the use of risk transfer payments to give insurers more time to predict and understand the full effects of risk adjustment.


Subject(s)
Health Care Reform/economics , Insurance Pools/economics , Insurance, Health/economics , Risk Adjustment/economics , Congresses as Topic , Federal Government , Health Care Reform/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Insurance Pools/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance, Health/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economics , Rate Setting and Review/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Assessment/economics , Risk Assessment/legislation & jurisprudence , State Government , United States
15.
Issue Brief (Commonw Fund) ; 74: 1-12, 2009 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20183948

ABSTRACT

The Medicare Advantage (MA) program, which enables Medicare beneficiaries to enjoy private health plan coverage, is a major element of the current health care reform discussion on Capitol Hill--in large part because payments to MA plans in 2009 are expected to run at least $11 billion more than traditional Medicare would have cost. While the pending Senate and House bills both endeavor to reduce these extra MA payments, their approaches are different. The bills also differ on other aspects of reforming the MA program, such as plans' allowable geographic areas, their risk-adjustment systems and reporting requirements, their potential bonuses for achieving high-quality care and providing good management, and their beneficiary protections. This issue brief compares the above and other provisions in the House and Senate bills, which have a common overall goal to improve the value that Medicare obtains for the dollars it spends


Subject(s)
Health Care Reform/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance Coverage/legislation & jurisprudence , Medicare Part C/legislation & jurisprudence , Fee-for-Service Plans/economics , Fee-for-Service Plans/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Care Reform/economics , Humans , Insurance Coverage/economics , Managed Care Programs/economics , Managed Care Programs/legislation & jurisprudence , Medicare Part C/economics , Private Sector , Quality of Health Care , Risk Adjustment/economics , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , United States
16.
Obstet Gynecol ; 134(5): 1105-1108, 2019 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31599834

ABSTRACT

The United States is the world's only developed country with a rising maternal mortality rate, with an increase of 26% between 2000 and 2014. Of the approximately 700 pregnancy-related deaths per year in the United States, nearly 30% are attributable to preexisting disease. Maternal-fetal medicine physicians are in a unique position-they are tasked with counseling patients regarding the risks of pregnancy in the context of their medical comorbidities. Individual physicians' opinions regarding the level of risk of death at which a termination of pregnancy would be considered "medically indicated" are highly variable and are influenced by where physicians are from, where they trained, and their knowledge regarding the safety of termination of pregnancy. Additionally, 43 states have legislated restrictions to abortion access that contain exceptions to protect women's life or health, but what constitutes a risk to a woman's life or health is not well-defined and appropriates medical terminology for political purposes. The current statements from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine advocate for safe, legal, and unobstructed access to pregnancy termination services. These statements attempt to remove health care providers' own biases regarding the exact risk level at which they would consider an abortion to be medically indicated. Because the risk of death from a first- or second-trimester termination is less than that of a traditional delivery, any medical problem that increases that risk of death could be considered an indication for counseling patients regarding the option of termination of pregnancy as a means to reduce mortality or morbidity.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Therapeutic , Pregnancy Complications , Risk Adjustment , Abortion, Therapeutic/legislation & jurisprudence , Abortion, Therapeutic/methods , Abortion, Therapeutic/statistics & numerical data , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Maternal Mortality/trends , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications/mortality , Pregnancy Complications/therapy , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , Pregnancy, High-Risk , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/methods , United States/epidemiology
17.
Health Policy ; 123(8): 700-705, 2019 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31196570

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Risk-adjustment in resource allocation is commonly used for regional redistribution or for eliminating risk selection motives of multiple statutory health insurers. In the Czech Republic, revenue redistribution between health insurers takes place since the 1990's. Since 2018, the risk-adjustment mechanism includes an adjustment for insured with chronic diseases using Pharmacy-based Cost Group (PCG) classification. In addition, retrospective compensation for very high cost patients has been strengthened. AIM: To provide an internationally relevant overview of the Czech risk-adjustment system. To assess the implication of the 2018 reform for health insurers and for the development of chronic care. METHOD: The framework of the Health Reform Monitor is used to analyse the policy process. Data from Czech health insurers and Czech Ministry of Health are used to assess likely impact of the reform. RESULTS: The reform increases coverage of predictable individual health risks and combines prospective risk-rating with strengthened retrospective risk-sharing among insurers. The reform results in moderate changes in risk-adjusted allocations of individual insurers. CONCLUSION: The Czech experience with risk-adjustment reforms is relevant for countries with multiple health insurers as well as for countries with risk-adjusted regional redistribution mechanisms. Combining prospective risk factors of age, sex, and PCGs with retrospective compensation of expensive cases limits potential losses to a manageable level, also for small risk-pools. It reduces incentives for cream skimming based on health status, enables higher use of risk-sharing contracts, and incentivizes the development of disease management programs in the Czech Republic.


Subject(s)
Insurance, Health/economics , Insurance, Health/organization & administration , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , Chronic Disease/drug therapy , Chronic Disease/economics , Czech Republic , Drug Utilization/economics , Health Care Reform , Humans , Insurance Carriers/economics , Insurance Carriers/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/methods , Risk Sharing, Financial/economics , Risk Sharing, Financial/legislation & jurisprudence
18.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 37(10): 1544-1545, 2018 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30199278

ABSTRACT

Last summer the administration finalized new rules on short-term plans and approved new state waivers. Litigation continues over the individual mandate, risk adjustment, and ACA "sabotage."


Subject(s)
Health Care Reform/economics , Health Policy , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , United States
19.
Chirurg ; 78(11): 1028-36, 2007 Nov.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17928975

ABSTRACT

Due to an increasing interest in patient safety and quality health care, many studies attempt to show a relationship between procedural volume at the institutional and individual level and patient outcome. Despite the correlation between number of surgeons and institutional volume in major operative procedures such as coronary artery bypass graft, pancreatic resection, and esophagectomy, these parameters are likely to be proxy for individual factors such as experience and structural aspects. In general the relationship between case numbers and results is more convincing in cancer surgery than for cardiovascular procedures, and risk adjustment may play an important role for interpreting results of the various studies. Exact thresholds cannot be determined and thus remain speculative. It appears difficult to implement practical changes based on the observations, because the etiology and causality of the relationship between volume and outcome are still not understood. The simple focus on volume does not apply to measurements of quality but can be a starting point for further studies to identify more specific factors associated with surgical quality.


Subject(s)
Clinical Competence/legislation & jurisprudence , Clinical Competence/standards , Cross-Cultural Comparison , Quality Assurance, Health Care/legislation & jurisprudence , Quality Assurance, Health Care/standards , Surgical Procedures, Operative/legislation & jurisprudence , Surgical Procedures, Operative/standards , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/mortality , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/surgery , Benchmarking/legislation & jurisprudence , Benchmarking/standards , Clinical Competence/statistics & numerical data , Coronary Artery Bypass/legislation & jurisprudence , Coronary Artery Bypass/mortality , Coronary Artery Bypass/standards , Coronary Artery Bypass/statistics & numerical data , Esophagectomy/legislation & jurisprudence , Esophagectomy/mortality , Esophagectomy/standards , Esophagectomy/statistics & numerical data , Germany , Humans , National Health Programs/legislation & jurisprudence , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/standards , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Quality Assurance, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , Risk Adjustment/legislation & jurisprudence , Risk Adjustment/standards , Risk Adjustment/statistics & numerical data , Surgical Procedures, Operative/statistics & numerical data , Survival Analysis , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL