Transforming Medicare's Payment Systems: Progress Shaped By The ACA.

The Affordable Care Act promoted payment reforms directly and through the creation of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, which it endowed with the authority to introduce Alternative Payment Models (APMs) into Medicare and Medicaid. We conducted a narrative review of these payment reforms, finding that several programs generated modest savings while maintaining or improving the quality of care, but they had high dropout rates. In general, evidence for other APMs is less conclusive, and whether the reforms spurred similar changes in the private sector remains anecdotal. Despite challenges, APMs provide incentives for efficient care provision and offer providers a way to succeed financially in an environment with slowly rising fee-for-service prices. Thus, we consider the Affordable Care Act's payment reforms to be modestly successful, and we encourage both the purging of initiatives that aren't working and the continued development and study of promising ones.

Hypothetical Network Adequacy Schemes For Children Fail To Ensure Patients' Access To In-Network Children's Hospital.

Insurers are increasingly adopting narrow network strategies. Little is known about how these strategies may affect children's access to needed specialty care. We examined the percentage of pediatric specialty hospitalizations that would be beyond existing Medicare Advantage network adequacy distance requirements for adult hospital care and, as a secondary analysis, a pediatric adaptation of the Medicare Advantage requirements. We examined 748,920 hospitalizations at eighty-one children's hospitals that submitted data for the period October 2014-September 2015. Nearly half of specialty hospitalizations were outside the Medicare Advantage distance requirements. Under the pediatric adaptation, there was great variability among the hospitals, with the percent of hospitalizations beyond the distance requirements ranging from less than 1 percent to 35 percent. Instead of, or in addition to, time and distance standards, policy makers may need to consider more nuanced network definitions, including functional capabilities of the pediatric care network or clear exception policies for essential specialty care services.

The Oncology Care Model: Perspectives From the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and Participating Oncology Practices in Academia and the Community.

Cancer care delivery in the United States is often fragmented and inefficient, imposing substantial burdens on patients. Costs of cancer care are rising more rapidly than other specialties, with substantial regional differences in quality and cost. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Innovation Center (CMMIS) recently launched the Oncology Care Model (OCM), which uses payment incentives and practice redesign requirements toward the goal of improving quality while controlling costs. As of March 2017, 190 practices were participating, with approximately 3,200 oncologists providing care for approximately 150,000 unique beneficiaries per year (approximately 20% of the Medicare Fee-for-Service population receiving chemotherapy for cancer). This article provides an overview of the program from the CMS perspective, as well as perspectives from two practices implementing OCM: an academic health system (Yale Cancer Center) and a community practice (Hematology Oncology Associates of Central New York). Requirements of OCM, as well as implementation successes, challenges, financial implications, impact on quality, and future visions, are provided from each perspective.

Design Challenges of an Episode-Based Payment Model in Oncology: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Oncology Care Model.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services developed the Oncology Care Model as an episode-based payment model to encourage participating practitioners to provide higher-quality, better-coordinated care at a lower cost to the nearly three-quarter million fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with cancer who receive chemotherapy each year. Episode payment models can be complex. They combine into a single benchmark price all payments for services during an episode of illness, many of which may be delivered at different times by different providers in different locations. Policy and technical decisions include the definition of the episode, including its initiation, duration, and included services; the identification of beneficiaries included in the model; and beneficiary attribution to practitioners with overall responsibility for managing their care. In addition, the calculation and risk adjustment of benchmark episode prices for the bundle of services must reflect geographic cost variations and diverse patient populations, including varying disease subtypes, medical comorbidities, changes in standards of care over time, the adoption of expensive new drugs (especially in oncology), as well as diverse practice patterns. Other steps include timely monitoring and intervention as needed to avoid shifting the attribution of beneficiaries on the basis of their expected episode expenditures as well as to ensure the provision of necessary medical services and the development of a meaningful link to quality measurement and improvement through the episode-based payment methodology. The complex and diverse nature of oncology business relationships and the specific rules and requirements of Medicare payment systems for different types of providers intensify these issues. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services believes that by sharing its approach to addressing these decisions and challenges, it may facilitate greater understanding of the model within the oncology community and provide insight to others considering the development of episode-based payment models in the commercial or government sectors.

Encouraging Medicare Advantage Enrollees to Switch to Higher Quality Plans: Assessing the Effectiveness of a "Nudge" Letter.

There are considerable quality differences across private Medicare Advantage insurance plans, so it is important that beneficiaries make informed choices. During open enrollment for the 2013 coverage year, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services sent letters to beneficiaries enrolled in low-quality Medicare Advantage plans (i.e., plans rated less than 3 stars for at least 3 consecutive years by Medicare) explaining the stars and encouraging them to reexamine their choices. To understand the effectiveness of these low-cost, behavioral "nudge" letters, we used a beneficiary-level national retrospective cohort and performed multivariate regression analysis of plan selection during the 2013 open enrollment period among those enrolled in plans rated less than 3 stars. Our analysis controls for beneficiary demographic characteristics, health and health care spending risks, the availability of alternative higher rated plan options in their local market, and historical disenrollment rates from the plans. We compared the behaviors of those beneficiaries who received the nudge letters with those who enrolled in similar poorly rated plans but did not receive such letters. We found that beneficiaries who received the nudge letter were almost twice as likely (28.0% [95% confidence interval = 27.7%, 28.2%] vs. 15.3% [95% confidence interval = 15.1%, 15.5%]) to switch to a higher rated plan compared with those who did not receive the letter. White beneficiaries, healthier beneficiaries, and those residing in areas with more high-performing plan choices were more likely to switch plans in response to the nudge. Our findings highlight both the importance and efficacy of providing timely and actionable information to beneficiaries about quality in the insurance marketplace to facilitate informed and value-based coverage decisions.

Financial Loss for Inpatient Care of Medicaid-Insured Children.

Importance: Medicaid payments tend to be less than the cost of care. Federal Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) payments help hospitals recover such uncompensated costs of Medicaid-insured and uninsured patients. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act reduces DSH payments in anticipation of fewer uninsured patients and therefore decreased uncompensated care. However, unlike adults, few hospitalized children are uninsured, while many have Medicaid coverage. Therefore, DSH payment reductions may expose extensive Medicaid financial losses for hospitals serving large absolute numbers of children. Objectives: To identify types of hospitals with the highest Medicaid losses from pediatric inpatient care and to estimate the proportion of losses recovered through DSH payments. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cross-sectional analysis evaluated Medicaid-insured hospital discharges of patients 20 years and younger from 23 states in the 2009 Kids' Inpatient Database. The dates of the analysis were March to September 2015. Hospitals were categorized as freestanding children's hospitals (FSCHs), children's hospitals within general hospitals, non-children's hospital teaching hospitals, and non-children's hospital nonteaching hospitals. Financial records of FSCHs in the data set were used to estimate the proportion of Medicaid losses recovered through DSH payments. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospital financial losses from inpatient care of Medicaid-insured children (defined as the reimbursement minus the cost of care) were compared across hospital types. For our subsample of FSCHs, Medicaid-insured inpatient financial losses were calculated with and without each hospital's DSH payment. Results: The 2009 Kids' Inpatient Database study population included 1485 hospitals and 843 725 Medicaid-insured discharges. Freestanding children's hospitals had a higher median number of Medicaid-insured discharges (4082; interquartile range [IQR], 3524-5213) vs non-children's hospital teaching hospitals (674; IQR, 258-1414) and non-children's hospital nonteaching hospitals (161; IQR, 41-420). Freestanding children's hospitals had the largest median Medicaid losses from pediatric inpatient care (-$9 722 367; IQR, -$16 248 369 to -$2 137 902). Smaller losses were experienced by non-children's hospital teaching hospitals (-$204 100; IQR, -$1 014 100 to $14 700]) and non-children's hospital nonteaching hospitals (-$28 310; IQR, -$152 370 to $9040]). Disproportionate Share Hospital payments to FSCHs reduced their Medicaid losses by almost half. Conclusions and Relevance: Estimated financial losses from pediatric inpatients covered by Medicaid were much larger for FSCHs than for other hospital types. For children's hospitals, small anticipated increases in insured children are unlikely to offset the reductions in DSH payments.

Patterns of care for clinically distinct segments of high cost Medicare beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to improve the efficiency of care for the Medicare population commonly target high cost beneficiaries. We describe and evaluate a novel management approach, population segmentation, for identifying and managing high cost beneficiaries. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 6,919,439 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries in 2012. We defined and characterized eight distinct clinical population segments, and assessed heterogeneity in managing practitioners. RESULTS: The eight segments comprised 9.8% of the population and 47.6% of annual Medicare payments. The eight segments included 61% and 69% of the population in the top decile and top 5% of annual Medicare payments. The positive-predictive values within each segment for meeting thresholds of Medicare payments ranged from 72% to 100%, 30% to 83%, and 14% to 56% for the upper quartile, upper decile, and upper 5% of Medicare payments respectively. Sensitivity and positive-predictive values were substantially improved over predictive algorithms based on historical utilization patterns and comorbidities. The mean [95% confidence interval] number of unique practitioners and practices delivering E&M services ranged from 1.82 [1.79-1.84] to 6.94 [6.91-6.98] and 1.48 [1.46-1.50] to 4.98 [4.95-5.00] respectively. The percentage of cognitive services delivered by primary care practitioners ranged from 23.8% to 67.9% across segments, with significant variability among specialty types. CONCLUSIONS: Most high cost Medicare beneficiaries can be identified based on a single clinical reason and are managed by different practitioners. IMPLICATIONS: Population segmentation holds potential to improve efficiency in the Medicare population by identifying opportunities to improve care for specific populations and managing clinicians, and forecasting and evaluating the impact of specific interventions.

State challenges to child health quality measure reporting and recommendations for improvement.

OBJECTIVE: The Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) was re-authorized in 2009, ushering in an unprecedented focus on children's health care quality one of which includes identifying a core set of performance measures for voluntary reporting by states' Medicaid/CHIP programs. However, there is a wide variation in the quantity and quality of measures states chose to report to the Center's for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The objective of this study is to assess reporting barriers and to identify potential opportunities for improvement. METHODS: From 2013 to 2014 a questionnaire developed in coordination with CMS and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) was sent to state Medicaid and CHIP officials to assess barriers to child health quality reporting for Federal Fiscal Year 2012. States were categorized as high, medium, or low reporting for comparative analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-five of the 50 states and the District of Columbia agreed to participate in the study and completed the questionnaire. States placed a high priority on children's health care quality reporting (4.2 of 5 point Likert Scale, SD 0.99) and 96% plan to use measurement results to further improve their quality initiatives. However, low reporting states believed they had inadequate staffing and that data collection and extraction was too time-consuming than high reporting states. CONCLUSION: Based on state responses, possible solutions to improve reporting includes funding and staff support, refining the technical assistance provided, and creating venues for state-to-state interaction. Realistic and tangible improvements are within reach and opportunities for CMS and states to collaborate to improve child health care quality.

Association Between Hospital Participation in a Medicare Bundled Payment Initiative and Payments and Quality Outcomes for Lower Extremity Joint Replacement Episodes.

IMPORTANCE: Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) is a voluntary initiative of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to test the effect of holding an entity accountable for all services provided during an episode of care on episode payments and quality of care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether BPCI was associated with a greater reduction in Medicare payments without loss of quality of care for lower extremity joint (primarily hip and knee) replacement episodes initiated in BPCI-participating hospitals that are accountable for total episode payments (for the hospitalization and Medicare-covered services during the 90 days after discharge). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A difference-in-differences approach estimated the differential change in outcomes for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who had a lower extremity joint replacement at a BPCI-participating hospital between the baseline (October 2011 through September 2012) and intervention (October 2013 through June 2015) periods and beneficiaries with the same surgical procedure at matched comparison hospitals. EXPOSURE: Lower extremity joint replacement at a BPCI-participating hospital. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Standardized Medicare-allowed payments (Medicare payments), utilization, and quality (unplanned readmissions, emergency department visits, and mortality) during hospitalization and the 90-day postdischarge period. RESULTS: There were 29 441 lower extremity joint replacement episodes in the baseline period and 31 700 in the intervention period (mean [SD] age, 74.1 [8.89] years; 65.2% women) at 176 BPCI-participating hospitals, compared with 29 440 episodes in the baseline period (768 hospitals) and 31 696 episodes in the intervention period (841 hospitals) (mean [SD] age, 74.1 [8.92] years; 64.9% women) at matched comparison hospitals. The BPCI mean Medicare episode payments were $30 551 (95% CI, $30 201 to $30 901) in the baseline period and declined by $3286 to $27 265 (95% CI, $26 838 to $27 692) in the intervention period. The comparison mean Medicare episode payments were $30 057 (95% CI, $29 765 to $30 350) in the baseline period and declined by $2119 to $27 938 (95% CI, $27 639 to $28 237). The mean Medicare episode payments declined by an estimated $1166 more (95% CI, -$1634 to -$699; P < .001) for BPCI episodes than for comparison episodes, primarily due to reduced use of institutional postacute care. There were no statistical differences in the claims-based quality measures, which included 30-day unplanned readmissions (-0.1%; 95% CI, -0.6% to 0.4%), 90-day unplanned readmissions (-0.4%; 95% CI, -1.1% to 0.3%), 30-day emergency department visits (-0.1%; 95% CI, -0.7% to 0.5%), 90-day emergency department visits (0.2%; 95% CI, -0.6% to 1.0%), 30-day postdischarge mortality (-0.1%; 95% CI, -0.3% to 0.2%), and 90-day postdischarge mortality (-0.0%; 95% CI, -0.3% to 0.3%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the first 21 months of the BPCI initiative, Medicare payments declined more for lower extremity joint replacement episodes provided in BPCI-participating hospitals than for those provided in comparison hospitals, without a significant change in quality outcomes. Further studies are needed to assess longer-term follow-up as well as patterns for other types of clinical care.