Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 13.308
Filtrar
1.
Med Care ; 60(1): 83-92, 2022 01 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34812788

RESUMO

IMPORTANCE: Model 3 of the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) is an alternative payment model in which an entity takes accountability for the episode costs. It is unclear how BPCI affected the overall skilled nursing facility (SNF) financial performance and the differences between facilities with differing racial/ethnic and socioeconomic status (SES) composition of the residents. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine associations between BPCI participation and SNF finances and across-facility differences in SNF financial performance. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A longitudinal study spanning 2010-2017, based on difference-in-differences analyses for 575 persistent-participation SNFs, 496 dropout SNFs, and 13,630 eligible nonparticipating SNFs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Inflation-adjusted operating expenses, revenues, profit, and profit margin. RESULTS: BPCI was associated with reductions of $0.63 million in operating expenses and $0.57 million in operating revenues for the persistent-participation group but had no impact on the dropout group compared with nonparticipating SNFs. Among persistent-participation SNFs, the BPCI-related declines were $0.74 million in operating expenses and $0.52 million in operating revenues for majority-serving SNFs; and $1.33 and $0.82 million in operating expenses and revenues, respectively, for non-Medicaid-dependent SNFs. The between-facility SES gaps in operating expenses were reduced (differential difference-in-differences estimate=$1.09 million). Among dropout SNFs, BPCI showed mixed effects on across-facility SES and racial/ethnic differences in operating expenses and revenues. The BPCI program showed no effect on operating profit measures. CONCLUSIONS: BPCI led to reduced operating expenses and revenues for SNFs that participated and remained in the program but had no effect on operating profit indicators and mixed effects on SES and racial/ethnic differences across SNFs.


Assuntos
Administração Financeira/métodos , Mecanismo de Reembolso/normas , Instituições de Cuidados Especializados de Enfermagem/economia , Administração Financeira/normas , Administração Financeira/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Mecanismo de Reembolso/estatística & dados numéricos , Instituições de Cuidados Especializados de Enfermagem/organização & administração , Instituições de Cuidados Especializados de Enfermagem/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos
2.
J Cyst Fibros ; 20 Suppl 3: 16-20, 2021 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34930535

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Chronic care delivery models faced unprecedented financial pressures, with a reduction of in-person visits and adoption of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to understand the reported financial impact of pandemic-related changes to the cystic fibrosis (CF) care model. METHODS: The U.S. CF Foundation State of Care surveys fielded in Summer 2020 (SoC1) and Spring 2021 (SoC2) included questions for CF programs on the impact of pandemic-related restrictions on overall finances, staffing, licensure, and reimbursement of telehealth services. Descriptive analyses were conducted based on program type. RESULTS: Among the 286 respondents (128 pediatric, 118 adult, 40 affiliate), the majority (62%) reported a detrimental financial impact to their CF care program in SoC1, though fewer (42%) reported detrimental impacts in SoC2. The most common reported impacts in SoC1 were redeployment of clinical staff (68%), furloughs (52%), hiring freezes (51%), decreases in salaries (34%), or layoffs (10%). Reports of lower reimbursement for telehealth increased from 30% to 40% from SoC1 to SoC2. Projecting towards the future, only a minority (17%) of program directors in SoC2 felt that financial support would remain below pre-pandemic levels. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in financial strain on the CF care model, including challenges with reimbursement for telehealth services and reductions in staffing due to institutional changes. Planning for the future of CF care model needs to address these short-term impacts, particularly to ensure a lack of interruption in high-quality multi-disciplinary care.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente , Fibrose Cística , Acesso aos Serviços de Saúde , Modelos Organizacionais , Telemedicina , Adulto , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Criança , Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente/organização & administração , Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente/normas , Custos e Análise de Custo , Fibrose Cística/economia , Fibrose Cística/epidemiologia , Fibrose Cística/terapia , Acesso aos Serviços de Saúde/organização & administração , Acesso aos Serviços de Saúde/tendências , Necessidades e Demandas de Serviços de Saúde , Humanos , Inovação Organizacional , Admissão e Escalonamento de Pessoal/organização & administração , Mecanismo de Reembolso/tendências , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicina/economia , Telemedicina/métodos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
3.
J Cyst Fibros ; 20 Suppl 3: 23-28, 2021 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34930537

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced cystic fibrosis (CF) care programs to rapidly shift from in-person care delivery to telehealth. Our objective was to provide a qualitative exploration of facilitators and barriers to: 1) implementing high-quality telehealth and 2) navigating reimbursement for telehealth services. METHODS: We used data from the 2020 State of Care CF Program Survey (n=286 U.S. care programs) administered in August-September to identify two cohorts of programs, with variation in telehealth quality (n=12 programs) and reimbursement (n=8 programs). We conducted focus groups and semi-structured interviews with CF program directors and coordinators in December 2020, approximately 9 months from onset of the pandemic. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to identify facilitators and barriers of implementation, and inductive thematic analysis to identify facilitators and barriers of reimbursement. RESULTS: Factors differentiating programs with greater and lower perceived telehealth quality included telehealth characteristics (perceived advantage over in-person care, cost, platform quality); external influences (needs and resources of those served by the CF program), characteristics of the CF program (compatibility with workflows, relative priority, available resources); characteristics of team members (individual stage of change), and processes for implementation (engaging patients and teams). Reimbursement barriers included documentation to optimize billing; reimbursement of multi-disciplinary team members, remote monitoring, and telephone-only telehealth; and lower volume of patients. CONCLUSIONS: A number of factors are associated with successful implementation and reimbursement of telehealth. Future efforts should provide guidance and incentives that support telehealth delivery and infrastructure, share best practices across CF programs, and remove barriers.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Barreiras de Comunicação , Fibrose Cística , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa/prevenção & controle , Acesso aos Serviços de Saúde , Participação do Paciente , Telemedicina , Adulto , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Criança , Fibrose Cística/epidemiologia , Fibrose Cística/psicologia , Fibrose Cística/terapia , Acesso aos Serviços de Saúde/organização & administração , Acesso aos Serviços de Saúde/tendências , Humanos , Determinação de Necessidades de Cuidados de Saúde , Participação do Paciente/métodos , Participação do Paciente/psicologia , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Melhoria de Qualidade , Mecanismo de Reembolso , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicina/economia , Telemedicina/métodos , Telemedicina/normas , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
4.
Int J Public Health ; 66: 1604073, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34744596

RESUMO

Objectives: Guidelines recommend colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or colonoscopy. In 2013, Switzerland introduced reimbursement of CRC screening by mandatory health insurance for 50-69-years-olds, after they met their deductible. We hypothesized that the 2013 reimbursement policy increased testing rate. Methods: In claims data from a Swiss insurance, we determined yearly CRC testing rate among 50-75-year-olds (2012-2018) and the association with socio-demographic, insurance-, and health-related covariates with multivariate-adjusted logistic regression models. We tested for interaction of age (50-69/70-75) on testing rate over time. Results: Among insurees (2012:355'683; 2018:348'526), yearly CRC testing rate increased from 2012 to 2018 (overall: 8.1-9.9%; colonoscopy: 5.0-7.6%; FOBT: 3.1-2.3%). Odds ratio (OR) were higher for 70-75-year-olds (2012: 1.16, 95%CI 1.13-1.20; 2018: 1.05, 95%CI 1.02-1.08). Deductible interacted with changes in testing rate over time (p < 0.001). The increase in testing rate was proportionally higher among 50-69-years-olds than 70-75-year-olds over the years. Conclusions: CRC testing rate in Switzerland increased from 2012 to 2018, particularly among 50-69-years-olds, the target population of the 2013 law. Future studies should explore the effect of encouraging FOBT or waiving deductible.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Colorretais , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Idoso , Colonoscopia/economia , Colonoscopia/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/economia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Formulário de Reclamação de Seguro/estatística & dados numéricos , Seguro Saúde/economia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Sangue Oculto , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Suíça
5.
JAMA ; 326(18): 1829-1839, 2021 Nov 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34751709

RESUMO

Importance: In 2016, the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services initiated the Oncology Care Model (OCM), an alternative payment model designed to improve the value of care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries with cancer. Objective: To assess the association of the OCM with changes in Medicare spending, utilization, quality, and patient experience during the OCM's first 3 years. Design, Setting, and Participants: Exploratory difference-in-differences study comparing care during 6-month chemotherapy episodes in OCM participating practices and propensity-matched comparison practices initiated before (January 2014 through June 2015) and after (July 2016 through December 2018) the start of the OCM. Participants included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with cancer treated at these practices through June 2019. Exposures: OCM participation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total episode payments (Medicare spending for Parts A, B, and D, not including monthly payments for enhanced oncology services); utilization and payments for hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, office visits, chemotherapy, supportive care, and imaging; quality (chemotherapy-associated hospitalizations and ED visits, timely chemotherapy, end-of-life care, and survival); and patient experiences. Results: Among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with cancer undergoing chemotherapy, 483 319 beneficiaries (mean age, 73.0 [SD, 8.7] years; 60.1% women; 987 332 episodes) were treated at 201 OCM participating practices, and 557 354 beneficiaries (mean age, 72.9 [SD, 9.0] years; 57.4% women; 1 122 597 episodes) were treated at 534 comparison practices. From the baseline period, total episode payments increased from $28 681 for OCM episodes and $28 421 for comparison episodes to $33 211 for OCM episodes and $33 249 for comparison episodes during the intervention period (difference in differences, -$297; 90% CI, -$504 to -$91), less than the mean $704 Monthly Enhanced Oncology Services payments. Relative decreases in total episode payments were primarily for Part B nonchemotherapy drug payments (difference in differences, -$145; 90% CI, -$218 to -$72), especially supportive care drugs (difference in differences, -$150; 90% CI, -$216 to -$84). The OCM was associated with statistically significant relative reductions in total episode payments among higher-risk episodes (difference in differences, -$503; 90% CI, -$802 to -$204) and statistically significant relative increases in total episode payments among lower-risk episodes (difference in differences, $151; 90% CI, $39-$264). The OCM was not significantly associated with differences in hospitalizations, ED visits, or survival. Of 22 measures of utilization, 10 measures of quality, and 7 measures of care experiences, only 5 were significantly different. Conclusions and Relevance: In this exploratory analysis, the OCM was significantly associated with modest payment reductions during 6-month episodes for Medicare beneficiaries receiving chemotherapy for cancer in the first 3 years of the OCM that did not offset the monthly payments for enhanced oncology services. There were no statistically significant differences for most utilization, quality, and patient experience outcomes.


Assuntos
Gastos em Saúde , Medicare/economia , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Idoso , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S. , Redução de Custos , Atenção à Saúde , Cuidado Periódico , Planos de Pagamento por Serviço Prestado , Feminino , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Oncologia , Neoplasias/economia , Estados Unidos
7.
Med Care ; 59(11): 980-988, 2021 11 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34644284

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative tested whether episode-based payment models could reduce Medicare payments without harming quality. Among patients with vulnerabilities, BPCI appeared to effectively reduce payments while maintaining the quality of care. However, these findings could overlook potential adverse patient-reported outcomes in this population. RESEARCH DESIGN: We surveyed beneficiaries with 4 characteristics (Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility; dementia; recent institutional care; or racial/ethnic minority) treated at BPCI-participating or comparison hospitals for congestive heart failure, sepsis, pneumonia, or major joint replacement of the lower extremity. We estimated risk-adjusted differences in patient-reported outcomes between BPCI and comparison respondents, stratified by clinical episode and vulnerable characteristic. MEASURES: Patient care experiences during episodes of care and patient-reported functional outcomes assessed roughly 90 days after hospitalization. RESULTS: We observed no differences in self-reported functional improvement between BPCI and comparison respondents with vulnerable characteristics. Patient-reported care experience was similar between BPCI and comparison respondents in 11 of 15 subgroups of clinical episode and vulnerability. BPCI respondents with congestive heart failure, sepsis, and pneumonia were less likely to indicate positive care experiences than comparison respondents for at least 1 subgroup with vulnerabilities. CONCLUSIONS: As implemented by hospitals, BPCI Model 2 was not associated with adverse effects on patient-reported functional status among beneficiaries who may be vulnerable to reductions in care. Hospitals participating in heart failure, sepsis or pneumonia bundled payment episodes should focus on patient care experience while implementing changes in care delivery.


Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde/normas , Medicare , Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente , Melhoria de Qualidade , Mecanismo de Reembolso/organização & administração , Populações Vulneráveis , Humanos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Estados Unidos
8.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm ; 27(11): 1568-1578, 2021 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34714107

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In the United States, the shift towards value-based health care seeks to improve patient outcomes while reducing health care spending. Although the federal government has led the implementation of performance-based models for physicians and health care systems, commercial entities have largely been responsible for the development of similar models within pharmacy. For the purposes of this study, performance-based pharmacy payment models (PBPPMs) were defined as prescription drug payment models that determine reimbursement or fees for community pharmacies based in part on measured performance. These PBPPMs incentivize pharmacies to improve patient care by linking reimbursement to performance measures. However, the design and implementation of PBPPMs lack transparency and have not been described in the literature. OBJECTIVES: To (1) describe the structure of PBPPMs in the United States and (2) identify contextual and motivational influences that need to be considered for successful uptake and integration of these models. METHODS: A search of peer-reviewed and grey literature was undertaken. In addition, semi-structured stakeholder interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of 17 individuals who were community pharmacists, payers, quality measure developers and vendors, academics, and pharmacy advocacy organization leaders. Data were analyzed to understand the current structure of PBPPMs and opportunities for improvement, as well as implementation considerations that included facilitators, barriers, and key insights. RESULTS: This study identified 4 major components of US PBPPMs: attribution, performance and quality measures, incentive structures, and patient care services. A number of barriers (eg, lack of alignment) and recommendations to improve the current structure of PBPPMs (eg, the need for adequate incentives to facilitate change) were highlighted. Notable implementation considerations centered around (1) establishing common ground among stakeholders to avoid misalignment and encourage engagement; (2) the importance of a quality-driven, innovative, and flexible organizational culture with access to data infrastructure, adjusted workflows, and relevant trainings; (3) supporting the cultural transition to value-based health care; and (4) application of financial incentives at the pharmacy or pharmacist level. CONCLUSIONS: To better develop and implement PBPPMs, it is first critical to understand the key components that define these models and the needed changes to their structure. In addition, identifying the contextual and motivational factors that influence their successful integration can improve future uptake. This study illustrates the landscape of PBPPMs in the United States, as well as makes recommendations for improvement in their design. To improve future development and implementation of these models, the following recommendations are highlighted: (1) increase transparency and alignment of measures with the incentive structure; (2) embrace innovative business models; (3) carefully plan and use roadmaps that outline successful uptake and implementation; and (4) foster culture of quality at all levels of health care. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Pharm-Alliance, an alliance between the pharmacy schools of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Monash University, and University College London. Urick reports consulting fees from Pharmacy Quality Solutions and Cardinal Health, unrelated to this work. The other authors have nothing to disclose. This study was a podium presentation under the title "What Makes Performance-Based Pharmacy Payment Models Work?" at AMCP Nexus Virtual, October 2020.


Assuntos
Serviços Comunitários de Farmácia/economia , Modelos Organizacionais , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Aquisição Baseada em Valor , Humanos , Entrevistas como Assunto , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Estados Unidos
9.
Am J Manag Care ; 27(10): e336-e338, 2021 10 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34668674

RESUMO

Reaching the goals set by the Health Care Payment and Learning Action Network requires an unyielding and unrelenting focus on encouraging providers to adopt advanced alternative payment models (APMs). Many of these models will continue to be voluntary because they either are in early stages or have not yet proven their effectiveness. The models that have proven their effectiveness should become permanent, comprising the new way that providers are paid in the Medicare program. Either way, getting today's high performers into those programs and keeping them engaged to continue to innovate and set new benchmarks is as important as attracting and improving the performance of poorer performers. That will require a shift in Medicare's policy on pricing and evaluating APMs.


Assuntos
Medicare , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Idoso , Humanos , Estados Unidos
10.
Am J Obstet Gynecol ; 225(5): 566.e1-566.e5, 2021 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34473964

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Gender disparities in medicine have been demonstrated in the past, including differences in the attainment of roles in administration and in physician income. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine the differences in Medicare payments based on the provider gender and training track among female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgeons. STUDY DESIGN: Medicare payments from the Provider Utilization Aggregate Files were used to determine the payments made by Medicare to urogynecologists. This database was merged with the National Provider Identifier registry with information on subspecialty training, years since graduation, and the geographic pricing cost index used for Medicare payment adjustments. Physicians with <90% female patients and those who graduated medical school <7 years ago in obstetrics and gynecology or <8 years ago in urology were excluded. The effects of gender, specialty of training, number of services provided, years of practice, and geographic pricing cost index on physician reimbursement were evaluated using linear mixed modeling. RESULTS: A total of 578 surgeons with female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery subspecialty training met the inclusion criteria. Of those, 517 (89%) were trained as gynecologists, whereas 61 (11%) were trained as urologists. Furthermore, 265 (51%) of the gynecology-trained surgeons and 39 (80%) of the urology-trained surgeons were women. Among the urology-trained surgeons, the median female surgeon was paid $85,962 and their male counterparts were paid $121,531 (41% payment difference). In addition, urology-trained female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery surgeons performed a median of 1135 services and their male counterparts performed a median of 1793 services (57% volume difference). Similarly, among gynecology-trained surgeons, the median female payment was $59,277 with 880 services performed, whereas male gynecology-trained surgeons received a median of $66,880 with 791 services performed, representing a difference of 12% in payments and 11% in services. With linear mixed modeling, male physicians were paid more than female physicians while controlling for specialty training, number of services performed, years of practice, and geographic pricing cost index (P<.001). CONCLUSION: Although Medicare payments are based on an equation, differences in reimbursement by physician gender exist in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery with female surgeons receiving lower payments from Medicare. The differences in reimbursement could not be solely explained by differences in patient volume, area of practice, or years of experience alone, suggesting that, similar to other fields in medicine, female surgeons in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery are not paid as much as their male counterparts.


Assuntos
Ginecologia , Medicare/economia , Mecanismo de Reembolso/economia , Cirurgiões/economia , Urologia , Feminino , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos em Ginecologia/economia , Humanos , Masculino , Fatores Sexuais , Cirurgiões/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urológicos/economia
12.
N Engl J Med ; 385(7): 618-627, 2021 08 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34379923

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation launched the Medicare Bundled Payments for Care Improvement-Advanced (BPCI-A) program for hospitals in October 2018. Information is needed about the effects of the program on health care utilization and Medicare payments. METHODS: We conducted a modified segmented regression analysis using Medicare claims and including patients with discharge dates from January 2017 through September 2019 to assess differences between BPCI-A participants and two control groups: hospitals that never joined the BPCI-A program (nonjoining hospitals) and hospitals that joined the BPCI-A program in January 2020, after the conclusion of the intervention period (late-joining hospitals). The primary outcomes were the differences in changes in quarterly trends in 90-day per-episode Medicare payments and the percentage of patients with readmission within 90 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes were mortality, volume, and case mix. RESULTS: A total of 826 BPCI-A participant hospitals were compared with 2016 nonjoining hospitals and 334 late-joining hospitals. Among BPCI-A hospitals, the mean baseline 90-day per-episode Medicare payment was $27,315; the change in the quarterly trends in the intervention period as compared with baseline was -$78 per quarter. Among nonjoining hospitals, the mean baseline 90-day per-episode Medicare payment was $25,994; the change in quarterly trends as compared with baseline was -$26 per quarter (difference between nonjoining hospitals and BPCI-A hospitals, $52 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 34 to 70] per quarter; P<0.001; 0.2% of the baseline payment). Among late-joining hospitals, the mean baseline 90-day per-episode Medicare payment was $26,807; the change in the quarterly trends as compared with baseline was $4 per quarter (difference between late-joining hospitals and BPCI-A hospitals, $82 [95% CI, 41 to 122] per quarter; P<0.001; 0.3% of the baseline payment). There were no meaningful differences in the changes with regard to readmission, mortality, volume, or case mix. CONCLUSIONS: The BPCI-A program was associated with small reductions in Medicare payments among participating hospitals as compared with control hospitals. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.).


Assuntos
Economia Hospitalar , Medicare/economia , Pacotes de Assistência ao Paciente/economia , Melhoria de Qualidade/economia , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Grupos Diagnósticos Relacionados , Cuidado Periódico , Feminino , Insuficiência Cardíaca/terapia , Hospitais/normas , Hospitais/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mortalidade , Readmissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Análise de Regressão , Estados Unidos
13.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm ; 27(8): 1142-1152, 2021 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34337992

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Before 2007, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) were the highest-expenditure drug in the Medicare system. In 2007, CMS issued a reimbursement policy change for ESAs used by cancer patients. However, empirical evidence is currently lacking to evaluate medical costs after the policy change, especially by sex and racial/ethnic groups. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of the Medicare reimbursement policy change and associated racial/ethnic and sex disparities on medical costs for cancer patients who were new users of ESAs. METHODS: This study was an exploratory retrospective treatment effectiveness study, which used SEER-Medicare linked data. A difference-in-difference design was used that incorporated a control group of patients with chronic kidney disease. A generalized linear model, with a log link and a gamma distribution, was used to examine medical costs. RESULTS: The Medicare reimbursement policy change was statistically significantly associated with an 11% (95% CI = 2%-20%) reduction in anemia-related costs, including a 10% (95% CI = 1%-19%) reduction in Medicare payment and an 18% (95% CI = 10%-26%) reduction in patient cost sharing. For total medical costs, the policy change was statistically significantly associated with a 12% (95% CI = 6%-18%) reduction, including an 11% (95% CI = 5%-18%) reduction in Medicare payment and a 14% (95% CI = 7%-20%) reduction in patient cost sharing. Medical costs were reduced in patients who were male and those who were White but remained the same for patients who were female and those who were Black, Hispanic, and other races or ethnicities. CONCLUSIONS: Anemia-related and total medical costs associated with ESAs used by cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia were reduced after the Medicare reimbursement policy change. However, the policy change was only effective for patients who were male and those who were White. The policy change had no effect on patients who were female and those of racial/ethnic minorities. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by the SPARC Research Grant. The funder had no role in any part of this study. This study used the linked SEER-Medicare database. The interpretation and reporting of the data are the sole responsibility of the authors. The authors have nothing to disclose.


Assuntos
Anemia/tratamento farmacológico , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde/etnologia , Hematínicos/economia , Medicare , Políticas , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Hematínicos/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Falência Renal Crônica , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Programa de SEER , Estados Unidos
14.
World Neurosurg ; 151: 348-352, 2021 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34243668

RESUMO

Practicing neurosurgery in 2021 requires a detailed knowledge of the vocabulary and mechanisms for coding and reimbursement, which should include general knowledge at the global level and fluency at the provider level. It is specifically of interest for the neurosurgeon to understand conceptually the nuances of hospital reimbursement. That knowledge is especially germane as more neurosurgeons become hospital employees. Here we provide an overview of the mechanics of coding. We illustrate the formula to generate physician reimbursement through the current relative value unit structure. We also seek to explain hospital-level reimbursement through the diagnosis-related group structure. Finally, we expand about different and ancillary income streams available to neurosurgeons and provide a realistic assessment including the opportunities and challenges of those entities.


Assuntos
Neurocirurgia/economia , Procedimentos Neurocirúrgicos/economia , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Humanos , Classificação Internacional de Doenças
15.
CMAJ Open ; 9(3): E788-E794, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34285058

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Despite well-documented challenges in recruiting physicians to rural practice, few Canadian studies have described the role physician payment models may play in attracting and retaining physicians to rural practice. This study examined the perspectives of rural primary care physicians on the factors that attract and retain physicians in rural locations, including the role that alternative payment models (APMs) might play. METHODS: This was a qualitative study involving in-depth, open-ended interviews with rural primary care physicians practising under fee-for-service (FFS) models and APMs in Alberta, Canada. Participants were recruited from the Rural Health Professions Action Plan member list (consisting of physicians practising in rural or remote locations in Alberta) and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta online database. Interviews were conducted April to June 2020, and data were analyzed using a thematic framework approach. RESULTS: Fourteen physicians were interviewed. There were 5 themes identified: factors that attract physicians to rural practice, barriers and challenges associated with rural practice, the potential role of APMs in recruitment and retention, factors that physicians consider in deciding to change payment models, and physician perceptions of APMs compared with FFS models. Participants expressed that APMs may have some role to play in retaining rural physicians but identified professional challenges, and family-related and personal factors as key determinants. Most FFS physicians indicated that they were interested in exploring APMs provided specific concerns were addressed (e.g., clear and adequately compensated APM contracts, and physician involvement in the development of APMs). INTERPRETATION: Primary care physicians practising in rural regions in Alberta view payment models as one consideration among many in their decision to pursue rural practice. Alternative payment model contracts designed with the input of physicians may have a role to play in attracting and retaining physicians to rural practice.


Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Planos de Pagamento por Serviço Prestado/estatística & dados numéricos , Papel do Médico , Médicos de Atenção Primária/psicologia , Mecanismo de Reembolso/estatística & dados numéricos , Serviços de Saúde Rural/estatística & dados numéricos , Alberta/epidemiologia , Tomada de Decisões , Análise Fatorial , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Fatores de Risco
16.
Glob Heart ; 16(1): 43, 2021 06 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34211829

RESUMO

Background: We investigated impacts of COVID-19 on cardiac rehabilitation (CR) delivery around the globe, including virtual delivery, as well as effects on providers and patients. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, a piloted survey was administered to CR programs globally via REDCap from April to June 2020. The 50 members of the International Council of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation (ICCPR) and personal contacts facilitated program identification. Results: Overall, 1062 (18.3% program response rate) responses were received from 70/111 (63.1% country response rate) countries in the world with existent CR programs. Of these, 367 (49.1%) programs reported they had stopped CR delivery, and 203 (27.1%) stopped temporarily (mean = 8.3 ± 2.8 weeks). Alternative models were delivered in 322 (39.7%) programs, primarily through low-tech modes (n = 226,19.3%). Furthermore, 353 (30.2%) respondents were re-deployed, and 276 (37.3%) felt the need to work due to fear of losing their job, despite the perceived risk of contracting COVID-19 (mean = 30.0% ± 27.4/100). Also, 266 (22.5%) reported anxiety, 241(20.4%) were concerned about exposing their family, 113 (9.7%) reported increased workload to transition to remote delivery, and 105 (9.0%) were juggling caregiving responsibilities during business hours. Patients were often contacting staff regarding grocery shopping for heart-healthy foods (n = 333, 28.4%), how to use technology to interact with the program (n = 329, 27.9%), having to stop their exercise because they have no place to exercise (n = 303, 25.7%), and their risk of death from COVID-19 due to pre-existing cardiovascular disease (n = 249, 21.2%). Respondents perceived staff (n = 488, 41.3%) and patient (n = 453, 38.6%) personal protective equipment, as well as COVID-19 screening (n = 414, 35.2%), and testing (n = 411, 35.0%) as paramount to in-person service resumption. Conclusion: Given the estimated number of CR programs globally, these results suggest approximately 4400 CR programs globally have ceased or temporarily stopped service delivery. Those that remain open are implementing new technologies to ensure their patients receive CR safely, despite the challenges. Highlights: - COVID-19 has impacted cardiac rehabilitation (CR) delivery around the globe.- In this cross-sectional study, a survey was completed by 1062 (18.3%) CR programs from 70 (63.1%) countries.- The pandemic has resulted in at least temporary cessation of ~75% of CR programs, with others ceasing initiation of new patients, reducing components delivered, and/or changing of mode delivery with little opportunity for planning and training.- There is also significant psychosocial and economic impact on CR providers.- Alternative CR model (e.g., home-based, virtual) reimbursement advocacy is needed, to ensure safe, accessible secondary prevention delivery.


Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , COVID-19 , Reabilitação Cardíaca/métodos , Atenção à Saúde/métodos , Estudos Transversais , Duração da Terapia , Saúde Global , Humanos , Mecanismo de Reembolso , SARS-CoV-2 , Inquéritos e Questionários , Telerreabilitação/métodos
17.
Obstet Gynecol ; 138(2): 182-188, 2021 08 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34237766

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate discrepancies between operative times in the ACS NSQIP (American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project) and self-reported operative time from the American Medical Association's Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC) and their effect on relative value units (RVU) determination. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional review of registry data using the ACS NSQIP 2016 Participant User File and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services physician procedure time file for 2018. We analyzed total RVUs for surgeries by operative time to calculate RVU per hour and stratified by specialty. Multivariate regression analysis adjusted for patient comorbidities, age, length of stay, and ACS NSQIP mortality and morbidity probabilities. The surgeon self-reported operative times from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services physician were compared with operative times recorded in the ACS NSQIP, with excess time from RUC estimates termed "overreported time." RESULTS: Analysis of 901,917 surgeries revealed a wide variation in median RVU per hour between specialties. Orthopedics (14.3), neurosurgery (12.9), and general surgery (12.1) had the highest RVU per hour, whereas gynecology (10.2), plastic surgery (9.5), and otolaryngology (9) had the lowest (P<.001 for all comparisons). These results remained unchanged on multivariate regression analysis. General surgery had the highest median overreported operative time (+26 minutes) followed by neurosurgery (+23.5 minutes) and urology (+20 minutes). Overreporting of the operative time strongly correlated to higher RVU per hour (r=0.87, P=.002). CONCLUSION: Despite reliable electronic records, the AMA-RUC continues to use inaccurate self-reported RUC surveys for operative times. This results in discrepancies in RVU per hour (and subsequent reimbursement) across specialties and a persistent disparity for women-specific procedures in gynecology. Relative value unit levels should be based on the available objective data to eliminate these disparities.


Assuntos
Duração da Cirurgia , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Escalas de Valor Relativo , Cirurgiões , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios/economia , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos em Ginecologia/economia , Humanos , Procedimentos Neurocirúrgicos/economia , Procedimentos Ortopédicos/economia , Sistema de Registros , Estados Unidos
18.
Radiology ; 300(3): 506-511, 2021 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34227885

RESUMO

Out-of-network (OON) balance billing, commonly known as surprise billing but better described as a surprise gap in health insurance coverage, occurs when an individual with private health insurance (vs a public insurer such as Medicare) is administered unanticipated care from a physician who is not in their health plan's network. Such unexpected OON care may result in substantial out-of-pocket costs for patients. Although ending surprise billing is patient centric, patient protective, and noncontroversial, passing federal legislation was challenging given its ability to disrupt insurer-physician good-faith negotiations and thus impact in-network rates. Like past proposals, the recently passed No Surprises Act takes patients out of the middle of insurer-physician OON reimbursement disputes, limiting patients' expense to standard in-network cost-sharing amounts. The new law, based on arbitration, attempts to protect good-faith negotiations between physicians and insurance companies and encourages network contracting. Radiology practices, even those that are fully in network or that never practiced surprise billing, could nonetheless be affected. Ongoing rulemaking processes will have meaningful roles in determining how the law is made operational. Physician and stakeholder advocacy has been and will continue to be crucial to the ongoing evolution of this process. © RSNA, 2021.


Assuntos
Cobertura do Seguro/economia , Cobertura do Seguro/legislação & jurisprudência , Seguro Saúde/economia , Seguro Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Radiologia/economia , Radiologia/legislação & jurisprudência , Contratos/economia , Contratos/legislação & jurisprudência , Dedutíveis e Cosseguros/economia , Financiamento Pessoal/economia , Humanos , Administração da Prática Médica/economia , Administração da Prática Médica/legislação & jurisprudência , Mecanismo de Reembolso/economia , Estados Unidos
19.
J Cancer Policy ; 29: 100297, 2021 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34316437

RESUMO

Policymakers everywhere struggle to introduce therapeutic innovation while controlling costs, a particular challenge for the universal Italian National Healthcare System (SSN), which spends only 8.8% of GDP to care for one of the world's oldest populations. Oncology provides a telling example, where innovation has dramatically improved care and survival, transforming cancer into a chronic condition. However, innovation has also increased therapy duration, adverse event management, and service demand. The SSN risks collapse unless centralized cancer planning changes gear, particularly with Covid-19 causing treatment delays, worsening patient prognosis and straining capacity. In view of the 750 billion Euro "Next Generation EU", released by the European Union to relieve Member States hit by the pandemic, the SSN tapped a multidisciplinary research team to identify key strategies for equitable uptake of innovations in treatment and delivery, with emphasis on data-driven technological and managerial advancements - and lessons from Covid-19.


Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde/organização & administração , Planejamento em Saúde/organização & administração , Neoplasias/terapia , Serviços de Saúde Comunitária , Redes Comunitárias , Humanos , Itália/epidemiologia , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Telemedicina
20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34065293

RESUMO

(1) Background: Diagnosis-Related Groups (DRG), one possibility of a hospital payment system, are currently used in most European countries. Introduced to the Czech system in the 1990s, the DRGs are currently used mainly for care reporting and partly for reimbursement. According to most experts, the use of DRG remain controversial. The goal of this paper was to study the effects of the current Czech DRG system on hospitals financing and, on this basis, to propose possible changes to the reimbursement mechanism in the Czech Republic. (2) Methods: Qualitative research methods were used for evaluating DRG mechanisms of application in three selected healthcare establishments in the CR in the period of 2012-2018. (3) Results: Our study shows that the current implementation of the DRG system is set up in a way that is very similar to traditional flat rates and is unlikely to yield major positive effects of the DRG mechanism, such as predictability of payments for hospitalisation cases, care quality and efficiency and transparent financing. (4) Conclusions: Based on our results, deep systemic change of the reimbursement mechanism in the Czech Republic is necessary. We propose five partial measures leading to the cultivation of the Czech DRG.


Assuntos
Grupos Diagnósticos Relacionados , Mecanismo de Reembolso , República Tcheca , Europa (Continente) , Hospitais , Humanos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...