Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Disproportionate Negative Impact of the Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model on Rural Providers: A Cost Identification Analysis of Medicare Claims.
Mantz, Constantine A; Thaker, Nikhil G; Pendyala, Praveen; Hubbard, Anne; Eichler, Thomas J; Shah, Chirag; Orio, Peter F; Petereit, Daniel G.
Afiliação
  • Mantz CA; GenesisCare USA, Fort Myers, FL.
  • Thaker NG; Arizona Oncology, Tucson, AZ.
  • Pendyala P; Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, North Brunswick, NJ.
  • Hubbard A; American Society for Radiation Oncology, Fairfax, VA.
  • Eichler TJ; Thomas Johns Cancer Hospital, CJW Medical Center, Richmond, VA.
  • Shah C; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
  • Orio PF; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.
  • Petereit DG; Cancer Care Institute at Monument Health, Rapid City, SD.
JCO Oncol Pract ; 17(12): e1977-e1983, 2021 12.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34529516
PURPOSE: The Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model (APM) is a Medicare demonstration project that will test whether prospective bundled payments to a randomly selected group of physician practices, hospital outpatient departments, and freestanding radiation therapy centers reduce overall expenditures while preserving or enhancing the quality of care for beneficiaries. The Model follows a complicated pricing methodology that blends historical reimbursements for a defined set of services made to professional and technical providers to create a weighted payment average for each of 16 cancer types. These averages are then adjusted by various factors to determine APM payments specific to each participating provider. METHODS: This impact study segregates APM participants into rural and urban groups and analyzes the effect of the Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model on their fee-for-service reimbursements. RESULTS: The main findings of this study are (1) the greater net-negative revenue impact on rural facilities versus urban facilities that would have participated in the Model this year and (2) the relative lack of high-value treatment services (ie, stereotactic radiotherapy and brachytherapy) delivered by rural facilities that exacerbates their negative impact. CONCLUSION: As such, rural providers participating in the Model in its current form may face greater risk to their economic viability and greater difficulty in funding technology improvements necessary for the achievement of high-quality care compared with their urban counterparts.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Radioterapia (Especialidade) Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Health_economic_evaluation / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Aged / Humans País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: JCO Oncol Pract Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Radioterapia (Especialidade) Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Health_economic_evaluation / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Aged / Humans País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: JCO Oncol Pract Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos