Concordance of Disclosed Hospital Prices With Total Reimbursements for Hospital-Based Care Among Commercially Insured Patients in the US.

Importance: To improve health care price transparency and promote cost-conscious selection of health care organizations and practitioners, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) required that hospitals share payer-specific negotiated prices for selected shoppable health services by January 2021. While this regulation improves price transparency, it is unclear whether disclosed prices reflect total costs of care, since many hospital-based services are delivered and billed separately by independent practitioners or other health care entities. Objective: To assess the extent to which prices disclosed under the new hospital price transparency regulation are correlated with total costs of care among commercially insured individuals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used a large database of commercial claims from 2018 to analyze encounters at US hospitals for shoppable health care services for which price disclosure is required by CMS. Data were analyzed from November 2020 to February 2021. Exposures: Whether the service was billed by the hospital or another entity. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes of interest were the percentage of encounters with at least 1 service billed by an entity other than the hospital providing care, number of billing entities, amounts billed by nonhospital entities, and the correlation between hospital and nonhospital reimbursements. Results: The study analyzed 4 545 809 encounters for shoppable care. Independent health care entities were involved in 7.6% (95% CI, 6.7% to 8.4%) to 42.4% (95% CI, 39.1% to 45.6%) of evaluation and management encounters, 15.9% (95% CI, 15.8% to 16%) to 22.2% (95% CI, 22% to 22.4%) of laboratory and pathology services, 64.9% (95% CI, 64.2% to 65.7%) to 87.2% (95% CI, 87.1% to 87.3%) of radiology services, and more than 80% of most medicine and surgery services. The median (IQR) reimbursement of independent practitioners ranged from $61 ($52-$102) to $412 ($331-$466) for evaluation and management, $5 ($4-$6) to $7 ($4-$12) for laboratory and pathology, $26 ($20-$32) to $210 ($170-$268) for radiology, and $47 ($21-$103) to $9545 ($7750-$18 277) for medicine and surgery. The reimbursement for services billed by the hospital was not strongly correlated with the reimbursement of independent clinicians, ranging from r = -0.11 (95% CI, -0.69 to 0.56) to r = 0.53 (95% CI, 0.13 to 0.78). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that independent practitioners were frequently involved in the delivery of shoppable hospital-based care, and their reimbursement may have represented a substantial portion of total costs of care. These findings suggest that disclosed hospital reimbursement was usually not correlated with total cost of care, limiting the potential benefits of the hospital price transparency rule for improving consumer decision-making.

Assessment of Federal Value-Based Incentive Programs and In-Hospital Clostridioides difficile Infection Rates.

Importance: Health care facility-onset Clostridioides difficile infection (HO-CDI) rates reported to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) became a target quality metric for 2 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) value-based incentive programs (VBIPs) in October 2016. The association of VBIPs with HO-CDI rates is unknown. Objective: To examine the association between VBIP implementation and HO-CDI rates. Design, Setting, and Participants: This interrupted time series study evaluated HO-CDI rates among adults hospitalized from January 2013 to March 2019 at 265 acute-care hospitals. Interventions: Implementation of VBIPs in October 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quarterly rates of HO-CDI per 10 000 patient-days, as reported to NHSN by participating hospitals, were evaluated. Generalized estimating equations were used to fit negative binomial regression models to estimate immediate program effect size (ie, level change) and changes in the slope of HO-CDI rates, controlling for each hospital's predominant method of CDI testing (ie, nucleic acid amplification test [NAAT], enzyme immunoassay [EIA] for toxin, or other testing methods). Results: The study cohort included 24 332 938 admissions, 109 371 136 patient-days, and 74 681 HO-CDI events at 265 hospitals (145 [55%] with 100-399 beds; 205 [77%] not-for-profit hospitals; 185 [70%] teaching hospitals; 229 [86%] in metropolitan areas). Compared with EIA, rates of HO-CDI were higher when detected by NAAT (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR], 1.55; 95% CI, 1.40-1.70; P < .001) and other testing methods (aIRR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.26-1.71; P < .001). There were no significant changes in testing methods used by hospitals immediately after VBIP implementation. Controlling for CDI testing method, VBIP implementation was associated with a 6% level decline in HO-CDI rates in the immediate postpolicy quarter (aIRR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.89-0.99; P = .01) and a 4% decline in slope per quarter (aIRR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.97; P < .001). Results were similar in a sensitivity analysis using a 1-year roll-in period accounting for the period after the announcement of the HO-CDI VBIP policy and prior to its implementation. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, VBIP implementation was associated with improvements in HO-CDI rates, independent of CDI testing method. Given that CMS payment policies have not previously been associated with improvements in other targeted health care-associated infection rates, future research should focus on elucidating the specific processes that contributed to improvement in HO-CDI rates to inform the design of future VBIP interventions.

Improving clinical documentation of evaluation and management care and patient acuity improves reimbursement as well as quality metrics.

OBJECTIVE: Accurate documentation of patient care and acuity is essential to determine appropriate reimbursement as well as accuracy of key publicly reported quality metrics. We sought to investigate the impact of standardized note templates by inpatient advanced practice providers (APPs) on evaluation and management (E/M) charge capture, including outside of the global surgical package (GSP), and quality metrics including case mix index (CMI) and mortality index (MI). We hypothesized this clinical documentation initiative as well as improved coding of E/M services would result in increased reimbursement and quality metrics. METHODS: A documentation and coding initiative on the heart and vascular service line was initiated in 2016 with focus on improving inpatient E/M capture by APPs outside the GSP. Comprehensive training sessions and standardized documentation templates were created and implemented in the electronic medical record. Subsequent hospital care E/M (current procedural terminology codes 99231, 99232, 99233) from the years 2015 to 2017 were audited and analyzed for charge capture rates, collections, work relative value units (wRVUs), and billing complexity. Data were compared over time by standardizing CMS values and reimbursement rates. In addition, overall CMI and MI were calculated each year. RESULTS: One year following the documentation initiative, E/M charges on the vascular surgery service line increased by 78.5% with a corresponding increase in APP charges from 0.4% of billable E/M services to 70.4% when compared with pre-initiative data. The charge capture of E/M services among all inpatients rose from 21.4% to 37.9%. Additionally, reimbursement from CMS increased by 65% as total work relative value units generated from E/M services rose by 78.4% (797 to 1422). The MI decreased over the study period by 25.4%. Additionally, there was a corresponding 5.6% increase in the cohort CMI. Distribution of E/M encounter charges did not vary significantly. Meanwhile, the prevalence of 14 clinical comorbidities in our cohort as well as length of stay (P = .88) remained non-statistically different throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate clinical documentation of E/M care and ultimately inpatient acuity is critical in determining quality metrics that serve as important measures of overall hospital quality for CMS value-based payments and rankings. A system-based documentation initiative and expanded role of inpatient APPs on vascular surgery teams significantly improved charge capture and reimbursement outside the GSP as well as CMI and MI in a consistently complex patient population.

Importance of medicine quality in achieving universal health coverage.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the importance of ensuring medicine quality in order to achieve universal health coverage (UHC). METHODS: We developed a systems map connecting medicines quality assurance systems with UHC goals to illustrate the ensuing impact of quality-assured medicines in the implementation of UHC. The association between UHC and medicine quality was further examined in the context of essential medicines in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) by analyzing data on reported prevalence of substandard and falsified essential medicines and established indicators for UHC. Finally, we examined the health and economic savings of improving antimalarial quality in four countries in sub-Saharan Africa: the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Nigeria, Uganda, and Zambia. FINDINGS: A systems perspective demonstrates how quality assurance of medicines supports dimensions of UHC. Across 63 LMICs, the reported prevalence of substandard and falsified essential medicines was found to be negatively associated with both an indicator for coverage of essential services (p = 0.05) and with an indicator for government effectiveness (p = 0.04). We estimated that investing in improving the quality of antimalarials by 10% would result in annual savings of $8.3 million in Zambia, $14 million in Uganda, $79 million in two DRC regions, and $598 million in Nigeria, and was more impactful compared to other potential investments we examined. Costs of substandard and falsified antimalarials per malaria case ranged from $7 to $86, while costs per death due to poor-quality antimalarials ranged from $14,000 to $72,000. CONCLUSION: Medicines quality assurance systems play a critical role in reaching UHC goals. By ensuring the quality of essential medicines, they help deliver effective treatments that lead to less illness and result in health care savings that can be reinvested towards UHC.

Quality assessment and cost saving of renal dosing recommendation by clinical pharmacists at medical wards in Thailand.

Background Renal dosage adjustment for patients with reduced kidney function is a common function of clinical pharmacy service. Assessment of pharmacist's intervention in the aspect of quality and economic impact should be conducted to evaluate the benefit of this service. Objective This study aimed to assess the quality and cost saving of clinical pharmacists' recommendation on renal dosage adjustment among patients with reduced kidney function. Setting Eight medical wards of the Siriraj Hospital, a tertiary-care hospital in Bangkok, Thailand. Method A retrospective study was conducted using medical records and clinical pharmacist's intervention database. All patients admitted to the study wards whose estimated creatinine clearance were less than 60 mL/min or presented with acute kidney injury on admission during October 2016-December 2017 were included. The targeted medications were antimicrobial agents. Main outcome measure Percentage of the concordance between pharmacists' recommendation compared to standard dosing references and related cost saving. Results Among 158 patients, pharmacists provided 190 recommendations, including 151 (79.1%) dose reduction, 17 (8.9%) dose increase and 22 (11.5%) recommendations to provide supplemental dose after dialysis. These recommendations were 90.5% consistent with standard references. Physician accepted and complied with 89.5% of pharmacists' recommendations. Average direct cost saving was €5,114.11 while cost avoidance was €863.47. Conclusion Trained clinical pharmacists were able to provide high-quality recommendation on dosage adjustment in these patients in accordance to standard dosing guidelines. In addition, dosage adjustment also led to a significant direct cost saving and cost avoidance from prevention of adverse drug reactions.

Permanent Interests Versus Paying for Better Outcomes: Two of the 10 Lessons I Learned Over the Past 30 Years Researching the Connections Between Payment and Health Care Quality.

In the wake of the election of Donald Trump, I resigned from my research work. I decided to become politically involved and since I am a health care professional, in June 2018, I started a bipartisan political consulting firm, Ask Nurses and Doctors (AND; www.asknursesdoctors.com). This start-up is focused on electing candidates or incumbents committed to health care reform. There are 2 approaches to universal coverage-either the Affordable Care Act or Medicare for All. To implement either approach, there are 10 lessons from my 30 years of research that may be useful to enact universal coverage.

Inadequate Risk Adjustment Impacts Geriatricians' Performance on Medicare Cost and Quality Measures.

OBJECTIVES: Medicare value-based payment programs evaluate physicians' performance on their patients' annual Medicare costs and clinical outcomes. However, little is known about how geriatricians, who disproportionately provide care for medically complex older adults, perform on these measures. DESIGN: A retrospective study using multivariable regression methods to estimate the association of geriatric risk factors with annualized Medicare costs and preventable hospitalization rates and to compare geriatricians' performance on these outcomes to other primary care physicians (PCPs) under standard Medicare risk adjustment and after adding additional adjustment for geriatric risk factors. SETTING: Eight years (2006-2013) of cohort data from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries, aged 65 years and older, with primary care services contributing 27 027 person-years of data. MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes were costs and preventable hospitalization rates; geriatric risk factors were patient frailty, long-term institutionalization, dementia, and depression. RESULTS: Geriatricians were more likely to care for patients with frailty (22.8% vs 14.1%), long-term institutionalization (12.0% vs 4.7%), dementia (21.6% vs 10.2%), and depression (23.6% vs 17.4%) than other PCPs (P < .001 for each). Under standard Medicare risk adjustment, geriatricians performed more poorly on costs compared to other PCPs (observed-expected [O-E] ratio = 1.24 vs 0.99) and preventable hospitalizations (O-E ratio = 1.16 vs 0.98). Adding frailty, institutionalization, dementia, and depression to risk adjustment improved geriatricians' performance on costs by 25% and on preventable hospitalization rates by 35%, relative to other PCPs. Concurrent-year risk prediction that removed the influence of unpredictable acute events further improved geriatricians' performance vs other PCPs (O-E ratio = 0.99 vs 1.00). CONCLUSION: Medicare should consider risk adjusting for frailty, long-term institutionalization, dementia, and depression to avoid inappropriately penalizing geriatricians who care for vulnerable older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:297-304, 2020.

Recommended quality measures for health-system pharmacy: 2019 update from the Pharmacy Accountability Measures Work Group.

PURPOSE: Pharmacists are accountable for medication-related services provided to patients. As payment models transition from reimbursement for volume to reimbursement for value, pharmacy departments must demonstrate improvements in patient care outcomes and quality measure performance. The transition begins with an awareness of quality measures for which pharmacists and pharmacy personnel can demonstrate accountability across the continuum of care. The objective of the Pharmacy Accountability Measures (PAM) Work Group is to identify measures for which pharmacy departments can and should assume accountability. SUMMARY: The National Quality Forum (NQF) Quality Positioning System (QPS) was queried for NQF-endorsed medication-related measures. Included measures were curated into a data set of 6 therapeutic categories: antithrombotic safety, cardiovascular control, glucose control, pain management, behavioral health, and antimicrobial stewardship. Subject matter expert (SME) panels assigned to each area analyzed each measure according to a predetermined ranking system developed by the PAM Work Group. Measures remaining after SME review were disseminated during a public comment period for review and ballot. Over 1,000 measures are captured in the NQF QPS; 656 of the measures were found to be endorsed and medication use related or impacted by medication management services. A single reviewer categorized 140 measures into therapeutic categories for SME review; the remaining measures were unrelated to those clinical domains. The SME groups identified 28 measures for inclusion. CONCLUSION: An understanding of the endorsed quality measures available for public reporting programs provides an opportunity for pharmacists to demonstrate accountability for performance, thus improving quality and safety and demonstrating value of care provided.

Have Hospice Costs Increased After Implementation of the Hospice Quality-Reporting Program?

CONTEXT: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Hospice Quality-Reporting Program introduced the requirement that hospices nationwide begin collecting and submitting standardized patient-level quality data on July 1, 2014. OBJECTIVES: This study examined whether this requirement has increased hospice total costs, general costs, and visiting services costs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study using data from the 2012 and 2014 Medicare hospice cost reports linked to hospice claims. We measured total costs per patient day (PPD), general costs PPD, and visiting services costs PPD for freestanding hospices. We estimated the incremental costs of operating in 2014 vs. 2012 using hierarchical random effects models and adjusting for year, wage index, care volume, case-mix, and hospice and market characteristics, stratified by hospice ownership type. RESULTS: Both for-profit and nonprofit hospices reported higher total costs PPD and general services costs PPD in 2014 than 2012. Nonprofit hospices also reported higher general costs PPD in 2014 than 2012. In adjusted models, the total costs PPD in 2014 were $10.55 higher than in 2012 for nonprofit hospices and $6.43 higher for for-profit hospices. The increase in general costs PPD and visiting services costs PPD ranged from $3.15 to $5.87 by ownership and type of costs. Both for-profit and nonprofit hospices showed lower costs PPD for all types associated with more patients and longer length of stay. CONCLUSION: Hospice costs increased after the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Hospice Quality-Reporting Program quality data collection/submission requirement. Complementary studies need to understand whether increased costs brought additional benefits.

Performance Of Safety-Net Hospitals In Year 1 Of The Comprehensive Care For Joint Replacement Model.

The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model introduced in 2016 aims to improve the quality and costs of care for Medicare beneficiaries undergoing hip and knee replacements. However, there are concerns that the safety-net hospitals that care for the greatest number of vulnerable patients may perform poorly in CJR. In this study we used Medicare's CJR data to evaluate the performance of 792 hospitals mandated to participate in the first year of CJR. We found that in comparison to non-safety-net hospitals, 42 percent fewer safety-net hospitals qualified for rewards based on their quality and spending performance (33 percent of safety-net hospitals qualified, compared to 57 percent of non-safety-net hospitals), and safety-net hospitals' rewards per episode were 39 percent smaller ($456 compared to $743). Continuation of this performance trend could place safety-net hospitals at increased risk of penalties in future years. Medicare and hospital strategies such as those that reward high-quality care for vulnerable patients could enable safety-net hospitals to compete effectively in CJR.

Radiologist Group Performance Reporting: Power in Numbers.

PURPOSE: Radiologists have historically participated as individuals in CMS pay-for-performance programs, but little is known about how radiologists perform under increasingly available group participation. We aimed to assess radiologists' relative national performance on CMS quality metrics using group versus individual participation. METHODS: Radiologists' group- and individual-level 2016 performance on Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) and non-PQRS Qualified Clinical Data Registry (QCDR) measures were obtained from the CMS national Physician Compare database and compared. RESULTS: Radiology groups reported an average 4.6 ± 2.0 quality measures; individual radiologists reported 2.3 ± 1.2 (P < .001). At least six measures were reported by 31.5% of groups versus 1.0% of individuals. Only one measure was reported by 5.4% of groups versus 33.0% of individuals. Groups reported 21 unique measures (20 via registries and one via QCDR). For 8 of the 11 measures reported by 20 or more groups, the average group performance rate was 3% or better than the average performance rate among radiologists participating as individuals (maximum 14% improvement with group participation versus individual participation for any individual measure). Group and individual performance were similar for the remaining three such measures. For measures reported by 20 or more groups in which a higher score indicates better performance, average group performance rates ranged from 86.2% to 98.9%. CONCLUSION: Compared with individual participation in CMS quality performance programs, radiologists participating as a group reported larger numbers of quality measures and achieved higher performance rates on those measures. Radiology practices seeking success under Medicare's new Quality Payment Program should carefully explore group participation.

Market Consolidation and Mortality in Patients Initiating Hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether consolidation in health care markets affects the quality of care provided and health outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether changes in market competition resulting from acquisitions by two large national for-profit dialysis chains were associated with patient mortality. METHODS: We identified patients initiating in-center hemodialysis between 2001 and 2009 from a registry of patients with end-stage renal disease in the United States. We considered two scenarios when evaluating consolidation from dialysis facility acquisitions: one in which we considered only those patients receiving dialysis in markets that became substantially more concentrated to have been affected by consolidation, and the other in which all patients living in hospital service areas where a facility was acquired were potentially affected. We used a difference-in-differences study design to examine the associations between market consolidation and changes in mortality rates. RESULTS: When we considered the 12,065 patients living in areas that became substantially more consolidated to have been affected by consolidation, we found a nominally significant (8%; 95% confidence interval 0%-17%) increase in likelihood of death after consolidation. Nevertheless, when we considered all 186,158 patients living in areas where an acquisition occurred to have been affected by consolidation, there was no observable effect of market consolidation on mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Decreased market competition may have led to increased mortality among a relatively small subset of patients initiating in-center hemodialysis in areas that became substantially more concentrated after two large dialysis acquisitions, but not for most of the patients living in affected areas.

Costs of Quality and Safety in Radiology.

With the movement toward at-risk population health management-related payment models, a core factor for the success and survival of health care organizations has become understanding and decreasing costs. In medical specialties such as radiology, understanding models for procedure-based costing will become increasingly important. Using bottom-up models for procedure-based costing, such as time-driven activity-based costing, is more advantageous than using the inaccurate ratio of costs to charges approach; however, these approaches are more resource intensive when compared to top-down approaches. Understanding the costs of quality is also important for creating an accounting and budgeting process that reflects the total cost of quality. The costs of quality are divided into two main categories: the cost of control (also referred to as the costs of conformance) and the costs of failure of control (also referred to as the costs of nonconformance). The costs of control are the expenditures that occur to ensure quality. The costs of noncontrol are the expenses that arise from the lack of quality and safety. The cost of control has two subcategories: prevention costs and appraisal costs. The cost of noncontrol also has two subcategories: internal failure costs and external failure costs. Adopting a mind-set that takes into account the costs of control, or the costs to ensure high-quality care, and the costs of noncontrol, or the hidden costs of poor-quality care, will be essential for successful health care organizations in the future. ©RSNA, 2018.

Seeking the Value in Value-Based Care.

The market forces pushing health care to evolve from volume to value are intensifying. At the same time, the culture change, capabilities, assets, methods, and mindset required to redefine the health care paradigm are staggering. Unlike corporate initiatives, we simply can't get there thinking quarter to quarter. But we will get there.

Employers as Consumers of Healthcare.

Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, and JP Morgan Chase shocked the industry with its announcement to join forces to cut healthcare costs and improve healthcare services for its employees. This is just the latest of employer efforts to disrupt the industry by the creation of alternative healthcare delivery networks that demonstrate high-value, low-cost services as compared with what traditional provider systems have to offer. What factors are behind this industry disruption, and what are the key implications for nurse executives?

Pay for performance program reduces treatment needed diabetic retinopathy - a nationwide matched cohort study in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: Pay-for-Performance programs have shown improvement in indicators monitoring adequacy and target achievement in diabetic care. However, less is known regarding the impact of this program on the occurrence and long-term effects of diabetic retinopathy. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of pay-for-performance program on the development of treatment needed for diabetic retinopathy in type 2 diabetes patients. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study with a matching design using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database from 2000 to 2012. The outcome was defined as the treatment needed diabetic retinopathy. We matched Pay-for-Performance and non-Pay-for-Performance groups for age, gender, year diabetes was diagnosed and study enrollment, and duration of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 9311 patients entered the study cohort, of whom 2157 were registered in the Pay-for-Performance group and 7154 matched in the non-Pay-for-Performance group. The incidence of treatment needed diabetic retinopathy was not significantly different in two groups. However, the incidence of treatment needed diabetic retinopathy was significantly different if restricted the non-Pay-for-Performance group who had at least 1 eye examination or optical coherence tomography within 1 year (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Pay-for-Performance is valuable in preventing the development of treatment needed diabetic retinopathy, which could be attributed to the routine eye examination required in the Pay-for-Performance program. We could improve our diabetic care by promoting eye health education and patient awareness on the importance of regular examinations.