The ASCO Oncology Composite Provider Utilization File: New Data, New Insights.

As we seek to understand the changing practice environment in oncology, the need for accurate information about demand for services, distribution of the delivery system in this sector of the health economy, and other practice trends is apparent. In this article, we present analysis of the sector using one of the public use files from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in combination with other publicly available data. Medicare data are particularly useful for this analysis because cancer is associated with aging and Medicare is the primary payer in the United States for patients older than age 65. As a result, nearly all oncologists who serve adult populations are represented in these data. By combining publicly available datasets into what we call the ASCO Provider Utilization File,we can investigate a wide range of supply, demand, and practice issues. We calculate the average work performed per physician, observe regional differences in work production,and quantify the downside risk and upside potential associated with the provision of chemotherapy drugs. Comparing the supply of oncologists by state with physician work relative value units and with estimates of cancer incidence by state reveals intriguing differences in the distribution of physicians and the demand for oncology services. In addition, our analysis demonstrates significant downside practice risk associated with the provision of drug therapy to Medicare beneficiaries. The economic risk associated with the purchase and delivery of chemotherapy is of particular concern as pressure for value increases. This article provides a description of a new dataset and interesting observations from these data.

The National Practice Benchmark for oncology, 2014 report on 2013 data.

The National Practice Benchmark (NPB) is a unique tool to measure oncology practices against others across the country in a way that allows meaningful comparisons despite differences in practice size or setting. In today's economic environment every oncology practice, regardless of business structure or affiliation, should be able to produce, monitor, and benchmark basic metrics to meet current business pressures for increased efficiency and efficacy of care. Although we recognize that the NPB survey results do not capture the experience of all oncology practices, practices that can and do participate demonstrate exceptional managerial capability, and this year those practices are recognized for their participation. In this report, we continue to emphasize the methodology introduced last year in which we reported medical revenue net of the cost of the drugs as net medical revenue for the hematology/oncology product line. The effect of this is to capture only the gross margin attributable to drugs as revenue. New this year, we introduce six measures of clinical data density and expand the radiation oncology benchmarks.

The National Practice Benchmark for Oncology, 2013 Report on 2012 Data.

Today, in the face of price and quality pressures, it is necessary that every oncology business unit produce, monitor, and benchmark basic metrics to meet current business pressures for increased efficiency and efficacy of care.

The Oncology Ecosystem: Oncology Practice Trends From the National Practice Benchmark.

Practices that participate in the National Practice Benchmark and are engaged in the management of their business in their local market will exhibit greater resilience, adaptability, and transformability than those who do not actively measure and manage.

Oncology practice trends from the national practice benchmark.

In 2011, we made predictions on the basis of data from the National Practice Benchmark (NPB) reports from 2005 through 2010. With the new 2011 data in hand, we have revised last year's predictions and projected for the next 3 years. In addition, we make some new predictions that will be tracked in future benchmarking surveys. We also outline a conceptual framework for contemplating these data based on an ecological model of the oncology delivery system. The 2011 NPB data are consistent with last year's prediction of a decrease in the operating margins necessary to sustain a community oncology practice. With the new data in, we now predict these reductions to occur more slowly than previously forecast. We note an ease to the squeeze observed in last year's trend analysis, which will allow more time for practices to adapt their business models for survival and offer the best of these practices an opportunity to invest earnings into operations to prepare for the inevitable shift away from historic payment methodology for clinical service. This year, survey respondents reported changes in business structure, first measured in the 2010 data, indicating an increase in the percentage of respondents who believe that change is coming soon, but the majority still have confidence in the viability of their existing business structure. Although oncology practices are in for a bumpy ride, things are looking less dire this year for practices participating in our survey.

Achieving Meaningful Use and Operational Efficiency.

PURPOSE: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), through the Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Program, are providing incentive payments to eligible professionals as they demonstrate meaningful use of certified EHR technology. Eligible professionals can receive up to $44,000 over a 5-year period for Medicare participation if they successfully demonstrate the ability to automatically generate, transmit, and meet thresholds for specific reporting elements from the EHR. Meeting the meaningful use requirement involves a reorganization of workflow within the clinical setting so that the data elements necessary to produce the relevant measurements are documented in the electronic medical record (EMR) as they are delivered. A by-product of this is operational efficiency improvement in three areas: coordination of data input throughout the care team to reduce or remove bottlenecks, assignment of responsibility for specific activity, and real-time objective monitoring of the work process. METHODS: Using the reporting system functionality of a certified EMR deployed in a two-physician medical oncology practice at the New London Cancer Center, the objective measurement of the ability of each of the eligible providers in the clinic to improve their individual MU scores was tracked. Analysis of the progress of each provider revealed gaps. Process issues were identified by work group: secretaries, laboratory preparation and phlebotomy staff, nurses, and clinicians. The designated physician leader met with each group to discuss the sections relevant to that particular group. RESULTS: By discovering and addressing work processes that were not utilizing the ability of the EHR to capture and document (ie, meaningful use of the EHR), rapid progress that affected all of the eligible providers and all patients cared for was made. Changes resulted in increased clarity of clinical and administrative responsibilities during patient processing and clinical care provision. Meaningful use attestation was completed in 14 weeks. CONCLUSION: Completion of the documentation necessary to meet the requirements of the EHR Incentive Program led to the discovery of systemic inefficiencies in administrative and clinical workflows. Addressing these bottlenecks, along with using the reporting capability of the EHR to measure the impact of workflow changes, enabled the administrative and care teams to make changes quickly and effectively. The certified EHR provided guidance and status-reporting capabilities that allowed the practice to achieve the meaningful use requirement.

National oncology practice benchmark: an annual assessment of financial and operational parameters-2010 report on 2009 data.

Amid increases in costs and numbers of patients combined with decreasing or stagnant reimbursements from payers, many oncology practices are improving efficiency and decreasing costs. The National Oncology Practice Benchmark, a national survey of community practices, provides data to help practices improve and monitor progress as they adapt to the changing practice environment.

National Oncology Practice Benchmark, 2011 Report on 2010 Data.

Benchmarking is widely recognized as the best, most efficient way to find opportunities to improve a practice and then monitor progress after corrective action is taken. The National Practice Benchmark provides important and meaningful data for oncology practices to use in today's challenging practice environment.

Results of the ASCO Study of Collaborative Practice Arrangements.

PURPOSE: ASCO projects a shortfall of oncologists in the next decade. The study was designed to address the workforce shortage by exploring collaborative oncology practice models that include nonphysician practitioners (NPPs). METHODS: ASCO contracted with Oncology Metrics, a division of Altos Solutions, to conduct a national survey of NPP integration and identify collaborative practice models and services provided by NPPs, as the first phase of the ASCO Study of Collaborative Practice Arrangements. Results of the national survey were used to identify practices for the next phase, in which selected practices participated in a more detailed data survey and satisfaction surveys. Focus groups or interviews were conducted with NPPs to collect additional subjective information to inform the project. RESULTS: The incident-to practice model was the predominant model. Satisfaction was universally high for patients and generally high for physicians and NPPs. In virtually all cases (98%), patients recognized they were seeing an NPP rather than a physician. Practices in which the NPP worked with all practice physicians showed significantly higher productivity than those practices in which the NPP worked exclusively with a specific physician or group of physicians. CONCLUSION: The use of NPPs in oncology practices increases productivity for the practice and provides high physician and NPP satisfaction. Patients were aware when care was provided by an NPP and were very satisfied with all aspects of the collaborative care that they received. The integration of nonphysician practitioners into oncology practice offers a reliable means to address increased demand for oncology services without adding physicians.

Oncology Practice Trends From the National Practice Benchmark, 2005 through 2010.

Oncology Metrics, a division of Altos Solutions, has been conducting organized surveys of practicing oncologists since 2005. In this article, we present data that represent trends in community oncology practice over a 6-year period, 2005 to 2010, and make projections on the basis of these data. Over the next 3 years, operating margins will continue to decrease, gains in business and clinical operating efficiencies will slow, and labor costs will rise. The cost of drugs provided to patients is also increasing while the amount above cost that is being reimbursed continues a slow decline. The gap between practice costs and practice revenue will continue to narrow, and as this occurs, community oncology practices will find it difficult to maintain their current business models.

National practice benchmark: 2010 report on 2009 data.

PURPOSE: Oncology practices continue to experience economic pressures as costs rise, numbers of patients increase, and reimbursements from payers remain flat or decrease. Many practices have responded to these challenges by examining business processes and making changes to improve efficiency and decrease costs. The National Practice Benchmark is a national survey of community oncology practices that provides data for practices to use in managing today's challenging practice environment. METHODS: Oncology practices were invited to participate in an online benchmarking survey. One hundred eighty-nine practices from 44 states responded to the survey, and demographic, operational, and financial data were collected for calendar year 2009 or the most recently completed fiscal year. RESULTS: Data from 2009 were compiled and compared with previously collected 2007 and 2008 data. The data reveal that total revenue has increased by approximately 6% per year over this 3-year period. During the same period, however, cost of drugs increased dramatically: 13.5% increase from 2007 to 2008 and 16% from 2008 to 2009. Total practice expense increased at virtually the same level as drug costs in 2008 and was flat for 2009. CONCLUSION: Survey results indicate an overall lowering of practice expenses even as cost of drugs continues to rise, and are consistent with the slight increase in the number of new patients per full-time equivalent hematology/oncology physician. These measures indicate an overall increase in service delivery efficiency and adaptation by many practices to the changing practice environment.

2009 national practice benchmark: report on 2008 data.

Many oncology practices have responded to rising supply costs and decreasing reimbursements by examining their operational processes and working to reduce costs and enhance practice efficiency.

The 2007 national practice benchmark: results of a national survey of oncology practices.

Long-term trends in the cost of pharmaceutical goods purchased by community oncology practices seem to have dramatically changed in 2007, potentially ending an era of practice growth built on the economic engine of in-office chemotherapy provision.