Healthcare and Technology news
50.9K views | +3 today
Healthcare and Technology news
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...!

CMS Finalizes 2016 Medicare Payment Rules for Physicians, Hospitals & Other Providers

CMS Finalizes 2016 Medicare Payment Rules for Physicians, Hospitals & Other Providers | Healthcare and Technology news |

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued final rules this week detailing how the agency will pay for services provided to beneficiaries in Medicare by physicians and other health care professionals in 2016 that reflects the administration’s commitment to quality, value, and patient-centered care. Payment rules for the 2016 calendar year for End-Stage Renal Disease Prospective Payment System, the Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System, Home Health Prospective Payment System, and the Physician Fee Schedule were all finalized this week.

“CMS is pleased to implement the first fee schedule since Congress acted to improve patient access by protecting physician payments from annual cuts. These rules continue to advance value-based purchasing and promote program integrity, making Medicare better for consumers, providers, and taxpayers,” said CMS Acting Administrator Andy Slavitt. “We received a large number of comments supporting our proposal to allow physicians to bill for advanced care planning conversations and we are finalizing this rule accordingly.”

Key policies finalized in the 2016 payment rules include:

  • Finalizing the Home Health Value-Based Purchasing model. This model, authorized under the Affordable Care Act, is designed to improve health outcomes and value by tying home health payments to quality performance. All Medicare-certified home health agencies that provide services in Massachusetts, Maryland, North Carolina, Florida, Washington, Arizona, Iowa, Nebraska, and Tennessee will participate in this model starting January 1, 2016. Compared to the proposed rule, the maximum payment adjustment in the first year of the model was reduced from 5 percent to 3 percent. This was part of the Home Health Prospective Payment System final rule.

  • Finalizing updates to the “Two-Midnight” rule. The rule clarifies when inpatient admissions are appropriate for payment under Medicare Part A. This continues CMS’ long-standing emphasis on the importance of a physician’s medical judgment in meeting the needs of Medicare beneficiaries by providing clearer guidelines and a more collaborative approach to education and enforcement. This was part of the Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System final rule.
  • Finalizing the End-Stage Renal Disease Quality Incentive Program. The End-Stage Renal Disease final rule will apply payment incentives to dialysis facilities to improve the quality of dialysis care. Facilities that do not achieve a minimum total performance score with respect to quality measures, such as anemia management, patient experience, infections, and safety, will receive a reduction in their payment rates. 
  • Beginning the new physician payment system post the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula and supporting patient- and family-centered care. This is the first final Physician Fee Schedule final rule since the repeal of the SGR formula by the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA). Through the final rule, CMS is beginning implementation of the new payment system for physicians and other practitioners, the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System, required by the legislation.
  • Finalizing provision to empower patients and their families regarding advance care planning. Consistent with recommendations from a wide range of stakeholders and bipartisan members of Congress, CMS is finalizing its proposal that supports patient- and family-centered care for seniors and other Medicare beneficiaries by enabling them to discuss advance care planning with their providers.
No comment yet.!

Can doctors afford to ignore the changes in medical practice?

As the CMS Innovation Center rolls out the Next Generation ACO Model, I wonder what doctors are thinking. The Next Generation ACO model ups the ante on risk and reward and is the next delivery model iteration as CMS marches on to 30 percent at risk Medicare in 2016. Some of the docs will generally acknowledge that medicine is changing, but there is often no corresponding change in behavior. Other docs will simply ignore what is being played out right before their very eyes, expressing the same willful blindness that some of my breast patients would, presenting with huge, fungating cancers.

It is understandable that doctors would want to hang on to a health care belief system that they embraced in medical school. But many of the beliefs of years past do not work today; try not to believe everything you think. Consider these five examples.

1. I am too busy to learn how to improve. Actually, you can’t afford to not learn. As we have discussed multiple times in these pages, our current system of health care finance is unsustainable. We are broke. For that reason, fee-for-service is going away. This means you will be at financial risk for populations of patients. You can’t just change one day. You need to learn how to improve quality and reduce costs. This requires new skills.

2. I make a lot of money, and that means I am really smart. Yeah, right. Like that failed limited partnership that cost you $500,000? Or how about both of those alimony checks that go out every month, regardless of your income? We know folks who have had stellar careers who still work in some capacity because they squandered their money. Anybody can learn how to do a colonoscopy or fix a hernia, so don’t get on a high horse because you have been blessed to have a good income. The future comes with significant uncertainty. Be a good steward and be grateful. If you think that you can win going against the forces that be, it could be disastrous.

3. My hospital loves me because I make them tons of money. Really? How do you know that? You would be surprised. I have a friend who was bragging about how much money he made for the hospital doing MRIs. It turns out that they lost $150 every time they turned the machine on. Or what about the $46M service line that cost $48M to run? I guess they will make it up on volume, right?

4. My performance benchmarks are OK, so that means my quality is good. You are two clicks to the green side of the benchmark, but that doesn’t mean you have good quality. It just means you are better than 52 percent of your peers. Plenty of people will stay there at 48 percent. Time to go to #1 above and learn how to get better outcomes, and in the process, you will also reduce costs. Your patients deserve it.

5. I will always have my choice in where I work. Don’t bet on it. Everyone is replaceable. You need to protect your career. Embrace team concepts of care. Develop leadership skills. I recommend that you start thinking now about how your work will change when you and your hospital or clinics take on more financial risk. Remember that lower costs of care are becoming indicators of higher quality. Don’t be the jerk that gets fired.

No comment yet.!

CMS enrollment proposals spark criticism on range of issues - Modern Healthcare

CMS enrollment proposals spark criticism on range of issues - Modern Healthcare | Healthcare and Technology news |

Insurers are at odds with providers and consumer advocacy groups over the Obama administration's guidance on network adequacy. In the proposed rule, the CMS indicated that it will hold off on issuing additional regulations dealing with provider networks until after the National Association of Insurance Commissioners completes drafting a model state law.

Narrow networks have been a major source of contention since the exchanges launched. Insurers have insisted that limiting networks is a crucial means of holding down premiums, and exchange customers have flocked to low-cost plans. But consumer advocates and providers worry that unsophisticated customers are choosing plans that may not include their doctors or otherwise meet their coverage needs.

That division played out in comments to the CMS about a proposed rule for 2016 enrollment. Insurers praised the agency for deferring to the NAIC process before drafting additional network adequacy regulations, while hospitals and consumer groups called for more aggressive action.

“CMS should not delay further the development of more robust network adequacy requirements and more effective oversight and enforcement mechanisms,” wrote Chip Kahn, CEO of the Federation of American Hospitals. “Rather, CMS should instead adopt and adapt the Medicare Advantage network adequacy standards for the marketplaces.”

Insurers also are raising objections to the CMS' proposal to require that drug formularies and provider directories be made available in “machine-readable” files. That would allow third parties to create tools to help consumers to make more informed choices about which plans would best meet their needs.

But health plans suggested that it could put them at a competitive disadvantage and confuse customers. “If issuers were required to post machine-readable files for general consumption by third parties, issuers would have no ability to ensure that their benefit information was correctly represented by those third parties,” wrote Anthony Mader, Anthem's vice president for public policy. “Inaccurate information not only would increase the burden on issuers; it also would create consumer confusion and potential dissatisfaction.”

The CMS also proposed that insurers be required to use pharmacy and therapeutics committees to advise them on drug formularies. Some patient advocacy groups have complained that crucial drugs are only available at top-tier pricing and are therefore unaffordable for many consumers. There's also been concerns raised about a lack of transparency with regards to drug formularies.

"We have heard from members that many patients have had difficulty determining how/if exchange plans will cover their prescription drugs," the American Pharmacists Association said. "Plan beneficiaries will benefit significantly from clear, up-to-date information regarding prescription drug coverage."

Immigration advocacy groups are urging the CMS to establish a “language access coordinator” to help ensure the needs of exchange customers with limited English proficiency are being addressed. They noted the Federal Emergency Management Agency already has such a position to help non-native speakers gain access to information and services.

Immigration advocates also praised the CMS for proposing that exchanges and health plans be required to provide telephone interpretive services in at least 150 languages. But they questioned why there should be any limitation on language assistance. Instead, they'd like to see the agency require interpretive services in any language requested.

However, some insurers raised objections to the 150-language standard being proposed by the CMS, arguing it would result in unnecessary expenses and higher premiums. “While we acknowledge the need for translation services and currently provide this to our members, we believe that any requirement should instead be tied to an issuer's respective member demographics in order to avoid needless administrative expense and burden,” wrote Cathy Mahaffey, CEO of Common Ground Healthcare Cooperative, a not-for-profit health plan operating in Wisconsin.

The National Immigration Law Center is also calling on the CMS to adopt more stringent guidelines for when exchanges and health plans must provide written materials in a foreign language. There were widespread complaints during the first year of enrollment that many non-English speakers couldn't understand letters alerting them to problems with their immigration documents and therefore risked losing coverage.

The CMS has suggested requiring that anytime a health plan or web broker has at least 10,000 customers who share a primary language other than English, they must provide written materials in that language. The NILC wants that provision strengthened to require that translated versions of materials be provided anytime a language group makes up 5% or 500 customers, whichever threshold is lower.

But insurers objected to even the 10,000-customer standard floated by the CMS. Blue Shield of California noted it would require the health plan to provide materials in 48 languages.

No comment yet.!

257,000 Doctors Will Get Medicare Pay Cut For Using Paper Records

257,000 Doctors Will Get Medicare Pay Cut For Using Paper Records | Healthcare and Technology news |

More than 250,000 physicians and other health professionals are being notified as early as today that their payments from Medicare and Medicaid will be cut because they aren’t adequately using electronic health records in their practices, the Obama administration confirmed.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, known as CMS, is telling about 257,000 eligible medical care providers who are largely physicians that they will be paid 1 percent less in reimbursement next year from both the Medicare health insurance program for the elderly and the Medicaid insurance program for the poor because they failed to comply with so-called “Meaningful Use” of electronic health records standards in 2013.

“CMS is working with physicians and other health care providers to improve health care quality through the use of electronic health records,” a spokeswoman with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services told Forbes in a statement. “Since 2011, more than 400,000 eligible professionals have received incentives under the Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Program. Beginning today, however, CMS will be notifying the minority of eligible professionals who have not successfully participated in the program that they will be subject to payment adjustments in 2015 as required by law.”

Sources close to the Obama administration as well as doctor groups confirm that 257,000 medical-care providers are being notified.

The pay cut shouldn’t come as a surprise.

In 2009, President Obama signed into law the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, as part of the so-called “federal stimulus” legislation known as the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act. The law provides some $20 billion to get medical care providers to use electronic medical records in the form of bonuses if they are complying with meaningful use standards.

But because these 257,000 medical care providers are not satisfying certain criteria that show they are using electronic medical records in a meaningful way, they are being hit with penalties.

Doctor groups aren’t happy, particularly as they work through other government regulations from Medicare reforms and millions of new customers under the Affordable Care Act. For small practices, the cuts will hit hard, these doctors say.

The American Medical Association said the meaningful use program uses a “strict set of one-size-fits-all requirements” and is “failing physicians and their patients,” AMA president-elect Dr. Steven Stack said in a statement. “The overlapping and often conflicting patchwork of laws and regulations must be fixed and aligned to ensure physicians are able to move to innovative payment and delivery models that could improve the quality of care.”

No comment yet.!

CMS gives IT entrepreneurs access to Medicare data

CMS gives IT entrepreneurs access to Medicare data | Healthcare and Technology news |

For the first time, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will allow innovators and entrepreneurs to access Medicare claims and other CMSdata, Acting Administrator Andy Slavitt announced Tuesday at Health Datapalooza in Washington.

These entrepreneurs will be allowed to conduct approved research aimed at developing tools and technologies to improve care and benefit consumers, say CMS officials. The data will be deidentified, but will be connected with specific providers. CMS will begin accepting innovator research requests in September 2015.

"Historically, CMS has prohibited researchers from accessing detailed CMS data if they intended to use it to develop products or tools to sell," said Niall Brennan, CMS chief data officer and director of its Office of Enterprise and DataAnalytics, in a press statement announcing the move.

"However, as the delivery system transforms from rewarding volume to value, data will play a key role," Brennan added. "We hope that this new policy will lead to additional innovation and insights from the CMS data.

The data will be accessed via the CMS Virtual Research Data Center, which provides access to granular data such as Medicare fee-for-service claims. Researchers working in the VRDC have direct access to approved privacy-protected data files and are able to conduct their analysis within a secure CMS environment, officials say.

The hope is that these data sources will help inform the development of transformative technologies, such as care management or predictive modeling tools.

Even though all data is privacy-protected, CMS emphasizes, researchers will not be allowed to remove patient-level data from the VRDC. They will only be able to download aggregated, privacy-protected reports and results to their own personal workstation.

CMS also announced Tuesday that researchers will be allowed to request data on a quarterly basis rather than the annual updates offered in the past. Platforms such as the VRDC have facilitated access to more current data without higher data costs, enabling researchers to conduct more rapid analysis of the delivery system.

"Data is the essential ingredient to building a better, smarter, healthier system," said Slavitt in a statement. "Today's announcement is aimed directly at shaking up health care innovation and setting a new standard for data transparency. We expect a stream of new tools for beneficiaries and care providers that improve care and personalize decision-making."

No comment yet.!

Robust Technology Platforms and Medicare Home Health Providers

Robust Technology Platforms and Medicare Home Health Providers | Healthcare and Technology news |

The home care industry, in its various forms, represents an $82 billion market with a population of potential customers that is growing by the minute. In fact, within the next five years, 20 percent of Americans will be eligible for Medicare services and many of them will avail themselves of home health services that will be funded by Medicare. Last month, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released the 2015 Home Health Final Rule (Final Rule), which sets forth the details of the second year of payment rebasing under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) together with other new rules, clarifications of previous rules and discussions of things to come. CMS makes it clear that its goal is to more closely align payment for services with the cost of providing them.

Interestingly, while physicians and hospitals were included in CMS’ meaningful use EHR Incentive Programs that began in 2011, home care providers were excluded from incentive opportunities. However, even in the absence of financial incentives for technology adoption, implementation of robust technology platforms capable of gathering, organizing, processing and protecting patient health and financial information is still crucial. Consider the following top five reasons for why technology adoption is not optional for Medicare certified home health providers.

  • First, there are 1,836 potential Health Insurance Prospective Payment System (HIPPS) Codes that form the basis for Medicare home health reimbursement. There are 3,273 counties represented for which an applicable wage index has been established for purposes of calculating reimbursement. That yields a potential universe of payment values in excess of $6 million.
  • Second, even the most straightforward of the episode payment calculations has at least three steps and the most cumbersome, outlier calculations, has over a dozen. Imagine trying to manually arrive at accurate calculations for each episode.
  • Third, newly proposed Medicare Conditions of Participation place increasing emphasis on the quality and coordination of patient care supported by detailed clinical records. Significant survey emphasis for home health providers is now being placed on reconciliation of medications as well as the adequacy of other clinical documentation. Technology greatly assists in creating efficient ways of achieving the desired end result of coordinated, cohesive and locatable clinical documentation.
  • Fourth, in order to justify payment, home health agencies must be able to schedule visits based on physician ordered care plans, record when visits are made or missed, and aggregate visit notes that are responsive, in the main, to ordered interventions. And, not incidentally, visit times must be translated into unit-based increments for claim submission purposes.
  • Finally, as the 2015 Final Rule demonstrates, the calculation rules and values change every year.

The operational needs and payment changes put into place for home health agencies are significant and have far reaching implications not only for agencies, but also for the whole industry. As the importance of post-acute care modalities grows in a countrywide effort to regulate costs and improve health outcomes, strong home health providers will play a key role in our general success in this area whether or not they are incentivized to adopt technology through meaningful use programs.

In order for home health agencies to continue building business momentum while ensuring top-quality care and health outcomes, they will need to be able to fully and quickly implement new regulations that change each year and adapt operational procedures correspondingly. Calculations, functions, decision support tools, up-to-the minute informational dashboards and reports will be a must for any home health provider that expects to thrive in what will be a very challenging and intricate operating environment. Fortunately, just as intricacy in processes will increase, there is also an increasing amount of cost-efficient and cloud-based technology alternatives available to providers to enable them to manage effectively the required details of providing home health services.

No comment yet.!

CMS Adds More Quality of Care Data to Comparison Sites |

CMS Adds More Quality of Care Data to Comparison Sites | | Healthcare and Technology news |
CMS is expanding the quality of care data available on several of its patient-facing websites.

Consumers looking for information about the quality of care they can expect at their healthcare providers will be able to browse more information from key patient safety and quality metrics on CMS websites.  The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced this week that Physician Compare, Hospital Compare, and will now include updated performance results for certain quality indicators.

“The performance information released this month will give patients and families additional information they can use to inform their selection of a hospital or physician practice,” wrote Dr. Patrick Conway, CMS Deputy Administrator for Innovation and Quality and Chief Medical Officer. “Health care professionals differ in the quality and safety of care they provide and these websites empower consumers with information to help with health care decisions, encourage providers to strive for higher levels of quality, and drive overall health system improvement.”

The data includes information on hospitals receiving payment adjustments under the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program in 2015, updated performance results on diabetes and cardiovascular care for certain physician providers and accountable care organizations, and performance metrics on critical measures of patient safety and quality including hospital-acquired infections, pressure ulcers, and accidental punctures.

“CMS is committed to providing useful and current quality performance data,” Conway says. “The Compare sites empower consumers with information to help with health care decisions, encourage providers to strive for higher levels of quality, and drive overall health system improvement. While consumers and patients are the main audience for the Compare sites, stakeholders can visit and use the same data that power the Compare websites in easy-to-use formats.”

A recent report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) chided CMS for its poor consumer-facing quality data, citing gaps in availability, outdated information, and insufficient data on out-of-pocket costs for patients.  CMS has been making an effort to improve their public data by instituting a five-star rating system on its Compare sites and expanding the quality of care data available on nursing homes and long-term care facilities.

Quality of care data and cost transparency has been an issue of great concern in the healthcare industry as patients who are becoming more active in their own care are also being required to spend more out of pocket due to higher deductible insurance plans.  The American Hospital Association (AHA) recently called on Congress to require Medicare to make more spending data available to the public in order to accelerate reductions in wasteful spending and help patients make better choices.

“Healthcare-related data is a growing but largely untapped resource for accelerating improvement in health care quality and value,” wrote AHA Executive Vice President Rick Pollack in a letter to Congress. “The ability to make that data available and useful in a meaningful way will impact health care delivery and consumers for years to come. As we move toward greater transparency, it is important that we balance the benefits of making that data broadly available against the need to ensure the privacy and security of individual patient data.”

“This transparency is critical to transforming the health care delivery system to achieve the three aims of better care for patients, better health for communities and spending dollars wisely,” Conway assures stakeholders in the latest announcement.  “CMS is committed to transparency of data about quality and cost of care provided by physicians, hospitals and other health care professionals.”

No comment yet.!

Draft Medicare ACO rules would allow more time with less risk - Modern Healthcare

Draft Medicare ACO rules would allow more time with less risk - Modern Healthcare | Healthcare and Technology news |

The CMS is planning major changes to the financial incentives for Medicare accountable care organizations in a revamp aimed at preventing hospitals and medical groups from dropping out of the initiative.

A proposed rule issued late Monday (PDF)would alter the structure of the Medicare Shared Savings Program, an attempt launched in 2012 under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to reduce U.S. health spending with new incentives that seek to improve the quality and efficiency of healthcare.

Those incentives have been a battleground between policymakers and the healthcare industry since the program's start. Policymakers have sought more substantial incentives—penalties as well as rewards—as a means to hasten changes to the way healthcare is delivered. Hospital officials and physicians have called for less financial risk so they can build the infrastructure and expertise they need to succeed.

The rules adopted in 2011 require accountable care organizations to face penalties after the first three years unless they volunteer to assume downside financial risk earlier in exchange for bigger bonuses if they do well.

The industry appears to have scored a victory in the proposed rules, which acknowledge widespread concern among the participants and experts that some organizations may need more time before penalties take effect. The switch after three years “may be too steep” for organizations that lack experience and infrastructure to achieve quality and cost-saving targets and organizations may exit as a result. Even those that perform well but “not yet ready” to accept the risk of penalties may depart without another option, the agency said.

Medicare, under the revised structure, would no longer require organizations to face penalties after the third year, but they could forgo penalties only if they meet certain criteria. ACOs that fail to slow spending in their first two years would be excluded. All ACOs must assume the risk of penalties after six years if they want to remain in the program.

In order to make it more appealing for ACOs to jump into the riskier track, the CMS would reduce the potential bonuses after the third year in the safer track to 40% from 50%.

In another bid to make riskier contracts more attractive, the agency wants to add a new option, or a third track, that would include potential penalties and bonuses and would use new methods to identify which patients are included in the ACO. Organizations in this new track could keep up to 75% of what they save. They also would be responsible for up to 75% of their losses, but the amount could be reduced based on quality performance. The agency capped the bonuses at 20% of ACOs' benchmarks and losses at 15%.

Participants in the third track would also have a list of patients at the start of the year whose care and costs they must manage. Under the current rules, Medicare identifies beneficiaries as included in the ACO at the end of the year based on how much care they received from the providers in the network. ACOs have called on the CMS to identify the patients at the beginning of the year to allow more focused improvement efforts.

The CMS has rapidly expanded the Medicare Shared Savings Program over the past three years, and it is perhaps one of the most visible efforts under the law to tame the nation's healthcare bill. But many experts feared the widespread enthusiasm for the program would wane significantly if the CMS declined to modify the program to keep less experienced providers on board.

All but five of more than 300 ACOs in the program chose to forgo the penalty. That may have been wise, because their financial performance has been uneven. Only a quarter of ACOs launched in 2012 and 2013 have saved enough to earn bonuses.

Clif Gaus, chief executive officer of the National Association of ACOs, said he was “pleased and disappointed” by the proposed rule. He praised the proposal to give ACOs more time before they face penalties for financial performance, but he also said the decision to couple that with a smaller potential bonus was “counterproductive.”

Many ACOs need the additional time to prepare for the risk of potential penalties, he said. “Three years is not enough.”

Efforts to revamp the delivery of care will require more time as ACOs build new relationships, new infrastructure and learn and adapt early redesign efforts, he said. “It's probably a decade-long process to redesign all of the care processes that lead to both better care and more appropriate care,” based on experience of organizations such as Geisinger Health System or Intermountain Healthcare, he said. “There's a big learning curve for many ACOs,” he said. “They are almost new businesses starting from scratch.”

The association surveyed Medicare Shared Savings Program ACOs in October and found two-thirds were somewhat or highly unlikely to continue if they were required to accept penalties. About 20% of the MSSP ACOs responded. “There's too much risk for the amount of reward” under contracts with penalties and bonuses, he said.

Coastal Carolina Quality Care in New Bern, N.C., entered Medicare's accountable care program in 2012 and saw its expenditures increase a marginal 0.6% against projections during the first year.

“It's very unlikely that we would continue” without the continued option to forgo penalties, said Stephen Nuckolls, Coastal Carolina's CEO.

Dr. Farzad Mostashari, founder and chief executive of accountable care contractor Aledade, said the option to continue without penalties may benefit some smaller organizations in the program. “There are a lot of home grown ACOs,” said Mostashari, a former national coordinator for health information technology at HHS. “It takes them a long time to get going.”

Policymakers, however, likely also want to discourage organizations from abusing Medicare's shared savings program as a way to consolidate market clout with little interest in achieving the program's savings goals, he said. The proposed rule, however, may do little to discourage them from remaining in the program. The proposed criteria for ACOs to continue without penalties, Mostashari said, is “a pretty low bar."

No comment yet.