Unbiased Analysis of Today's Healthcare Issues

A glitch in ACO beneficiary assignement?

Written By: Jason Shafrin - Apr• 29•13

For most managed care plans, beneficiaries elect to participate in the plan. In exchange, beneficaries often have lower premiums, but often restricted access to providers (e.g., referral requirements, copayment differentials for out-of-network physicians).

Medicare’s Accountable Care Organizations (known as Shared Savings Plans (SSP)) also assign beneficaries to organizations. The SSPs are groups of providers that are responsible for a set of beneficiaries and can earn bonuses if they are able to save Medicare money and improve quality. Unlike managed care plans, however, beneficaries do not choose to participate in an ACO; Medicare assigns beneficiaries to ACOs based on where they receive care. Unlike managed care plans, beneficaries do not have any in/out-of-network limitations or referral restrictions, even though ACOs are responsible for their care. Thus, it is crucial that the assignment of beneficiaries to SSPs is reliable.

A study by McWilliams et al. (2013), however, states that reliable attribution my be compromised in the current system. They write:

For the purpose of assignment, both the SSP and Pioneer program define primary care as specific sets of evaluation and management (E&M) services delivered not only in outpatient settings but also in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and nursing homes This definition ensures that long-term nursing home residents no longer receiving primary care in the community are still eligible for assignment to ACOs that include nursing homes…

including nursing home E&M services in the assignment process appropriately allows for ACO contracts to apply to long-term nursing home residents if such partnerships should develop…

For community-dwelling beneficiaries, however, counting E&M services provided in SNFs as primary care services could transfer the locus of accountability from primary to post-acute care providers as an unintended consequence. Specifically among beneficiaries who receive both outpatient primary care and short-term post-acute care, the assignment rules may selectively assign the sickest patients requiring the most post-acute care away from community primary care providers, and thus away from ACOs that do not include SNFs in their contracting networks.

Will the inclusion of post-acute E&M services into the attribution method affect the SSP to which beneficiaries are assigned in practice? The authors find that the answer is yes.

Assignment shifts occurred for 27.6 percent of 25,992 community-dwelling beneficiaries with at least one post-acute skilled nursing facility stay, and they were more common for those incurring higher Medicare spending. Those whose assignment shifted constituted only 1.3 percent of all community-dwelling beneficiaries cared for by large ACO-eligible organizations (n = 535,138), but they accounted for 8.4 percent of total Medicare spending for this population.

Source:
(more…)

Friday Reading

Written By: Jason Shafrin - Apr• 26•13

Health Wonk Review

Written By: Jason Shafrin - Apr• 25•13

The always insightful Hank Stern host this week’s edition of the Health Wonk Review.

Should the CDC warn Americans about a ‘potential’ epidemic?

Written By: Jason Shafrin - Apr• 25•13

Although at first glance, the answer would be ‘yes’, the answer is not so straight-forward.  Consider the case of the recent H7N9 influenza outbreak in China.  Although the media gave some coverage to this issue, the risk of a pandemic was not emphasized.

The reason may be Bayesian updating.  Previous influenza threats in recent years have not had the impact expected.  A H5N1 bird flu pandemic never occurred in the U.S.; the H1N1 swine flu was serious, but not the pandemic that many individuals expected.  Another CDC ‘false alarm’ would harm the agency’s reputation; it would risk that its future announcements about pandemics would be taken less seriously.

The Peter Sandman Risk Communication Website gives the following opinion on the topic:

The CDC chose to go along with the overall mood of mild, casual interest. I’m not sure this was the wrong decision. Piercing the apathy would have been difficult and perhaps premature. If H7N9 never amounts to much, the CDC might have done some damage to its credibility by trying to pierce the apathy. On the other hand, if H7N9 does start looking like The Big One, the CDC will have passed up an early teachable moment. But on a third hand, if the situation starts to look worse, more teachable moments will come along, and the CDC can prepare for them in advance: reminding its experts not to over-reassure and not to sound overconfident about managing a pandemic; figuring out what to ask of the public; etc.

Chinese public health agencies may be more likely to give stern warnings than the CDC due to China’s recent history with infectious disease.  “China lived through SARS and H5N1 firsthand, whereas the U.S. experienced them mostly as faraway news stories and possible future threats that never materialized. And China is living through the first few H7N9 cases firsthand as well. If the public reaction in the U.S. ranges predictably from ridicule to apathy to casual interest, the reaction in China can be expected to be significantly more anxious.”

In the arena of public health, warning citizens of serious health threats is vital to the economy, health and survival of a nation.  False positive warnings, however, are not costless.

P4P in Australia

Written By: Jason Shafrin - Apr• 24•13

Pay for performance (P4P) is the latest rage in healthcare quality monitoring. Paying physicians more who provide high quality care makes sense intituitvely. The U.S. isn’t the only country to hop on the P4P bandwagon.

In 2001, the Australian government initiated a financial incentive program for “improved management of diseases such as asthma and diabetes and increased screening for cervical cancer” for GPs, who are paid for each patient visit on a fee-for-service basis. The voluntary program, called the Practice Incentives Program or PIP, is open to GPs in practices that are accredited or undergoing accreditation and it continues today. Participation is incentivized with one-time, sign-on payments to medical practices, which are approximately $250 per full-time GP in the practice for the asthma and cervical cancer programs and $1,000 per GP for the diabetes program.

The diabetes and asthma incentives are based upon GPs providing patients with a cycle of care over a 12-month period. For diabetes, the cycle includes providing patients recommended tests (HbA1c, microalbuminuria, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and blood pressure); relevant examinations (feet and eyes); reviewing medications, diet, physical activity, and smoking status; measuring body mass index; and providing diabetes self-care and related education. A GP earns A$40 for each patient who completes the cycle of care, in addition to the regular consultation fee. To earn P4P incentive payments, the GP has to bill specific PIP-related codes for the visit. There is also a practice-level outcome incentive for practices that complete cycles of care for 20 percent or more of their patients with diabetes in a year (A$20 per diabetes patient). For asthma, the incentive is A$100 for each patient who completes the cycle of care.

However, the question is, does it work? A paper by Greene (2013) examines just this question. At first glance, the trend seems to be yes.
hesr12033-fig-0001

However, it appears that P4P may not affect physician behavior directly. As the chart below shows, although overall diabetes and asthma screening increased, the rise did not differ between physicians who participated in the program and those who did not. A fixed effects regression confirms these findings.
hesr12033-fig-0003

Why didn’t P4P make a big difference? The author followed up with a number of physician interviews. Responses included:

  • “It’s money for doing what you were already doing.”
  • “From a clinical point of view, yes [the care cycles are] a priority and we do it.”
  • “I’m not improving their care, I’m just doing paperwork. And for that minimal return, it’s just not worth it”
  • “In the time I could muck around working out whether I’ve done it this year, have I done all the bits and pieces, ticked all the boxes, rather than do that, I’ll just see someone else.”

(more…)

Baskets of Care

Written By: Jason Shafrin - Apr• 22•13

What are the best practices for providing care for a specific condition?  This question is not easy to answer.  Further, the best practices for treating the average patient may differ from the best practice for treating certain other types of patients; particularly when a patient suffers from multiple conditions simultaneously.

Despite these challenges, this information can be used not only for quality monitoring but also to alter payment systems.  Specially, once the care relevant for the treatment of a specific condition is identified, payers can use this information to for the purposes of bundled payment.  In fact, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) has developed “Baskets of Care” to accomplish just this goal.  The MPH website states that:

Baskets of care are collections of health care services designed to treat particular health conditions or episodes of care. Offering these bundled services is a major reform in the way we pay for health care…Minnesota health care providers now have the option to voluntarily use baskets of care to deliver services. State law requires providers offering a state-designated basket of care to register with the commissioner of health.

MPH has developed 7 different baskets of care. These include:

  • Asthma (children) – Management of asthma as a chronic disease
  • Diabetes- Without co-morbidities, does include hypertension and hyperlipidemia
  • Low Back Pain – Management of acute episode of low back pain
  • Obstetric Care – Prenatal, uncomplicated vaginal delivery, cesarean section delivery
  • Preventive Care (adults)
  • Preventive Care (children) - Well child care, preventive care, normal newborn care
  • Total Knee Replacement – Inclusive management from preoperative phase through rehabilitation phase

I am not sure, however, how widely payers (or providers) use these baskets of care. Anyone from Minnesota have any feedback on this program?

Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Enrollment Trends in 2013

Written By: Jason Shafrin - Apr• 22•13

According to research from Avalere, Medicare beneficiaries are overwhelmingly choosing low-cost Part D prescription drug plans . In 2013, more than 500,000 beneficiaries enrolled in the brand new AARP Saver Plus plan—catapulting it to a position in the top 10 list of plans in its first year. With the addition of Humana/Walmart and First Health Part D Value Plus, nearly 3 million beneficiaries are choosing low-premium plans with preferred pharmacy networks.  Between 2012 and 2013, premiums have been fairly stable with an average annual increase of only 2%.

The first graphic below examines trends in Medicare Part D coverage by a prescription drug plan (PDP), Medicare Advantage drug plan (HMO), preferred provider organization (PPO), preferred fee-for-service (PFFS) and other Part D plan types.  The second graphic displays enrollment and premium information for the top 10 Part D plans as of 2013.

Part D Enrollment by Plan Type 2009-2013

Monthly Premiums for Top 10 PDPs

 

 

Weekend Links

Written By: Jason Shafrin - Apr• 19•13

Some reading for your weekend:

Quotation of the Day

Written By: Jason Shafrin - Apr• 19•13

“When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”

Overwhelmed Blue Person Holding A Hammer And Nail While Standing In A Patch Of Many Nails Clipart Illustration Image

 

Picture hat tip to Wages of Wins.

Cavalcade of Risk #181: The ‘What If’ Edition

Written By: Jason Shafrin - Apr• 17•13

The news of the bombing at the Boston Marthathon has shaken many Americans.  How could such a thing happen?  What are the odds that such a thing happens to me?

Let’s try to quantify the risk.  According to FindMyMarathon.com, in 2012, there were 658 marathons in the U.S. and Canada.  Thus, the probability of a bombing of a randomly selected marathon in the U.S. or Canada is about 0.2% if one assumes one bombing per year.

The Chicago Tribune reports that 100 people were injured and 3 people died.  In 2012, 528,375 individuals finished a marathon.  Thus, the probability of being injured at a marathon due to a bombing is 0.02% and the probability of being killed is 0.0006% or fewer than 1 in every 150,000 individuals.

About 1 in 100,000 marathon finishers die during or in the 24 hours immediately after a marathon, according to The New York Times.  Thus, marathoners are at higher risk of dying of a heart attack after a marathon than from a terrorist attack.

Although the chances of being injured or killed in any marathon are relatively small, life is still full of unforseen events.  In today’s Cavalcade of Risk, the best of the blog-o-sphere answers the question ‘What If’?

  • What if I get bird flu?  Risk Management Monitor examines what they call “the largest health threat…that the globe has seen in several years.”
  • What if you suffer from a degenerative disease?  Hull Financial Planning discusses how to create a financial plan for multiple sclerosis.
  • What if your home is destroyed by an earthquake? InsureBlog notes that often times your homeowners insurers will not cover the damage caused by this natural disaster.
  • What if you are wasting money on unnecessary insurance premiums?  Chatswood Consulting Limited examines whether certain provisions of income protection insurance are unnecessary.
  • What if I lose my hearing?  The Health Business Blog notes that the risk of this event increases for individuals who use the high-powered Excel Xlerator hand dryers.
  • What if Medicare runs out of money?  The Disease Management Care Blog examines how the U.S. could learn from Canada, France, Germany and England to decrease the rate of growth of health care spending.
  • What if I am injured on the job? Workers Comp Insider examines whether companies can build mobile apps to improve workers safety.
  • What if I die of old age?  Life Insurance by Jeff examines weather people over 65 need life insurance.
  • What if the world is run by egotistical psychopaths?  Ponerology News reviews the movie I am a Fishead which examines why financial professionals took enormous risks leading to the economic recession.
  • What if I am a helicopter pilot searching for life insurance?  Rootfin provides some helpful tips.
  • What if Medicare cuts reimbursement rates?  The Healthcare Economist finds that hospitals are not likely to raise private payer cost, but rather decrease large capital expenditures on advanced medical records and curtail the offering of unprofitable services (e.g., trauma centers, alcohol and drug treatment).

Jeff Root of Rootfin hosts the next Cavalcade of Risk.

(more…)