Bundled Payments for Care Improvement: Boom or Bust?

Abstract

BackgroundAs early implementors of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative, our private practice sought to compare our readmission rates, post-acute care utilization, and length of stay for the first year under BPCI compared to baseline data. MethodsWe used CMS data to compare total expenditures of all diagnosis-related groups (DRGs). Medicare patients who underwent orthopedic surgery between 2009 and 2012 were defined as non-BPCI (n = 8415) and were compared to Medicare BPCI patients (n = 4757) who had surgery in 2015. Ninety-day post-acute events including inpatient rehabilitation facility or subacute nursing facility admission, home health (HH), and readmissions were analyzed. ResultsThe median expenditure for non-BPCI patients was $22,193 compared to $19,476 for BPCI patients (P < .001). Median post-acute care spend was $6861 for non-BPCI and $5360 for BPCI patients (P < .001). Compared to non-BPCI patients, BPCI patients had a lower rate of subacute nursing facility admissions (non-BPCI 43% vs 37% BPCI; P < .001), inpatient rehabilitation facility admissions (non-BPCI 3% vs 4% BPCI; P = .005), HH (non-BPCI 79% vs 73% BPCI; P < .001), and readmissions (non-BPCI 12% vs 10% BPCI; P = .02). Changes in length of stay for post-acute care were only significant for HH with BPCI patients using a median 12 days and non-BPCI using 24 days. ConclusionThe objective of BPCI was to improve healthcare value. Through substantial efforts both financially and utilization of human resources to contain costs with clinical practice guidelines, patient navigators, and a BPCI management team, the expenditures for CMS were significantly lower for BPCI patients.