Value-based Reimbursement Research Articles

What is the True Cost of Motion Preservation? A Time-driven Activity-Based Cost Analysis of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Disc Replacement

Total disc replacement (TDR) has become a viable alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for select patients. Although most comparative studies have assessed outcomes, cost differences remain largely uninvestigated. This information is critical as we move towards value-based reimbursement. To address this knowledge gap, we used time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) to compare total intraoperative costs between the two procedures. Total cost was divided into direct (personnel and supply cost) and indirect costs (administrative and overhead costs). Individual costs were determined through direct observation, electronic medical records, and through querying multiple departments (including business operations, sterile processing, plant operations, and pharmacy). Timestamps for all involved personnel and material resources were documented, in conjunction with process mapping of the intraoperative period. Total intraoperative costs were estimated for all ACDFs (n=810) and TDRs (n=54) from 2017 to 2022. Regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with total cost. A total of 810 and 54 patients underwent one- and two-level ACDFs and TDRs, respectively. The average total intraoperative cost for an ACDF was $6,776 +/- $2,808, compared to $12,026 +/- $4,235 for TDR. Supply cost accounted for the majority of total cost for both procedures ($4,173 +/- $2,225 for ACDF and $9,532 +/- $4,010 for TDR). On multivariable linear regression analysis, TDR was associated with roughly $3,885 of additional cost compared to ACDF (p<0.001), as well as $4,072 in additional supply cost (p<0.001), most of which was driven by the higher cost of implants (p<0.001). TDABC is a highly useful methodology for estimating differences in true costs between procedures and determining cost drivers. TDRs were associated with an additional $3,885 of total intraoperative cost as compared to ACDFs, the majority of which was driven by the cost of implants.

Escalating costs of innovative medicines: perspective and proposals.

Public healthcare systems are challenged by the soaring costs of medications that require increasing resources, often at the expense of other investments. The increasing pharmaceutical budget poses a threat to the allocation of funds for essential preventive and primary healthcare services while also raising concerns about equitable access, particularly in models where patients bear part of the costs out of their own pockets. Proposals on how to ensure ongoing and long-term accessibility, efficiency, and financial stability are required. The escalating costs of medicines may be explained in part by the mismatch between the traditional value-based pricing and reimbursement frameworks and the type of clinical development of targeted therapies and precision medicine in clinical practice. New appraisal methods and managed access strategies should be adapted to therapies targeting small populations and addressing increased uncertainty. Fair pricing strategies, transparent healthcare investments based on problems and outcomes, regulatory reforms, international cooperation, and critically examining the drug acquisition model are potential solutions. Transitioning from an industry-driven pricing approach to a health-driven payment model can help align the cost of treatments with actual health outcomes, establishing a foundation for a healthcare system that addresses immediate challenges and fosters long-term well-being. Acknowledging the lack of a universally applicable solution, the practical implementation of interventions requires a reframing of the pricing and access system and adaption to the targeted therapeutic approaches. Balancing innovation with financial sustainability necessitates a collaborative, adaptive, and transparent approach, as well as transitioning toward health-driven payment models, moving the focus from the cost of medications to the well-being of populations worldwide.

Value-based healthcare as an opportunity for patient management at the individual and system level

Value-based healthcare (VBHC) aims to increase patient outcomes in relation to the costs incurred, with afocus on measuring these outcomes using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The German healthcare system faces the challenge of quality disparities in care amidst rising costs, making VBHC of interest. This paper aims to illustrate how VBHC principles are currently being implemented in the field of internal medicine in Germany and to identify the potential that can be derived from VBHC pioneering examples from the Netherlands. Selected case studies are presented to illustrate how VBHC principles are already being applied in internal medicine, focusing on where PROMs are utilized and how value-based reimbursement supports VBHC implementation-both in Germany and the Netherlands. In Germany, various cross-provider initiatives and individual providers implement the VBHC element of PROMs measurement. In addition, the Baden-Württemberg selective contract in cardiology demonstrates how financing VBHC elements in regular care was already made possible in Germany. Pioneers such as the Dutch center of excellence Diabeter and the multidisciplinary care network Netherlands Heart Network provide further inspiration for the implementation of VBHC in internal medicine. While various initiatives support the measurement of PROMs in the German context, the use of these results in care practice is not apparent. The utilization of PROMs and strategies identified in Dutch examples could be initial steps toward fostering VBHC in Germany.

Cheaper is not always better: Drug shortages in the United States and a value-based solution to alleviate them.

Drug shortages threaten patients' access to medications and are associated with adverse health outcomes and increased costs. Drug shortages disproportionately occur among generic drugs of limited profitability, most notably drugs administered by injection. In this perspective, we discuss how reimbursement and purchasing practices that were meant to create an efficient marketplace for generics have generated strong price pressure that threatens profitability in certain markets. We further explain how, faced with limited profitability, manufacturers lack incentives to invest in resilient supply chains, and in some cases, engage in cost-containment strategies or decide to exit the market, ultimately contributing to shortages. We propose the development and implementation of value-based reimbursement to provide needed incentives for drug purchasers and manufacturers to establish a more reliable supply chain as part of the policy solution to reduce the number and extent of drug shortages. This reimbursement model would necessitate the development of a rating system that measures supply chain resilience and maturity for each generic product. This rating would then be applied as a value-based modifier to reimbursement rates for generic products. The proposed model would result in higher reimbursement rates for generic products from more dependable supply chains, generating incentives for manufacturers to invest in supply chain resiliency. We propose the application of this reimbursement system originally in Medicare given Congressional interest on reforming Medicare payment to prevent drug shortages.

New reimbursement models to promote better patient outcomes and overall value in laboratory medicine and healthcare.

The most widespread healthcare reimbursement models, including diagnostic laboratory services, are Fee-for-Service, Reference Pricing and Diagnosis-Related Groups. Within these models healthcare providers are remunerated for each specific service or procedure they operate. Healthcare payers are increasingly exploring alternative models, such as bundled payments or value-based reimbursement to encourage value of patient care rather than the simple amount of delivered services. These alternative models are advised, as they are more efficient in promoting cost-effective, high-quality laboratory testing, thereby improving patient health outcomes. If outcomes-based evaluation is a pillar in a new vision of "Value-Based Healthcare", an active policy of Value-Based Reimbursement in laboratory medicine will assure both an efficiency-based sustainability and a high-quality effectiveness-based diagnostic activity. This review aims to evaluate current and alternative reimbursement models, to support a wider agenda in encouraging more Value-Based Healthcare and Value-Based Reimbursement in laboratory medicine.

What defines the "value" of robotic surgery for patients with gastrointestinal cancers? Perspectives from a U.S. Cancer Center.

The use of robotic surgery has experienced rapid growth across diverse medical conditions, with a notable emphasis on gastrointestinal cancers. The advanced technologies incorporated into robotic surgery platforms have played a pivotal role in enabling the safe performance of complex procedures, including gastrectomy and pancreatectomy, through a minimally invasive approach. However, there exists a noteworthy gap in high-level evidence demonstrating that robotic surgery for gastric and pancreatic cancers has substantial benefits compared to traditional open or laparoscopic methods. The primary impediment hindering the broader implementation of robotic surgery is its cost. The escalating healthcare expenses in the United States have prompted healthcare providers and payors to explore patient-centered, value-based healthcare models and reimbursement systems that embrace cost-effectiveness. Thus, it is important to determine what defines the value of robotic surgery. It must either maintain or enhance oncological quality and improve complication rates compared to open procedures. Moreover, its true value should be apparent in patients' expedited recovery and improved quality of life. Another essential aspect of robotic surgery's value lies in minimizing or even eliminating opioid use, even after major operations, offering considerable benefits to the broader public health landscape. A quicker return to oncological therapy has the potential to improve overall oncological outcomes, while a speedier return to work not only alleviates individual financial distress but also positively impacts societal productivity. In this article, we comprehensively review and summarize the current landscape of health economics and value-based care, with a focus on robotic surgery for gastrointestinal cancers.

A multi-criteria decision analysis framework that prioritizes economic policy to enhance value based health care during the COVID-19 pandemic

ObjectiveTo investigate pandemic impacts on Value-Based Health Care (VBHC) globally, using multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to address challenges through prioritizing economic policies.MethodsPreferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta Analyses extension for Scoping-Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), PUBMED, Medline, and google-scholar were used to analyze pandemic impacts on VBHC domains. MCDA prioritized economic policies, utilizing the value-measurement model with additive-weighted scores. The criteria weighting-method used direct-rating, ranking and robust deliberation by four experts to priority rank economic policies for each VBHC domain.ResultsCOVID-19 impacted on all VBHC domains: Integrated Practice Units, outcome and cost measurement, Value-Based Reimbursement, Information Technology (IT), regional systems integration, geography of care and VBHC policy and institutions. There were changes in patient complexity, service delivery, activity, models of care, pricing, costs, IT, quality, and health status. COVID-19 pricing impacts included increased capacity costs, Personal Protective Equipment costs, cost per patient, service delivery changes, and telehealth costs. A median of 37% of patients globally avoided care, negatively impacting on diabetes, venous thromboembolism, Parkinson’s disease, kidney disease, myocardial infarction, stroke, and cancer patients. A consequence is inaccurate assessments of health status, underestimated projected health needs, and costs for risk-adjustment, impacting health services. Innovations include telehealth and changing service redesign. New care models include state-wide ICU-COVID Models of Care, Telehealth-Inpatient Physician Services, COVID-linked pathology testing, and increased Hospital in the Home. Artificial Intelligence innovations involved patient-screening, triage, risk-evaluation, care assessment, pathways, and laboratories. Risk-adjustment challenges impacted on Value-Based Reimbursement and patient risk-stratification. MCDA prioritized economic policies, including healthcare system performance, healthcare demand and supply, risk-adjustment, planning and market mechanisms, economic evaluation of healthcare, economic sustainability initiatives, and health determinants.ConclusionCOVID-19 demonstrated the limits of health systems globally, with increasing costs and limited budgets. The economic strategies identified can enhance VBHC globally.

Development of the Emirates Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Tool for Orphan Drugs.

Background The number of orphan drug approvals is currently increasing globally. This creates a significant burden on payers and healthcare systems. This study aimed to create a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) tool for evaluating orphan drugs within the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The intended result of the tool is to provide evidence-based guidance to decision-makers in reimbursement and procurement decisions. Methods We conducted a literature search and local expert interviews to identify relevant preliminary criteria for the MCDA tool. Then we conducted a structured consensus-building session for healthcare experts and decision-makers in the UAE to develop the Emirati MCDA tool for orphan drugs. The experts voted for the criteria to be included in the tool and their ranking according to importance, as well as the weight of each criterion and its scoring function. To improve understanding and facilitate the voting process, experts were provided with a brief illustration of similar tools conducted in other countries before the voting sessions. Finally, the tool was developed in a Microsoft Excel sheet (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, United States), and it was validated and tested based on real case studies, then it was fine-tuned accordingly based on the experts' discussions. The final tool was provided to the attendees to guide their decisions in the reimbursement and procurement of orphan drugs. Results The created tool provides a score for each analyzed orphan drug based on its value. Ten criteria were included in the final MCDA tool. These were cost-effectiveness (25.1% of the weight), magnitude of health gain (20.1%), availability of therapeutic alternative (14.3%), disease severity (11%), budget impact (7.9%), disease rarity (5.6%), strength of clinical evidence (5.6%), burden on households (4.5%), indication uniqueness (3.2%), and patients' age (2.6%). Conclusions Implementation of evidence-based healthcare necessitates assessing the fair value of each health technology. Addressing the high unmet medical needs and improving healthcare for patients with rare diseases are priorities within the UAE. The created Emirates MCDA tool for orphan drugs has the potential to help decision-makers implement value-based and evidence-based reimbursement decisions for orphan drugs.

Mobile Application Use and Patient Engagement in Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.

» Mobile applications (MAs) are widely available for use during the perioperative period and are associated with increased adherence to rehabilitation plans, increased satisfaction with care, and considerable cost savings when used appropriately.» MAs offer surgeons and health care stakeholders the ability to collect clinical data and quality metrics that are important to value-based reimbursement models and clinical research.» Patients are willing to use wearable technology to assist with data collection as part of MAs but prefer it to be comfortable, easy to apply, and discreet.» Smart implants have been developed as the next step in MA use and data collection, but concerns exist pertaining to patient privacy and cost.» The ongoing challenge of MA standardization, validation, equity, and cost has persisted as concerns regarding widespread use.

Association of Frailty with Healthcare Utilization for Patients over One Year Following Surgical Evaluation.

Characterize the distribution of healthcare utilization associated with pre-operative frailty in the year following evaluation by a surgeon. Frailty is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and costs for surgical patients. However, the total financial burden for frail patients beyond the index surgery and inpatient stay remains unknown. Prospective cohort assembled from February 2016 to December 2020 within a multi-hospital integrated healthcare delivery and finance system (IDFS), from patients evaluated with the Risk Analysis Index (RAI) of frailty. Inclusion criteria: age greater than 18, valid RAI, membership in the IDFS Health Plan. Data were stratified by frailty and surgical status. The mean (SD) age was 54.7 (16.1) and 58.2% female of the cohort (n=86,572). For all patients with reimbursement for surgery (n=53,856), frail and very frail patients incurred respective increases of 8% ( P =0.027) and 29% ( P <0.001) on utilization relative to the normal group. Robust patients saw a 52% ( P <0.001) decrease. This pattern was more pronounced in the cohort without surgery (n=32,716). The increase over normal utilization for frail and very frail patients increased to 23% ( P =0.004) and 68% ( P <0.001), respectively. Utilization among robust patients decreased 62% ( P <0.001). Increases among the frail were primarily due to increased inpatient medical and post-acute care services (all P <0.001). Patient frailty is associated with increased total healthcare utilization, primarily via increased inpatient medical and post-acute care following surgery. Quantifying these frailty-related financial burdens may inform clinical decision making as well as the design of value-based reimbursement strategies.

Development of a Consensus-Based List of Potential Quality Indicators for Fever and Inflammation of Unknown Origin

Abstract With a growing emphasis on value-based reimbursement, developing quality indicators for infectious diseases has gained attention. Quality indicators for fever of unknown origin and inflammation of unknown origin are lacking. An assembled group of international experts developed 12 quality measures for these conditions, which could be validated with additional study.

Santeon’s Lessons from a Decade of Implementing Value-Based Health Care

Summary Despite growing global support for value-based health care (VBHC), there is no consensus on the best approach for the identification of improvement potential nor on the selection and implementation of improvement initiatives. In addition, varying frames of reference shape how individuals interpret the concept of value and how they implement VBHC. As a result, it is often implemented in various and fragmented ways. Santeon, a nonprofit formal alliance of seven Dutch teaching hospitals, has been working on VBHC since 2012. In this article, intended to address gaps in the literature regarding the implementation of VBHC, the authors use the new strategic agenda for value transformation to share more than 10 years of Santeon’s VBHC implementation experience. The authors provide an overview of Santeon’s implementation methods; describe challenges and lessons learned; and demonstrate how value transformation was achieved with tangible examples from birth care, chronic kidney disease care, and breast cancer care. In breast cancer care, for example, system-wide improvement initiatives resulted in an increase in breast-conserving surgeries on an outpatient basis (from 391 in 2014 and 2015 to 458 in 2016), and a reduction in reoperation rates owing to positive tumor margins (from 39 in 2014 and 2015 to 33 in 2016). These results were subsequently used to negotiate a collective value-based reimbursement model with insurance companies.

PP18 Unlocking The Potential Of Medical Device Reimbursement In India For Better Health Outcomes

IntroductionThe Indian healthcare landscape has witnessed several promising changes including the introduction of a comprehensive medical technology inclusion process, Diagnosis-related group (DRG)-pilot and value-based incentives for hospital services under the national public health insurance scheme. Realizing the need for a more patient-centric stance towards improving healthcare outcomes as the way forward, we propose incremental changes including greater participation of public and private care-providers in topic prioritization and the appraisal committee. We also propose a unique evidence-driven approach using reimbursement as a lever for rewarding quality and innovation in medical technologies.MethodsWe developed two discussion guides to capture the ideas around deeper involvement of care-providers and patient societies, and introduction of value-based reimbursement for incentivizing high-quality implantable medical devices in India. The guides were prepared using secondary research and key informant interviews. Over 25 key stakeholders representing payers, regulatory agencies, government authorities, clinical experts, and industry players selected through quota sampling participated in a roundtable meeting. Based on the meeting outcomes, key recommendations for leveraging medical device reimbursement for better health outcomes were developed.ResultsThis qualitative research was carried out with participation of key stakeholders across the medical device reimbursement process. The group proposed recommendations for bringing care-providers closer to the process through a structured and inclusive nomination approach involving therapy users and patient groups at various stages of evaluation. Complementing the existing value-based incentives framework for hospital services, we proposed a similar two-step pathway for incentivizing quality of implantable medical devices. The proposal includes the introduction of certification-based and outcome-based incentives built on a scientific and holistic evaluation criterion.ConclusionsThrough this process, we created a pragmatic and concrete call for a stronger voice from care-providers and patient groups in the evaluation process. Consecutively, the proposed innovative framework introducing value-based incentives for implantable medical devices will be instrumental in enabling access to quality health care to poor patients. These strategies follow the principles of value-based care and will go a long way in achieving better health outcomes for the population. The scientific initiative has been made possible with the support of St. Jude Medical India Pvt Ltd. (now Abbott).

Big Data Education for Clinical Documentation

Nursing educators and students need new competencies and tools for creating and analyzing clinical documentation and big data to maximize value-based reimbursements and data sharing.&amp;nbsp; Carefully structured and shareable documentation of nursing diagnoses, goals, interventions and outcomes, available in the EHR (electronic health record), may be aggregated and analyzed to provide a foundation for population health, quality improvement and clinical research.&amp;nbsp; One way to access anonymized clinical data for use in academic and clinical data sharing is via Project NeLL™ (Nurses electronic Learning Laboratory™), an innovative suite of online applications for teaching and practicing nursing data science from the Nell Woodruff Hodgson School of Nursing of Emory University's Center for Data Science.&amp;nbsp; Emory is collaborating with Rutgers University School of Nursing to teach graduate students using Project NeLL.

Digital Health Reimbursement Strategies of 8 European Countries and Israel: Scoping Review and Policy Mapping.

The adoption of digital health care within health systems is determined by various factors, including pricing and reimbursement. The reimbursement landscape for digital health in Europe remains underresearched. Although various emergency reimbursement decisions were made during the COVID-19 pandemic to enable health care delivery through videoconferencing and asynchronous care (eg, digital apps), research so far has primarily focused on the policy innovations that facilitated this outside of Europe. This study examines the digital health reimbursement strategies in 8 European countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom) and Israel. We mapped available digital health reimbursement strategies using a scoping review and policy mapping framework. We reviewed the literature on the MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, and Web of Science databases. Supplementary records were identified through Google Scholar and country experts. Our search strategy yielded a total of 1559 records, of which 40 (2.57%) were ultimately included in this study. As of August 2023, digital health solutions are reimbursable to some extent in all studied countries except Poland, although the mechanism of reimbursement differs significantly across countries. At the time of writing, the pricing of digital health solutions was mostly determined through discussions between national or regional committees and the manufacturers of digital health solutions in the absence of value-based assessment mechanisms. Financing digital health solutions outside traditional reimbursement schemes was possible in all studied countries except Poland and typically occurs via health innovation or digital health-specific funding schemes. European countries have value-based pricing frameworks that range from nonexistent to embryonic. Studied countries show divergent approaches to the reimbursement of digital health solutions. These differences may complicate the ability of patients to seek cross-country health care in another country, even if a digital health app is available in both countries. Furthermore, the fragmented environment will present challenges for developers of such solutions, as they look to expand their impact across countries and health systems. An increased emphasis on developing a clear conceptualization of digital health, as well as value-based pricing and reimbursement mechanisms, is needed for the sustainable integration of digital health. This study can therein serve as a basis for further, more detailed research as the field of digital health reimbursement evolves.

Variation in Ischemic Stroke Payments in the USA: A Medicare Beneficiary Study

Introduction: The growing cost of stroke care has created the need for outcome-oriented and cost-saving payment models. Identifying imbalances in the current reimbursement model is an essential step toward designing impactful value-based reimbursement strategies. This study describes the variation in reimbursement fees for ischemic stroke management across the USA. Methods: This Medicare Fee-For-Service claims study examines USA beneficiaries who suffered an ischemic stroke from 2021Q1 to 2022Q2 identified using the Medicare-Severity Diagnosis-Related Groups (MS-DRGs). Demographic national and regional US data were extracted from the Census Bureau. The MS-DRG codes were grouped into four categories according to treatment modality and clinical complexity. Our primary outcome of interest was payments made across individual USA and US geographic regions, assessed by computing the mean incremental payment in cases of comparable complexity. Differences between states for each MS-DRG were statistically evaluated using a linear regression model of the logarithmic transformed payments. Results: 227,273 ischemic stroke cases were included in our analysis. Significant variations were observed among all DRGs defined by medical complexity, treatment modality, and states (p < 0.001). Differences in mean payment per case with the same MS-DRG vary by as high as 500% among individual states. Although higher payment rates were observed in MS-DRG codes with major comorbidities or complexity (MCC), the variation was more expressive for codes without MCC. It was not possible to identify a standard mean incremental fee at a state level. At a regional level, the Northeast registered the highest fees, followed by the West, Midwest, and South, which correlate with poverty rates and median household income in the regions. Conclusions: The payment variability observed across USA suggests that the current reimbursement system needs to be aligned with stroke treatment costs. Future studies may go one step further to evaluate accurate stroke management costs to guide policymakers in introducing health policies that promote better care for stroke patients.

Quality improvement mechanisms to improve lymph node staging for lung cancer: Trends from a statewide database

ObjectiveOur statewide thoracic quality collaborative has implemented multiple quality improvement initiatives to improve lung cancer nodal staging. We subsequently implemented a value-based reimbursement initiative to further incentivize quality improvement. We compare the impact of these programs to steer future quality improvement initiatives. MethodsSince 2016, our collaborative focused on improving lymph node staging for lung cancer by leveraging unblinded, hospital-level metrics and collaborative feedback. In 2021, a value-based reimbursement initiative was implemented with statewide yearly benchmark rates for (1) preoperative mediastinal staging for ≥T2N0 lung cancer, and (2) sampling ≥5 lymph node stations. Participating surgeons would receive additional reimbursement if either benchmark was met. We reviewed patients from January 2015 to March 2023 at the 21 participating hospitals to determine the differential effects on quality improvement. ResultsWe analyzed 6228 patients. In 2015, 212 (39%) patients had ≥5 nodal stations sampled, and 99 (51%) patients had appropriate preoperative mediastinal staging. During 2016 to 2020, this increased to 2253 (62%) patients and 739 (56%) patients, respectively. After 2020, 1602 (77%) patients had ≥5 nodal stations sampled, and 403 (73%) patients had appropriate preoperative mediastinal staging. Interrupted time-series analysis demonstrated significant increases in adequate nodal sampling and mediastinal staging before value-based reimbursement. Afterward, preoperative mediastinal staging rates briefly dropped but significantly increased while nodal sampling did not change. ConclusionsCollaborative quality improvement made significant progress before value-based reimbursement, which reinforces the effectiveness of leveraging unblinded data to a collaborative group of thoracic surgeons. Value-based reimbursement may still play a role within a quality collaborative to maintain infrastructure and incentivize participation.

Primary Care Continuity, Frequency, and Regularity Associated With Medicare Savings

Reducing Medicare expenditures is a key objective of Medicare's transition to value-based reimbursement models. Improving access to primary care is an important way to reduce expenditures, yet less is known about how visits should be organized to maximize savings. To examine the association between Medicare savings and primary care visit patterns. This retrospective cohort study used data from a 5% sample of traditional Medicare claims from 2016 to 2019. Participants had at least 3 primary care visits with at least 180 days between the first and the last visit, were not enrolled in Medicare Advantage, did not have end-stage kidney disease, and were not institutionalized. Data were analyzed from June 2022 to April 2023. Primary care visit patterns: visit frequency, regularity, continuity of care. Savings in Medicare expenditures; risk-adjusted Medicare expenditures, number of emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations. Among 504 471 beneficiaries (298 422 [59.16%] women; mean [SD] age, 74.26 [10.41] years), temporally regular visits with higher continuity were associated with the highest savings. For these patients, the savings increased with increasing visit frequencies, with peak savings observed at higher visit frequencies as clinical complexity increased. As regularity and continuity decreased, the association between savings and visit frequencies progressively inverted. The group with a regular and highly continuous pattern was associated with greater savings (175.87%; 95% CI, 167.40% to 184.33%; P < .001), lower risk-adjusted expenditures (-16.61%; 95% CI, -16.73% to -16.48%; P < .001), fewer risk-adjusted ED visits (-40.49%; 95% CI, -40.55% to -40.43%; P < .001), and fewer risk-adjusted hospitalizations (-53.32%; 95% CI, -53.49% to -53.14%; P < .001) compared with the irregular noncontinuous group. In this cohort study, savings in Medicare expenditures and improvements in acute care utilization were associated with visit frequency, regularity, and continuity in primary care in an interrelated fashion such that optimization of primary care visit patterns along each axis were associated with the largest improvement in outcomes. Demonstrating the magnitude and interdependence of these associations is useful for health care professionals and policymakers as Medicare continues its transition to value-based reimbursement models.

Quality indicators and outcomes in ambulatory surgery.

Quality indicators are used to monitor the quality and safety of care in ambulatory surgery, a specialty in which major morbidity and mortality remain low. As the demand for safe and cost-effective ambulatory surgical care continues to increase, quality indicators and metrics are becoming critical tools used to provide optimal care for these patients. Quality indicators are tools used by both regulatory agencies and surgical centers to improve safety and quality of ambulatory surgical and anesthetic care. These metrics are also being used to develop value-based payment models that focus on efficient, safe, and effective patient care. Patient reported outcome measures are a growing method of collecting data on the satisfaction and postoperative recovery period for ambulatory surgical patients. Monitoring of perioperative efficiency and utilization using quality metrics are important to the financial health of ambulatory surgical centers. Quality indicators will continue to play a growing role in the monitoring of quality and safety in ambulatory surgery, especially with the trend towards value-based reimbursement models and efficient, cost-effective surgical care. Additionally, quality indicators are useful tools to monitor postoperative patient outcomes and recovery pathways and the efficiency of operating room utilization and scheduling.

The effect of patient quality measurements and HCAHPS patient satisfaction on hospital reimbursements

BACKGROUND: The Centers of Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services (CMS) links hospital reimbursements to quality metrics. Likewise, the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) program offers financial incentives to acute-care hospitals based on performance improvements on several quality measures included in the national Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey. A research gap exists with regard to assessing the effectiveness of VBP incentives on improving the patient’s quality of care. OBJECTIVE: This study is to determine whether hospitals which reported better patient quality metrics and lower frequency of pressure sores received higher reimbursements. METHODS: The data were retrieved from the CMS Care Compare website utilizing matched data from 2297 US hospitals. Information on HCAHPS, the VBP Program in Patient Safety Index, and Reimbursements was obtained for this study. Partial Least Square (PLS) was utilized thru SmartPLS 3.0 to test the hypotheses. RESULTS: The results did not reveal any financial penalties when hospitals reported lower patient quality outcomes and increased numbers of pressure sores. However, lower patient quality measures were associated with lower patient satisfaction. Controversially, lower patient satisfaction scores were associated with higher reimbursement rates overall. CONCLUSIONS: The main contribution of this study reveals that the effectiveness of value-based reimbursements and the concept of continuous improvement is constrained due to the lack of unified measurement objectives across US healthcare institutions.