Year 1 of the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement-Advanced model

BACKGROUND: The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation launched the Medicare Bundled Payments for Care Improvement-Advanced (BPCI-A) program for hospitals in October 2018. Information is needed about the effects of the program on health care utilization and Medicare payments. METHODS: We conducted a modified segmented regression analysis using Medicare claims and including patients with discharge dates from January 2017 through September 2019 to assess differences between BPCI-A participants and two control groups: hospitals that never joined the BPCI-A program (nonjoining hospitals) and hospitals that joined the BPCI-A program in January 2020, after the conclusion of the intervention period (late-joining hospitals). The primary outcomes were the differences in changes in quarterly trends in 90-day per-episode Medicare payments and the percentage of patients with readmission within 90 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes were mortality, volume, and case mix. RESULTS: A total of 826 BPCI-A participant hospitals were compared with 2016 nonjoining hospitals and 334 late-joining hospitals. Among BPCI-A hospitals, the mean baseline 90-day per-episode Medicare payment was $27,315; the change in the quarterly trends in the intervention period as compared with baseline was -$78 per quarter. Among nonjoining hospitals, the mean baseline 90-day per-episode Medicare payment was $25,994; the change in quarterly trends as compared with baseline was -$26 per quarter (difference between nonjoining hospitals and BPCI-A hospitals, $52 [95$26,807; the change in the quarterly trends as compared with baseline was $4 per quarter (difference between late-joining hospitals and BPCI-A hospitals,$82 [95% CI, 41 to 122] per quarter; P\u3c0.001; 0.3% of the baseline payment). There were no meaningful differences in the changes with regard to readmission, mortality, volume, or case mix. CONCLUSIONS: The BPCI-A program was associated with small reductions in Medicare payments among participating hospitals as compared with control hospitals. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.)

Associations between social risk factors and surgical site infections after colectomy and abdominal hysterectomy

Importance: Surgical site infection (SSI) is an important patient safety outcome. Although social risk factors have been linked to many adverse health outcomes, it is unknown whether such factors are associated with higher rates of SSI. Objectives: To determine whether social risk factors, including race/ethnicity, insurance status, and neighborhood income, are associated with higher rates of SSI after colectomy or abdominal hysterectomy, 2 surgical procedures for which SSI rates are publicly reported and included in pay-for-performance programs by Medicare and other groups. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed adults undergoing colectomy or abdominal hysterectomy, as captured in State Inpatient Databases for Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maryland, New York, and Vermont. Operations were performed in 2013 through 2014 at general acute care hospitals in the United States. Data analysis was conducted from October 2018 through June 2019. Exposures: Colectomy or hysterectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Postoperative complex SSI rates. Results: A total of 149 741 patients met the inclusion criteria, including 90 210 patients undergoing colectomies (mean [SD] age, 63.4 [15.6] years; 49 029 [54%] female; 74% white, 11% black, 9% Hispanic, and 5% other or unknown race/ethnicity) and 59 531 patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomies (mean [SD] age, 49.8 [11.8] years; 100% female; 52% white, 26% black, 14% Hispanic, and 8% other or unknown race/ethnicity). In the colectomy cohort, 34% had private insurance, 52% had Medicare, 9% had Medicaid, and 5% had other or unknown insurance or were uninsured; 24% were from the lowest quartile of median zip code income. In the hysterectomy cohort, 57% had private insurance, 16% had Medicare, 19% had Medicaid, and 3% had other or unknown insurance or were uninsured; 27% were from the lowest-income zip codes. Within 30 days of surgery, SSI rates were 2.55% for the colectomy cohort and 0.61% for the hysterectomy cohort. For colectomy, black race (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.82) was associated with lower odds of SSI, whereas Medicare (AOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.10-1.41), Medicaid (AOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06-1.44), and low neighborhood income (AOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.29) were associated with higher odds of SSI. For hysterectomy, no social risk factors that were examined in this study had statistically significant associations with SSI after adjustment for clinical risk. Conclusions and Relevance: Inconsistent associations between social risk factors and SSIs were found. For colectomy, infection prevention programs targeting low-income groups may be important for reducing disparities in this postoperative outcome, and policy makers could consider taking social risk factors into account when evaluating hospital performance

Association Between Race, Neighborhood, and Medicaid Enrollment and Outcomes in Medicare Home Health Care

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142524/1/jgs15082_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142524/2/jgs15082.pd

Changes in racial equity associated with participation in the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced Program

IMPORTANCE: The Medicare alternative payment models are designed to incentivize cost reduction and quality improvement, but there are no requirements established for evaluating the outcomes of the Medicare populations. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether participation in the Medicare Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced (BPCI-A) program was associated with narrowing or widening of Black and White racial inequities in outcomes and access. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort alternative payment models on equity and quality for disadvantaged populations were studied between April 6, 2021, and August 28, 2022, in US hospitals. Black and White Medicare beneficiaries admitted for any of the 29 inpatient conditions in the BPCI-A program between January 1, 2017, and September 31, 2019, were included. EXPOSURES: BPCI-A participation implemented in 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Ninety-day readmission and mortality, healthy days at home, and proportion of Black patients hospitalized. Segmented regression models were used to examine quarterly changes in slopes for each outcome. RESULTS: The sample included 6 690 336 episodes (6 019 359 White patients, 670 977 Black patients). The population comprised approximately 43% men, 57% women, 17% individuals younger than 65 years, 47% between ages 65 and 80 years, and 36% older than 80 years. Prior to implementation of the BPCI-A program, compared with episodes for White patients, Black patients had higher 90-day readmissions (36.3% vs 29.6%), similar 90-day mortality (12.3% vs 13.3%), and fewer healthy days at home (mean, 68.5 vs 69.5 days). BPCI-A participation was not associated with significant changes in the racial gap in readmissions but was associated with a greater gain in heathy days at home (differences by race, -0.07 days per quarter; 95% CI, -0.12 to -0.01 days per quarter). Among Black patients admitted to BPCI-A hospitals vs controls, healthy days at home increased by 0.09 more days/episode per quarter (95% CI, 0.02-0.17 days/episode per quarter). The proportion of Black patients decreased similarly at BPCI-A and control hospitals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cohort study, BPCI-A participation was not associated with improvements in racial inequities in clinical outcomes. Black patients in BPCI-A had a slight gain in healthy days at home; there were no changes in access. The findings of this study suggest that more needs to be done if payment policy reform is going to be part of the efforts to address glaring racial inequities in health care quality and outcomes. These findings support a need for payment policy reform specifically targeting equity-enhancing programs

Comparison of performance of psychiatrists vs other outpatient physicians in the 2020 US Medicare Merit-Based Incentive Payment System

Importance: Medicare\u27s Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is a new, mandatory, outpatient value-based payment program that ties reimbursement to performance on cost and quality measures for many US clinicians. However, it is currently unknown how the program measures the performance of psychiatrists, who often treat a different patient case mix with different clinical considerations than do other outpatient clinicians. Objective: To compare performance scores and value-based reimbursement for psychiatrists vs other outpatient physicians in the 2020 MIPS. Design Setting and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Provider Data Catalog was used to identify outpatient Medicare physicians listed in the National Downloadable File between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020, who participated in the 2020 MIPS and received a publicly reported final performance score. Data from the 593 863 clinicians participating in the 2020 MIPS were used to compare differences in the 2020 MIPS performance scores and value-based reimbursement (based on performance in 2018) for psychiatrists vs other physicians, adjusting for physician, patient, and practice area characteristics. Exposures: Participation in MIPS. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were final MIPS performance score and negative (penalty), positive, and exceptional performance bonus payment adjustments. Secondary outcomes were scores in the MIPS performance domains: quality, promoting interoperability, improvement activities, and cost. Results: This study included 9356 psychiatrists (3407 [36.4%] female and 5 949 [63.6%] male) and 196 306 other outpatient physicians (69 221 [35.3%] female and 127 085 [64.7%] male) (data on age and race are not available). Compared with other physicians, psychiatrists were less likely to be affiliated with a safety-net hospital (2119 [22.6%] vs 64 997 [33.1%]) or a major teaching hospital (2148 [23.0%] vs 53 321 [27.2%]) and had lower annual Medicare patient volume (181 vs 437 patients) and mean patient risk scores (1.65 vs 1.78) ( Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study that compared US psychiatrists with other outpatient physicians, psychiatrists had significantly lower 2020 MIPS performance scores, were penalized more frequently, and received fewer bonuses. Policy makers should evaluate whether current MIPS performance measures appropriately assess the performance of psychiatrists