An Early Look at the Effects of the Medicare Bundled Payments for Care Improvement: Evidence from Presence Health

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan Petek ◽  
Will Clark ◽  
Jonas de Souza ◽  
Heidi Graham ◽  
Svati Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bundled Payments ◽  
Care Improvement

Medicare bundles for arthroplasty

2021 ◽  
Vol 103-B (6 Supple A) ◽  
pp. 119-125
Author(s):  
Bryan D. Springer ◽  
Jordan McInerney
Keyword(s):  
Acute Care ◽  
Acute Care Hospitals ◽  
Drop Out ◽  
Retention Rates ◽  
Fee For Service ◽  
Target Price ◽  
High Performing ◽  
Bundled Payment ◽  
Bundled Payments ◽  
Care Improvement

Aims There is concern that aggressive target pricing in the new Bundled Payment for Care Improvement Advanced (BPCI-A) penalizes high-performing groups that had achieved low costs through prior experience in bundled payments. We hypothesize that this methodology incorporates unsustainable downward trends on Target Prices and will lead to groups opting out of BPCI Advanced in favour of a traditional fee for service. Methods Using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) data, we compared the Target Price factors for hospitals and physician groups that participated in both BPCI Classic and BPCI Advanced (legacy groups), with groups that only participated in BPCI Advanced (non-legacy). With rebasing of Target Prices in 2020 and opportunity for participants to drop out, we compared retention rates of hospitals and physician groups enrolled at the onset of BPCI Advanced with current enrolment in 2020. Results At its peak in July 2015, 342 acute care hospitals and physician groups participated in Lower Extremity Joint Replacement (LEJR) in BPCI Classic. At its peak in March 2019, 534 acute care hospitals and physician groups participated in LEJR in BPCI Advanced. In January 2020, only 14.5% of legacy hospitals and physician groups opted to stay in BPCI Advanced for LEJR. Analysis of Target Price factors by legacy hospitals during both programmes demonstrates that participants in BPCI Classic received larger negative adjustments on the Target Price than non-legacy hospitals. Conclusion BPCI Advanced provides little opportunity for a reduction in cost to offset a reduced Target Price for efficient providers, as made evident by the 85.5% withdrawal rate for BPCI Advanced. Efficient providers in BPCI Advanced are challenged by the programme’s application of trend and efficiency factors that presumes their cost reduction can continue to decline at the same rate as non-efficient providers. It remains to be seen if reverting back to Medicare fee for service will support the same level of care and quality achieved in historical bundled payment programmes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):119–125.

2020 John N. Insall Award: Removal of total knee arthroplasty from the inpatient-only list adversely affects bundled payment programmes

2020 ◽  
Vol 102-B (6_Supple_A) ◽  
pp. 19-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Yayac ◽  
Nicholas Schiller ◽  
Matthew S. Austin ◽  
P. Maxwell Courtney
Keyword(s):  
Total Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Hospital Inpatient ◽  
Target Price ◽  
Bundled Payment ◽  
Bundled Payments ◽  
Medicare Patients ◽  
Total Knee ◽  
Care Improvement ◽  
The Impact

Aims The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of the removal of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) from the Medicare Inpatient Only (IPO) list on our Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) Initiative in 2018. Methods We examined our institutional database to identify all Medicare patients who underwent primary TKA from 2017 to 2018. Hospital inpatient or outpatient status was cross-referenced with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) claims data. Demographics, comorbidities, and outcomes were compared between patients classified as ‘outpatient’ and ‘inpatient’ TKA. Episode-of-care BPCI costs were then compared from 2017 to 2018. Results Of the 2,135 primary TKA patients in 2018, 908 (43%) were classified as an outpatient and were excluded from BPCI. Inpatient classified patients had longer mean length of stay (1.9 (SD 1.4) vs 1.4 (SD 1.7) days, p < 0.001) and higher rates of discharge to rehabilitation (17% vs 3%, p < 0.001). Post-acute care costs increased when comparing the BPCI patients from 2017 to 2018, ($5,037 (SD $7,792) vs $5793 (SD $8,311), p = 0.010). The removal of TKA from the IPO list turned a net savings of $53,805 in 2017 into a loss of $219,747 in 2018 for our BPCI programme. Conclusions Following the removal of TKA from the IPO list, nearly half of the patients at our institution were inappropriately classified as an outpatient. Our target price was increased and our institution realized a substantial loss in 2018 BPCI despite strong quality metrics. CMS should address its negative implications on bundled payment programmes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6 Supple A):19–23.

scholarly journals Bundled Payments for Care Improvement

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (6) ◽  
pp. 313-319 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauran Hardin ◽  
Adam Kilian ◽  
Elizabeth Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Bundled Payments ◽  
Care Improvement

Lack of Cost Savings for Lumbar Spine Fusions After Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Initiative

Spine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wesley H. Bronson ◽  
Matthew T. Kingery ◽  
Lorraine Hutzler ◽  
Raj Karia ◽  
Thomas Errico ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Bundled Payments ◽  
Care Improvement
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document