PPACA - payment based on care, not volume

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
This is basically where we're headed, irrespective of the PPACA. The current fee-for-service environment is unsustainable, and isn't delivering the outcomes one would expect for the costs.

Healthcare costs are directly tied to the robustness of a nation's primary care infrastructure, and the emphasis placed on prevention and chronic disease management. Chronic diseases are bankrupting our system. By working to prevent these in the first place, and by optimizing the care for those who have them, serious (and expensive) complications are avoided. Having a single physician who coordinates care in a team-based model is far more efficient and cost-effective than our present fragmented "system" wherein many patients have a specialist for every body system, waste and duplication of effort abounds, and cooperation and communication is almost nonexistent. Paying physicians for the quality of care they deliver, based on measured outcomes, rather than as pieceworkers on an assembly line, has the potential to not only improve care, but reduce costs, boost the physician's bottom line, and improve both physician and patient satisfaction.

The devil is in the details, and those remain a work in progress. There are already lots of Patient Centered Medical Home (PCMH) programs in place which have reported excellent results. Google "Patient Centered Primary Care Collaborative" to see what IBM is doing.

ACOs are simply another way to implement the PCMH in an integrated setting which incorporates hospital and specialty care in a risk-sharing model.

Payment in the PCMH setting usually involves a care management fee in addition to fee-for-service, with bonuses for quality, outcomes, and/or cost savings.

http://www.pcpcc.net/

http://www.aafp.org/online/en/home/membership/initiatives/pcmh.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So at this point, we can't define quality? I was guessing it would be something along the lines of reducing a BP of 160+ down to 130 and keeping it there for years or dropping a patient's A1c down from 11% down to 6-7% or so and keeping it there for years. I'm also guessing a problem with that is patient autonomy; we can throw all the medicine, education, and counseling we want, but there will be some people who will absolutely refuse to give up the McD's diet, no?
 
No, we have a pretty good handle on the quality measures.

And, yes...ideally, patients will have some skin in the game. Good behaviors should be rewarded. Bad behaviors, not so much.
 
We use several quality measures in our practice. They are based on the Medicare/aid guidelines with the goal of increasing reimbursement as we move toward payment for numbers. These are some of the measures we track:

  • HbAlc at least twice yearly in known diabetics
  • Pap within the last 1-2 years for women 21-65yo
  • Mammograms yearly for women >40yo
  • LDL <70 for those with 2+ risk factors
  • Colon CA screening via colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy or stool hemoccult x 3 in patients 50-75yo
  • Smoking cessation and/or wt control mentioned at every visit
We also track our patient surveys for Excellent ratings, too, since we are expected to be nice, friendly and provide good customer service often regardless of the quality of medicine



I'm not sure how we (as a profession) will reconcile these two goals.
 
Thank you so much for this information.

There is a thread on Reddit addressing doctor pay issues. Here is the link, and please scroll down to 1/1/2015:

http://www.reddit.com/tb/vbkfm

Your reactions to that post would be most appreciated, plus:

When doctor pay is determined by quality of care, will doctors be penalized if patients don't follow directions (for example, refuses to quit smoking or declines tests or medications?

Will doctors be more inclined to "dump" patients who don't follow directions?

Will doctors be more inclined to enter a practice that does not service Medicare or Medicaid patients thereby limiting doctor access for lower income patients?
 
When doctor pay is determined by quality of care, will doctors be penalized if patients don't follow directions (for example, refuses to quit smoking or declines tests or medications?

It's feasible, I suppose. Obviously, this could have unintended consequences...

Will doctors be more inclined to "dump" patients who don't follow directions?

...like that.

Will doctors be more inclined to enter a practice that does not service Medicare or Medicaid patients thereby limiting doctor access for lower income patients?

You mean, more than we already are? That's hard to imagine.
 
It's feasible, I suppose. Obviously, this could have unintended consequences...



...like that.



You mean, more than we already are? That's hard to imagine.

I think that's going to be the biggest unintended consequence of the pay for performance idea - firing noncompliant patients. If medicaid isn't paying you much to begin with, I'm not sure many practices would be thrilled with seeing patients who, because of their own actions, result in even less payment when they don't take their insulin.
 
Top