CMS Announces Release of 2018 National Impact Assessment of Quality Measures Report

CMS Announces Release of 2018 National Impact Assessment of Quality Measures Report

Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) conducts and publishes an assessment of the quality and efficiency impact of the use of endorsed measures in CMS programs every three years as required by statute.  The first report was published March 1, 2012 and the 2018 Impact Assessment Report is the third such report.   The data-driven results of this Report support the use of measures implemented in CMS reporting programs to drive improvement in the quality of care provided to patients in facilities and across settings nationwide.  This report is used by the measure developer community, patients and families, clinicians, providers, federal partners, and researchers.

The 2018 Impact Assessment Report demonstrates that performance on CMS measures contributed to better care and reduced expenditures, and identified critical areas of improvement across settings with respect to six CMS quality priorities:  patient safety, person and family engagement, care coordination, effective treatment, healthy living, and affordable care.

Highlights include these main findings:

  • Patient impacts estimated from improved national measure rates indicated approximately:
    • 670,000 additional patients with controlled blood pressure (2006–2015).
    • 510,000 fewer patients with poor diabetes control (2006–2015).
    • 12,000 fewer deaths following hospitalization for a heart attack (2008–2015).
    • 70,000 fewer unplanned readmissions (2011–2015).
    • 840,000 fewer pressure ulcers among nursing home residents (2011–2015).
    • 9 million more patients reporting a highly favorable experience with their hospital (2008–2015).
  • Costs avoided were estimated for a subset of Key Indicators, data permitting. The highest were associated with increased medication adherence ($4.2 billion–$26.9 billion), reduced pressure ulcers ($2.8 billion–$20.0 billion), and fewer patients with poor control of diabetes ($6.5 billion–$10.4 billion).
  • National performance trends are improving for 60% of the measures analyzed, including a majority of outcome measures, and are stable for about 31%.
  • Overwhelmingly, hospitals (92%) and nursing homes (91%) surveyed reported they consider CMS measures clinically important. Likewise, 90% of hospitals and 83% of nursing homes agreed that performance on CMS quality measures reflects improvements in care. Respondents also described barriers to reporting, including burden; barriers to improving performance; and unintended consequences of CMS measures.

CMS introduces new payment model for both inpatient and outpatient care

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced the launch of a new voluntary bundled payment model called Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced (BPCI Advanced). Under traditional fee-for-service payment, Medicare pays providers for each individual service they perform. Under this bundled payment model, participants can earn additional payment if all expenditures for a beneficiary’s episode of care are under a spending target that factors in quality.

Bundled payments create incentives for providers and practitioners to work together to coordinate care and engage in continuous improvement to keep spending under a target amount. BPCI Advanced participants may receive payments for performance on 32 different clinical episodes which are listed below.

Of note, BPCI Advanced will qualify as an Advanced Alternative Payment Model (Advanced APM) under the Quality Payment Program (QPP). Under Advanced APMs, providers take on financial risk to earn the Advanced APM incentive payment.

BPCI Advanced will operate under a total-cost-of-care concept, in which the total Medicare fee for services (FFS) spending on all items and services furnished to a BPCI Advanced Beneficiary during the  Clinical Episode, including outlier payments, will be part of the Clinical Episode expenditures for purposes of the Target Price and reconciliation calculations, unless specifically excluded.

Clinical Episodes

BPCI Advanced will initially include 29 inpatient Clinical Episodes and 3 outpatient Clinical Episodes. Participants selected to participate in BPCI Advanced beginning on October 1, 2018, must commit to be held accountable for one or more Clinical Episodes and may not add or drop such Clinical Episodes until January 1, 2020.

Inpatient Clinical Episodes – 29

  • Disorders of the liver excluding malignancy, cirrhosis, alcoholic hepatitis *
    *(New episode added to BPCI Advanced)
  • Acute myocardial infarction
  • Back & neck except spinal fusion
  • Cardiac arrhythmia
  • Cardiac defibrillator
  • Cardiac valve
  • Cellulitis
  • Cervical spinal fusion
  • COPD, bronchitis, asthma
  • Combined anterior posterior spinal fusion
  • Congestive heart failure
  • Coronary artery bypass graft
  • Double joint replacement of the lower extremity
  • Fractures of the femur and hip or pelvis
  • Gastrointestinal hemorrhage
  • Gastrointestinal obstruction
  • Hip & femur procedures except major joint
  • Lower extremity/humerus procedure except hip, foot, femur
  • Major bowel procedure
  • Major joint replacement of the lower extremity
  • Major joint replacement of the upper extremity
  • Pacemaker
  • Percutaneous coronary intervention
  • Renal failure
  • Sepsis
  • Simple pneumonia and respiratory infections
  • Spinal fusion (non-cervical)
  • Stroke
  • Urinary tract infection

Outpatient Clinical Episodes – 3

  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI)
  • Cardiac Defibrillator
  • Back & Neck except Spinal Fusion

Hospital OPPS and ASC Payment System and Quality Reporting Programs Changes for 2018

On November 1, CMS issued the CY 2018 Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) and Ambulatory Surgical Center (ASC) Payment System final rule with comment period, which includes updates to the 2018 rates and quality provisions and other policy changes. CMS adopted a number of policies that will support care delivery; reduce burdens for health care providers, especially in rural areas; lower beneficiary out of pocket drug costs for certain drugs; enhance the patient-doctor relationship; and promote flexibility in healthcare.

CMS is increasing the OPPS payment rates by 1.35 percent for 2018. The change is based on the hospital market basket increase of 2.7 percent minus both a 0.6 percentage point adjustment for multi-factor productivity and a 0.75 percentage point adjustment required by law. After considering all other policy changes under the final rule, including estimated spending for pass-through payments, CMS estimates an overall impact of 1.4 percent payment increase for providers paid under the OPPS in CY 2018.

CMS updates ASC payments annually by the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers (CPI-U). The Medicare statute specifies a Multi-Factor Productivity (MFP) adjustment to the ASC annual update. For CY 2018, the CPI-U update is 1.7 percent. The MFP adjustment is 0.5 percent, resulting in a CY 2018 MFP-adjusted CPI-U update factor of 1.2 percent. Including enrollment, case-mix, and utilization changes, total ASC payments are projected to increase approximately 3 percent in 2018.

Physician Fee Schedule Final Policy for Calendar Year 2018

On November 2, CMS issued a final rule that includes updates to payment policies, payment rates, and quality provisions for services furnished under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) on or after January 1, 2018.

The overall update to payments under the PFS based on the finalized CY 2018 rates will be +0.41 percent. This update reflects the +0.50 percent update established under the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015, reduced by 0.09 percent, due to the misvalued code target recapture amount, required under the Achieving a Better Life Experience Act of 2014. After applying these adjustments, and the budget neutrality adjustment to account for changes in Relative Value Units, all required by law, the final 2018 PFS conversion factor is $35.99, an increase to the 2017 PFS conversion factor of $35.89. 

Highlights of Quality Payment Program for Year 2 (Calendar Year 2018) Under MACRA

Here are the highlights of the Final Rule for QPP for Year 2 under MACRA as announced by CMS yesterday:

• Weighting the MIPS Cost performance category to 10% of your total MIPS final score, and the Quality performance category to 50%.
• Raising the MIPS performance threshold to 15 points in Year 2 (from 3 points in the transition year).
• Allowing the use of 2014 Edition and/or 2015 Certified Electronic Health Record Technology (CEHRT) in Year 2 for the Advancing Care Information performance category, and giving a bonus for using only 2015 CEHRT.
• Awarding up to 5 bonus points on your MIPS final score for treatment of complex patients.
• Automatically weighting the Quality, Advancing Care Information, and Improvement Activities performance categories at 0% of the MIPS final score for clinicians impacted by Hurricanes Irma, Harvey and Maria and other natural disasters.
• Adding 5 bonus points to the MIPS final scores of small practices.
• Adding Virtual Groups as a participation option for MIPS.
• Issuing an interim final rule with comment for extreme and uncontrollable circumstances where clinicians can be automatically exempt from these categories in the transition year without submitting a hardship exception application (note that Cost has a 0% weight in the transition year) if they were have been affected by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria, which occurred during the 2017 MIPS performance period.
• Decreasing the number of doctors and clinicians required to participate as a way to provide further flexibility by excluding individual MIPS eligible clinicians or groups with ≤$90,000 in Part B allowed charges or ≤200 Medicare Part B beneficiaries.
• Providing more detail on how eligible clinicians participating in selected APMs (known as MIPS APMs) will be assessed under the APM scoring standard.
• Creating additional flexibilities and pathways to allow clinicians to be successful under the All Payer Combination Option. This option will be available beginning in performance year 2019.

EMRs Taking Away Close to One-Third of Physicians’ Work Time – AMA

The EMR Time Crunch

A common complaint among physicians across practices and specialties has been the amount of time that was previously spent attending to patients is now being occupied by clinical documentation.  These time disparities can have adverse effects on physician-patient relationships, and also limit the number of patients able to receive care from a physician or practice. Value-based purchasing models are frequently the basis for physician reimbursements, and because these models require extensive documentation to accurately report the quality and cost of care, the EMR software physicians are required to use is becoming increasingly complex and time consuming.

AMA Findings

A recent study conducted by the American Medical Association focusing specifically on the use of electronic health records in academic centers concluded that an average of 27% of the participating Ophthalmologists’ time spent on patient examinations was occupied by EMR use. On average a total of 5.8 minutes per patient and 3.7 hours was spent working in EMR on any given full day of clinic.  The study also found a negative association between the amount of time spent on EMR per patient encounter and overall clinic patient volume.

The AMA study concluded what many physicians have been expressing for years: doctors have limited time to spend with patients while they are spending more time within EMRs. Aside from the strain EMR places on physicians’ time and patient relationships, it is also creating cumbersome clerical burdens when completed incorrectly or hastily. Large swaths of copied and pasted text create bloated and messy records, and a lack of training and technical knowledge can result in incorrect coding, medical errors, and frequent interruptions in the documentation process.

Physician Dissatisfaction

The amount of physician dissatisfaction has also grown with the increased implementation of EMRs. Nearly half of all physicians report feeling unsatisfied with their work-life balance, and 57% of physicians display signs of burnout. The additional time requirements of clinical documentation are a significant factor in both of these statistics. Physicians are spending an increasing amount of time outside of regular work hours completing EMRs, and an increasingly less amount of time on actual patient care and interaction. This has led to heightened levels of stress and job dissatisfaction.

Looking Forward

While the path hasn’t always been an easy one, electronic medical records are here to stay, and they do present a plethora of benefits to clinical documentation, patient care, and bottom lines. The challenge that needs to be addressed is how to make EMRs efficient and thorough, while minimizing the amount of time physicians are required to spend on them.  Perhaps the solution for better EMR efficiency lies within a hybrid workflow — a workflow that combines the traditional model of medical transcription, where physicians dictate patient encounters and trained transcriptionists and coders review the reports for accuracy and sufficiency, combined with the advantages of using a modern day EMR is the most efficient way to ensure document quality and lessen the time burden EMRs place on physicians. When the responsibility of clinical documentation is not placed solely on the physician, doctors will be able to attend to more patients, improve patient relationships, and increase their job satisfaction.

The Prevalence and Consequences of Medical Errors in American Medicine

Part I

There are numerous records that we maintain, or are maintained on us, over the course of our lives.  Our school records track our grades and accolades. Our public records track our civic life and criminality. Our resumes document our accomplishments and abilities.  And our medical records compile the history of our overall health and wellness throughout the course of our lives. Inevitably, we are all dependent on the precision of these records to portray ourselves truthfully. Any inaccuracy could have a monumental impact on some aspect of our lives. Missing credits could keep us from graduating. A mistake in our criminal background could result in the loss of liberties. And an error in our medical records could cost us our health, perhaps even our lives.

 

Patient Perception on Healthcare Safety

We trust doctors, as we should. They’re dedicated, intelligent, and went to school a lot longer than most of us did, so we put our health and well-being in their hands and trust that they will know how to fix us and keep us healthy.  A recent study out of the University of Chicago and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement found that 90% of Americans interacted with some kind of healthcare provider in the last year, and that most people’s experiences were positive. The care was comprehensive, the physicians were attentive, and they understood how to care for themselves after their visits. (1) Over all, Americans do not feel that they run the risk of experiencing a medical error. However, this could largely be contributed to a general misunderstanding of what, exactly, constitutes one.

 

Defining “Medical Error” and Patient Experience

For most of us, the thought of “medical error” conjures images of a scalpel left inside of us after a surgery or something else gruesome, newsworthy, and incredibly unlikely to ever occur. In reality, a medical error can mean a simple miswording in diagnoses, perhaps stating an injury to a right foot instead of left, or a few switched numbers in a medical code show you diagnosed and treated with something else entirely. The same study found that, after having the term “medical error” defined to them, 21% of participants expressed that they had personally experienced a medical error, while 31% said that they had cared for someone who had experienced one.  All total, 41% of adults in the United States have either personally experienced a medical error in their own care, or were directly involved in caring for someone who had. (1)

The Consequences of Medical Errors

When it comes to medical errors, 41% is a disparaging, and frankly, frightening number, especially considering that 73% of people who reported experiencing a medical error or caring for someone who had said that the mistake had some kind of long term or permanent health detriment or financial impact. There is also a clear correlation between medial errors and harm with 36% of patients who reported personally experiencing a medical error also reporting that they had been harmed while receiving medical care. (1)

Another alarming statistic coming out of this study is that only about 1/3 of the participants who reported experiencing a medical error were made aware of the error by someone at the facility where they were treated. Around half of the participants brought their medical error to the attention of medical personnel on their own. (1) The important assumption to then take from this data, is that not only are medical errors occurring frequently, most of them are not being caught by medical personnel or facility staff. This leads then to the even larger issue of medical disparity, as medical record errors tend to impact vulnerable populations more so than populations with greater health literacy, a factor closely tied to education and income.(1)

Of the participants who reported dealing with medical errors, 59% reported that the error was centered around diagnosis, where the patient was either diagnosed incorrectly, had a delayed diagnosis, or was not diagnosed at all when they were, in fact, ill or injured. (1) The reasons for misdiagnosis are broad and varying, and misdiagnosis is the leading cause of medical malpractice suits in the United States. Diagnostic errors can have dire, long lasting, and even fatal consequences for patients, and yet they are so common that nearly everyone will experience at least one incorrect or delayed diagnosis in their lifetime. (2)

The question then becomes, what is causing such a high prevalence of medical errors and what can be done to rectify that?

Changes in Medical Documentation and Resulting Challenges

In 2004, thanks to new government incentives, medical records began to change with a push from paper charts to electronic archives. While the benefits of EMRs are undeniable—they can lower costs, enhance efficiency, and make patient records immediately available across care settings– the transition, unfortunately, has been less than smooth. Many medical facilities are still scrambling to fully and comprehensively changeover. (3)

One of the biggest hinderances to care and sources of medical errors is the extra documentation burden that now falls on doctors. Prior to EMR, physicians would fill out charts or record their observations, and those documents would then go to a trained medical transcriptionist, a coding expert, and then a billing specialist. In this new system of clinical documentation, doctors are responsible for filling out patient charts and coding, often using clunky systems that they are ill-trained to use. (3) Not only does this result in a substantial amount of physicians’ time shifting from patient interaction to documentation as they navigate unfamiliar and complicated computer programs, but it also drastically reduces the potential for any mistakes that physicians might have made to be caught and queried by professionals trained in transcription and coding. 

In addition to the obvious consequences placed on patients when medical errors arise from EMR complications, medical documentation is also a significant factor in the increasing rise of physician burnout. Physicians report higher levels of job dissatisfaction when the amount of time they spend on documentation encroaches on, and even surpasses in many cases, the amount of time they spend on patient care. (4) Essentially, new clinical documentation standards are forcing doctors to perform tasks and use technology with which they’ve had practically no training, resulting in transitional delays with the learning curve, professional frustrations, and a high prevalence of mistakes.

 

New Solutions in Traditional Practices

Medical errors are costly and dangerous and combatting them is a top priority in patient safety and hospital efficiency. With EMR hiccups contributing to a substantial amount of errors in medical documentation, the most obvious solution to begin combating medical error is to elevate the quality, capabilities, and usability of clinical documentation workflows. New software solutions and technology, specifically backend speech recognition and natural language processing, are capable of significantly improving the quality and accuracy of medical transcriptions.

The traditional transcription model where physicians dictate patient encounters and trained transcriptionists and coders review the reports to ensure quality and integrity is by far the most comprehensive way to prevent medical errors. Thanks to advancements in transcription technologies, the cost of transcription has come down significantly, and can more than offset the costs accumulated as a result of the medical errors it can eliminate. With new solutions and technologies, the outlook for not only reducing medical error, but enhancing the entire system of medical transcription and diagnosis, is exciting and promising.           

SAINCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE 89TH ANNUAL AHIMA CONVENTION AND EXHIBIT

Saince Will Be Exhibiting Several of Its Clinical Documentation Solutions at This Year’s Convention in Los Angeles, CA – October 7-11

Alpharetta, GA, October 2, 2017– In the ever-changing world of value based healthcare, hospitals and health systems are scrambling to keep up with the rapid shift from predominantly inpatient revenues to outpatient revenues. In today’s healthcare system, the ability to track patient risk pools across care settings (outpatient, inpatient, and ER) is crucial for hospitals to maximize their reimbursements, increase their quality scores, and improve patient outcomes. In this climate, the quality of clinical documentation is paramount. The challenge many care providers are faced with is how to efficiently and seamlessly expand their current inpatient CDI programs into outpatient settings, and ensure that physicians in outpatient settings are appropriately and adequately documenting the care provided to patients.

Saince, Inc. will be participating in the 89th annual American Health Information Management Association’s (AHIMA) Convention and Exhibit demonstrating several of its revolutionary clinical documentation improvement solutions specifically designed to effectively manage and improve hospital workflows and productivity in both inpatient and outpatient settings. Among the programs being demonstrated, Saince will also reveal the newest version of PracticePerfect, Saince’s groundbreaking outpatient CDI technology.  Convention participants can visit Saince at booth number 905 to learn about the clinical documentation and integrity solutions that are helping hospitals across the country to improve their case mix index and protect reimbursements.

PracticePerfect™- The industry’s first and most advanced outpatient CDI solution — fast, easy, and efficient.

Doc-U-Aide – The most advanced clinical documentation improvement technology available on the market today, designed by CDI specialists for CDI specialists.

Additionally, Saince invites everyone who will be attending the AHIMA convention to participate in their Twitter scavenger hunt which will take place in and around the Los Angeles Convention Center.  Participants are eligible to win prizes and the winner will be gifted the grand prize of a Google Home at the end of the convention on Wednesday!  Play and follow along by following @Saince_inc on Twitter and using hashtag #Saince2017.

This year’s convention will run from October 7-12 in at the Los Angeles Convention Center in Los Angeles, California.

About Saince: Saince is a 15-year-old, award winning clinical documentation solutions and services company based in Atlanta, GA. Saince is well recognized for its innovative solutions that help healthcare providers navigate and thrive in the fast, changing healthcare industry landscape. Saince helps hospitals of all sizes and specialties – from critical access hospitals to large health systems- in saving costs, improving reimbursements, and enhancing quality of care.

Saince 2017 AHIMA Convention Scavenger Hunt

Saince will be participating in this year’s AHIMA Convention and Exhibit in Los Angeles, and will be hosting a Twitter scavenger hunt for event attendees! 

To play, take pictures of the following people, places, and objects and tweet them to @Saince_Inc using the hashtag #Saince2017.

All participants are eligible to win prizes and the winner of the scavenger hunt will receive the grand prize of a Google Home!

The Cost of Care: How AI is Revolutionizing Healthcare and Driving Down Prices

The cost of healthcare is once again at the center of a national debate.  With premiums rising, the baby boomers aging, and diabetes, the most expensive disease in the world, affecting 10% of the US population, the rising cost of healthcare in America is an issue that affects all of us.  In the past, the implementation of new and emerging technologies in healthcare has contributed to the climbing costs. In contrast, the application of AI into healthcare is promising to drive those costs down.

Healthcare is an enormously expensive industry and the costs are steadily climbing.  According to World Book, in 2014 healthcare made up 17.1% of the GDP of the United States– up 4% from 1995, and continuing to grow.  The application of artificial intelligence into healthcare is promising to greatly reduce these expanding expenses while improving healthcare quality and access.  By 2026, it’s estimated $150 billion could be saved annually in the US healthcare economy by AI applications. It’s no wonder that healthcare is currently the number one investor in AI.

One of the areas in healthcare that will be most significantly impacted by the application of artificial intelligence is clinical documentation. AI applications in medical workflow management are estimated to accumulate $18 billion in annual savings for the healthcare industry by 2026, the third largest estimated savings from AI technology in healthcare after robotic surgery and virtual assistants.  Modern healthcare AI is capable of learning and comprehending and can perform clinical healthcare functions in much the same way as a human, minus human error.

Physician error in clinical documentation is an understandable yet costly complication in healthcare, and AI is able to streamline the tedious clinical documentation process and automatically generate accurate and complete reports.  Many AI healthcare programs are capable of fully augmenting human behavior and can perform tasks from risk analysis to patient diagnosis. Physician engagement in clinical documentation is a critical component to the quality and costs of healthcare, and AI applications are proving to increase physician engagement and improve clinical documentation quality.

With so much potential to improve not only healthcare costs, but also access and quality, the AI health market is currently experiencing a boom, and is expected to grow into a $6.6 billion dollar industry by 2021. This growth makes sense when you consider that the nation and the world are currently facing a shortage of doctors and healthcare personnel, and AI offers hospitals and physician practices a way to combat their rising operational and labor costs, while enabling them to better perform critical administrative functions quickly, accurately, and cost effectively.

Artificial Intelligence seems like the wave of the future, but the reality is, the future is here. In today’s medical environment of value-based care, appropriate reimbursements are incumbent upon accurate, high quality clinical documentation. As AI continues to grow and evolve, AI enabled clinical documentation improvement technology will continue to transform the healthcare industry, improving patient outcomes and optimizing revenue.