POPULATION HEALTH MANAGEMENT: VALUE- BASED PAYMENT MODELS: CARE REDESIGN IN TOTAL JOINT REPLACEMENT HCSRN Conference: April 2016

Transcription

1 POPULATION HEALTH MANAGEMENT: VALUE- BASED PAYMENT MODELS: CARE REDESIGN IN TOTAL JOINT REPLACEMENT HCSRN Conference: April 2016

2 TAMARA CULL, NATIONAL DIRECTOR, POPULATION HEALTH ACCOUNT MANAGEMENT Tamara Cull, DHA, MSW, LCSW, ACM is currently the National Director of Population Health Account Management for Catholic Health Initiatives with leadership responsibility for Value Based Programs and Operations. Prior to this role at CHI, Dr. Cull served for over 20 years in acute hospital settings as the System Director of Care Management. Dr. Cull holds a Doctorate Degree in Health Administration from Medical University of South Carolina and a Master s Degree in Social Work. 2

3

4

5 CARE MODEL REDESIGN: TOTAL KNEE/HIP REPLACEMENT

6 WE ARE CHARGED WITH UNDERSTANDING THE PATIENT S FULL EXPERIENCE IN ORDER TO IMPACT OVERALL QUALITY OF CARE Patient experiences pain and finds CHI through internet search, Primary Care referral, or WOM Patient has initial clinic visit and decides to move forward with procedure Patient completes registration, preadmission paperwork, and is walked through Pre- Op process Patient attends Joint Camp Patient receives EKG, Labs, and other Diagnostics ordered in Pre-Op Final Pre-Op Visit Surgery, Pre-Post Anesthesia Care DAY OF SURGERY: Hospital Registration/ Admission, Surgery Prep, Consents Signed, Assessments Completed, further labs, diagnostics as needed Awaits bed placement in PACU Care team assessments (by MD, RN, SW, CM, PT) Attends Joint Camp Therapy until IP care completed, Criteria met Final Assessment, Med Reconciliation DISCHARGE TO HOME Post-Op Visit Ongoing communication with Care Team Outpatient Physical Therapy 6

7 Physician Clinic Diagnosti cs TRADITIONAL COST CENTER APPROACHES GENERATE SILOS OR Scheduling Supply Chain OR Pharma cy Social Work ED OP Therapy Home Health 7

8 HEALTHCARE S NEW DEMANDS REQUIRE SERVICE LINE APPROACHES THAT EMBRACE FULL-CONTINUUM STRATEGIES SERVICE LINE 8

9 CARE REDESIGN/BUNDLED PAYMENT: OUTCOMES AND RESEARCH

10 CHI IS INVESTED IN POPULATION HEALTH Facility Location Phase Launch Date Procedure(s) CHI St. Vincent Infirmary Medical Center Little Rock, AR Phase October 1, Total Knee/Hip Replacement Council Bluffs, Phase January 1, Total Knee/Hip CHI Health, Alegent Mercy Council Bluff IA Replacement CHI Health, St. Elizabeth Regional Phase January 1, Total Knee/Hip Lincoln, NE Medical Center Replacement Phase January 1, Total Knee/Hip CHI Health, Good Samaritan Hospital Kearney, NE Replacement October 2013-December 2014 CHI Results Achieved CMS Savings Achieved Internal Cost Savings Improved Patient Satisfaction Decreased Readmissio ns by 46% Decreased SNF Utilization 10

11 TAMARA CULL, DHA RESEARCH STUDY SUMMARY

12 THE NEW ERA OF HEALTHCARE: CATHOLIC HEALTH INITIATIVES JOURNEY WITH BUNDLED PAYMENT FOR CARE IMPROVEMENT IN TOTAL JOINT REPLACEMENTS Doctoral Project Tamara Cull, Medical university of South Carolina Committee Chair: Abby Kazley, PHD Committee members: Karen a. wager, DBA Christopher Stanley, MD 12

13 Abstract Background Purpose and Need of the Study Literature Review Research Method & Design Research Questions Summary of Findings Conclusions Limitations Recommendations OUTLINE 13

14 This study examined the relationships between total costs of care and total readmission rates for Medicare patients undergoing major joint replacement of the lower extremity (knee/hip arthroplasty) at one of four Catholic Health Initiatives (CHI) facilities participating in both Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the BPCI program by using complete Medicare claims data for beneficiaries. Both univariate and multivariate models were utilized to examine the impact of the BPCI initiative on costs and readmissions. Findings from this study suggest a relationship between Phase 2 BPCI participation and decreased costs. Hospitals participating in the Phase 2 BPCI program had total episode costs that were $3,333 per episode lower than hospitals participating in the Phase 1 BPCI program. There was no statistically significant evidence of decreased readmissions for Phase 2 BPCI participants. Practice Implications: Findings from this study have direct implications for ongoing episode-based payment initiatives aimed at improving quality and decreasing costs, as they suggest that episode-based payment models have the potential to decrease total costs per episode. ABSTRACT 14

15 It is becoming clear that the traditional healthcare delivery systems are not capable of meeting the needs of the patient population or providing the necessary resources to address the rapid growth of chronic diseases in the United States (Ferrario, Moore, and Copeland, 2009, p.393) The resources currently utilized are unable to be sustained leading CMS to explore value-based payment models as an alternative to how healthcare is delivered in this country The call for change was highlighted in an Institute of Medicine report estimating that 30 to 40 cents of every health care dollar is spent on inappropriate, duplicative, or ineffective care, costing the nation between $600 and $700 billion annually (Shomaker, 2010, p.756) BACKGROUND 15

16 One of the value-based care models developed through the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation Center (CMMI) is the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative (BPCI) The BPCI model is a new innovative episode-based payment approach that focuses on improving patient experience and quality while decreasing costs. The program has 2 phases: Phase 1 (information only) and Phase 2 (up/downside financial risk to program participants) The primary goal of the BPCI program is to redesign the care delivery model by increasing care coordination among providers The bundled payment model is designed to incentivize providers to deliver the right mix of services at the right time while shifting risk from the payer to the provider (Averill et. al, 2009, p. 241) PURPOSE 16

17 Despite the large volume of pay-for value programs, such as BPCI, now active in the United States, research reveals that there is limited evidence to support the effectiveness of this approach (Ryan and Doran, 2012, p. 195) Lack of evidence to support effectiveness of the CMS BPCI program in decreasing costs and decreasing readmissions There has been little research on the overall effectiveness of the new value-based payment models in decreasing costs and improving quality Research available focuses on historical episode-based payment models not the new CMS innovation models Total knee replacement is now among the most common major surgical procedures, with approximately 600,000 total knee procedures, at an expense of $9 billion per year, performed annually in the United States (Cram et al., 2012). NEED FOR STUDY 17

18 Key definitions in this project are: BPCI: Bundled Payment for Care Improvement Initiative CMI: Case Mix Index is a relative value assigned to a diagnosis-related group of patients in a medical environment. The CMI value is used in determining the allocation of resources to care for and/or treat patients in the group CMMI: Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation CMS: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services MS-DRG: Medicare Severity Diagnostic Related Group is a system to classify hospital cases into one groups for reimbursement. Total Hip/Knee Arthroplasty: Joint replacement of the hip or knee TERMS AND DEFINITIONS 18

19 Research Question What is the impact of bundled payments on cost and quality? Sample Medicare beneficiaries in the clinical episode of care DRGs 469/470: major joint replacement of the lower extremity (hip/knee arthroplasty) receiving surgery at one of the four CHI facilities (St. Vincent, Alegent Mercy, Good Samaritan, or St. Elizabeth) participating in both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 BPCI program. Research Hypothesis 1 Participation in the Phase 2 BPCI (Bundled Payment for Care Improvement Iniative) program improves care coordination which leads to decreased costs per episode of care. Research Hypothesis 2 Participation in the Phase 2 BPCI program improves quality which leads to decreased readmission rates per episode of care. RESEARCH STUDY SUMMARY 19

20 This study was based on complete Medicare claims data for Medicare beneficiaries in the clinical episode of care DRGs 469/470: major joint replacement of the lower extremity (i.e., hip/knee arthroplasty) who: (a) received surgery at one of the four CHI facilities (i.e., St. Vincent, Alegent Mercy, Good Samaritan, or St. Elizabeth) (b) the facility participated in both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 BPCI programs The CHI BPCI facility geographic representation includes the states of Arkansas, Iowa, and Nebraska. STUDY SAMPLE DESCRIPTION 20

21 Total Sample Count Gender BPCI Phase CMI Age Facility 2,603 (100%) Female: 1,646 (63%) Male: 957 (37%) Phase 1: 1,324 (51%) Phase 2: 1,279 (49%) CMI 2.1 or less: 2,486 (95%) CMI 3.4 or greater: 117 (5%) DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLE Age 21-30: 2 (<1%) Age 31-40: 7 (<1%) Age 41-50: 41(2%) Age 51-60: 97 (4%) Age 61-70: 808 (31%) Age 71-80: 1,099 (42%) IA: Alegent 365 (14%) NE: Good Samaritan 669 (26%) NE: St. Elizabeth 815 (31%) AR: St. Vincent 754 (29%) Age 81-90: 484 (19%) Age : 65 (2%) 21

22 We used an ANOVA analysis to assess the relationship between total allowed costs per episode and total readmissions per episode between Phase 1 and Phase 2 BPCI program participation. Episode payments and readmissions were examined at the 90 day episode level. We used a regression analysis to assess the relationship between total costs of the episode and total readmissions per episode on age, gender, BPCI phase, CMI, and site of service location. STUDY DESIGN 22

23 Participation Phase Total Sample Size Total Costs Phase 1 1,324 $ 25,171 Phase 2 1,279 $ 21,838 Cost Reduction Per Episode CHI Total Cost Reduction 1,279 $ (3,333) 1,279 *$ 4,262,907 *Total difference from Phase 1 CMS allowed payments and Phase 2 CMS allowed payments F Value Pr > F < Confidence Interval 95% P value *< *Statistically significant difference exists between mean of Phase 1 and Phase 2 based on total costs per episode STUDY METHODOLOGY: PART 1: ANOVA TOTAL COSTS PER EPISODE 23

24 Participation Phase Total Sample Size Total Readmissions Phase 1 1, Phase 2 1, Readmission Reduction 1, F Value 0.57 Pr >F *< * No statistically significant difference exists between mean of Phase 1 and Phase 2 STUDY METHODOLOGY: PART 1: ANOVA TOTAL READMISSIONS PER EPISODE 24

25 Total Costs per Episode $3,333 lower in Phase 2 BPCI program participants Age, gender, BPCI Phase 2 participation, CMI and site of service all impact total costs per episode Total Readmissions per Episode SUMMARY OF FINDINGS No statistically significant difference found between Phase 1 and Phase 2 BPCI program participants, but Phase 1 participants did have higher average readmits than Phase 2 Increased age and higher CMI appear to have impact on total readmissions 25

26 Supported Research Hypothesis 1 Participation in the Phase 2 BPCI (Bundled Payment for Care Improvement Iniative) program improves care coordination which leads to decreased costs per episode of care Not Supported Research Hypothesis 2 Participation in the Phase 2 BPCI program improves quality which leads to decreased readmission rates per episode of care CONCLUSIONS 26

27 Reliance on CMS Data Inclusion of only CHI facilities with limited sample size Only 1 Clinical Episode Represented Study Limitations Comparing Facilities not matched by size, geographic area, number of cases, or number of surgeons participating in the program LIMITATIONS 27

28 Expand participation in CMS BPCI Phase 2 program for major joint replacement of the lower extremity Total knee arthroplasty is now among the most common major surgical procedures, with approximately 600,000 total knee procedures, at an expense of $9 billion per year, performed annually in the United States (Cram et al., 2012). For CHI alone, our research indicates that the Phase 2 BPCI program reduced total costs for the 1,279 episodes by a total of $4.2 million. CHI did not maintain 100% of those savings, but decreased costs per episode were achieved by CHI in this program. Evaluate other clinical episodes for CMS BPCI Phase 2 program participation Develop a best-practice bundled payment model from learnings of the CMS BPCI program to utilize in other bundled payment models (i.e. commercial insurance, direct to employer) Utilize the care re-design learnings from the BPCI program to reach the triple aim of improved quality, improved experience, and decreased costs in other populations served RECOMMENDATIONS 28

29