The Wonk Room

Baucus And Grassley Preview What Bipartisan Health Reform Will Look Like

The Senate Finance Committee is meeting behind closed doors today to consider a series of health care delivery reforms that could potentially improve health care quality and lower costs. Yesterday, Sens. Max Baucus (D-MT) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) released ‘Description of Policy Options: Transforming the Health Care Delivery System – Proposals to Improve Patient Care and Reduce Health Care Costs,’ a compilation of recommendations for how to reform the way Medicare and Medicaid reimburse providers:

Paying for health outcomes: Currently, the system pays hospitals and providers for reporting data on quality, the Senate Finance Committee (SFC) is proposing to pay for actual improved outcomes. That means paying hospitals that meet certain quality performance standards and lowering preventable hospital readmission by reducing payments to hospitals with high preventable readmission rations.

Encouraging care coordination through payment reform: SFC is proposing developing payment innovations that encourage independent health care providers to work cooperatively for the benefit of the patient. They would bundle hospital stays with post-acute care services, allow groups of providers who voluntarily meet quality thresholds to share in the cost-savings they achieve for the Medicare program, and pay for a health care professional to help patients transition out of the hospital.

Expanding electronic health records: Electronic health records lower medical errors, improve care quality and reduce health care spending, but many providers are reluctant to invest in a system with limited national standardization and slow financial return. Nationally, less than 25 percent of hospitals, and less than 20 percent of doctor’s offices, employ health information technology systems (HIT). The stimulus provided $19 billion to encourage providers to implement electronic health records and SFC is looking to expedite health care’s push into the 21st century by “exploring the possibility of expanding eligibility” for electronic health records by offering incentive payments not just to doctors but also to nurse practitioners, physician assistants and other providers.

Improving comparative effectiveness research: The stimulus bill already includes $1.1 billion for research that compares the effectiveness of different treatments and procedures. SFC would establish “a private, non-profit corporation that would generate and synthesize evidence on what works in health care.” The institute would remain independent and diverse “so that no stakeholder interest dominates” and would “establish a national agenda for research priorities.” To ensure patient safety, Medicare “could be allowed to use the findings only in circumstances where the process by which it uses the information is transparent, relies on all available evidence, considers the potential effects on subpopulations of beneficiaries, and allows for public comment on any draft proposals that use the information.”

Dealing with the shortage of primary care providers: Some studies have shown that “the trajectory of the supply of primary care physicians for adult patients is now falling behind the growth of the adult population” and HHS estimates that “by 2020 there will be a shortage of 66,000 primary care doctors nationwide.” Lower primary care salaries discourage medical students from practicing primary care and residency slots for primacy are physicians have decreased in recent years. SFC is proposing redistributing unused residency slots to encourage training in primary care and general surgery and establishing bonuses payments “for general surgeons practicing in newly defined rural general surgeon scarcity areas.” Primary care providers could also receive 10 percent bonus payments.

Linking Medicare Advantage payments to quality: Currently, the federal government subsidizes private insurers to provide Medicare beneficiaries with some extra benefits and care in rural areas. But numerous studies have demonstrated that rather than using the extra federal dollars to provide better quality care (and coordinated care), insurers are pocketing the extra dough. SFC is promising to tie “some portion of payment” “to performance and quality measures,” modify payment to encourage plans to provide care more efficiently and play plans a bonus for chronic care management.

Individually these reforms seem small. For instance, the document places some restraints on the use of data obtains from comparative effectiveness research (for instance, considering effects on ’subpopulations’ may very well prevent CMS from making serious reimbursement decisions) and does not call for the elimination of Medicare Advantage overpayments. But collectively, these reforms start the slow process of re-orienting the system from one that encourages providers to over-prescribe treatments, to one that rewards quality care and outcomes.






8 Responses to “Baucus And Grassley Preview What Bipartisan Health Reform Will Look Like”

  1. jps Says:

    Cue Stateofthedivision complaining about pay for performance and Baucus.

    At least physician shortages are on the radar now — yay Congress; took long enough. The “unused resident slots” are because Congress set up Medicare’s Graduate Medical Education program to pay medical schools to limit the number of physicians they train. They have been since the long-past doctor glut of the 1980s.


  2. stateofthedivision Says:

    Cue JPS to cheer for Dirty Max and implement distorting pay schemes, the same ones that imploded Wall Street. So why will they work better in health care? Surely doctors are as smart as CEO’s. The smart ones will retire early under these plans.

    General surgery is not primary care.

    Comparative effectiveness research is the health insurance industry’s plan to make money by selling their data. Using retrospective billing data to make quality decisions is a supremely bad idea.


  3. stateofthedivision Says:

    JPS, read the Wyden-Bennett bill to see how Democrats will deform health care even further.

    If you want to learn anything about pay for performance and how it suboptimizes organizations, if Wall Steet’s implosion wasn’t enough, read Alfie Kohn’s and Dr. W. Edwards Deming’s work.


  4. stateofthedivision Says:

    Lowering preventable hospital readmission by reducing payments to hospitals with high preventable readmission ratio’s. This is flowery language for reducing payments, period. The feds just adjust the statistics/ratio’s so the money saving happens.

    Patients are lucky to stay a day in the hospital, nowadays. If 80% of money is spent on the last year of life, doesn’t that speak to multiple admissions? Hospice care is the better alternative, but that’s not mentioned in the SFC plan.

    Innovative payments is bundling care payment across organizaitonal lines. Providers will scrap over the division of funds. Shouldn’t they be focusing on improving quality? That’s different than focusing on a bonus payment. Optimizing pay, suboptimizes care.

    Link Medicare Advantage payments to quality. Insurance companies don’t provide care. They contract with doctors and hospitals. The bribe system rolls downhill.


  5. stateofthedivision Says:

    It takes 10 years to impact physician supply in any meaningful way. That means Congress must act now to have an impact on primary care physician supply.

    This bunch of clueless yahoos hasn’t a chance. Expect the U.S. to raid doctors from other parts of the world.


  6. stateofthedivision Says:

    I said yahoos. I meant for-profit health care lackeys.


  7. stateofthedivision Says:

    did anyone read the PDF? This plan is bloody joke. Many nonprofit community hospitals will implode when Baucus and Grassley implement their poison.


  8. stateofthedivision Says:

    The Baucus-Grassley plan grandfathers “physician owned hospitals” and sets up a bizarre planning structure within HHS for those hospitals to expand services.

    What happens when a grandfathered hospital wants to buy another hospital in their area? That’s not addressed.

    Why not ban physician self-referral all together and force physicians to sell their shares? More for-profit health care corporafornication.



Jump to Top

About Wonk Room | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy (off-site) | RSS | Donate
© 2005-2008 Center for American Progress Action Fund
image Register imageimageRSSimageimage imageimage
image
Latest Posts

Advertisement

Issues

Alerts

image
Sign up for Wonk Room Alerts



image
Visit Our Affiliated Sites

image image
imageTopic Cloud


imageArchives


imageBlog Roll


imageAbout Wonk RoomimageimageContact UsimageimageDonateimage