0
View Post
Hospitals Receive PY22 Mid-Year Scorecards for MVC Component of BCBSM P4P Program

Hospitals Receive PY22 Mid-Year Scorecards for MVC Component of BCBSM P4P Program

This week the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) Coordinating Center distributed the Mid-Year Scorecards for Program Year (PY) 2022 of the MVC Component of the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) Pay-for-Performance (P4P) Program. These were the first scorecards for the new two-year program cycle for PYs 2022 and 2023.

PY2022 evaluates the index admissions from 2021 as the performance year against admissions in 2019 as the baseline year. MVC is using an improved z-score methodology to calculate both improvement and achievement scores. Hospitals will continue to receive the better of the two scores for each of their two selected conditions. For a description of how the program has changed from the last two-year cycle see the Change Document.

Additionally, this cycle offers hospitals bonus points for completing and submitting a survey for each selected condition by November 1, 2022. These surveys will be used by the MVC Coordinating Center to improve the program for future years and elicit improved best practice sharing between members. The full methodology for the new program can be found in the PY2022-2023 Technical Document.

Figure 1 below illustrates the distribution of total hospital points out of 10. The average points scored for the Mid-Year Scorecards was 5.9/10 before including the survey bonus points. This is 0.9 points higher than the average points scored at the conclusion of PY21 excluding all bonus points.

Figure 1.

Figure 2 below illustrates the breakdown of average points by condition out of five. Consistent with previous years, joint replacement was the highest scoring condition with an average of 4.5 points earned. The success of the joint replacement condition can be attributed to the shift from post-acute care in skilled nursing facilities (SNF) to home health and the move towards outpatient surgeries. Pneumonia was the lowest scoring condition with hospitals earning less than one point on average. The MVC average payment for a 30-day pneumonia episode increased by $792 from the baseline in 2019 to the performance year in 2021. The largest contributors to this increase were the base payment and readmission payments.

Figure 2.

The Mid-Year P4P scores are subject to change as new data is added. The final scorecards will be distributed after all 2021 claims have been added to the data in quarter one of 2023. Hospitals can track their score through the new P4P PY2022-2023 reports on the MVC registry. These new reports provide all relevant scoring information for both improvement and achievement points in one place except for the survey bonus points. They can be filtered by selected conditions to make the tracking of P4P points easier. For a walkthrough of your hospital’s Mid-Year P4P Scorecard or P4P registry reports, please contact the MVC Coordinating Center.

0
View Post
MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program: PY21 in Review

MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program: PY21 in Review

Last month the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) Coordinating Center distributed the final scorecards for the 2021 program year of the MVC Component of the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) Pay-for-Performance (P4P) Program. The 2021 program year was the second year of a two-year cycle for which hospitals were evaluated using MVC data. Hospitals were scored on two conditions that they selected from seven options: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), colectomy, congestive heart failure (CHF), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), joint replacement, pneumonia, and spine surgery. Figure one shows the frequency of hospital condition selections for the two-year program cycle.

Figure 1. Distribution of Hospital Condition Selections for PY21

The MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program evaluates each participating hospital’s risk-adjusted, price-standardized, average 30-day episode payments for their two selected conditions through two methods. One way that hospitals earn points is by reducing their payments from the baseline period (which included index admissions in 2018) to the performance period (which included index admissions in 2020). These are termed “improvement points.” Alternatively, hospitals can earn points by being less expensive than the other hospitals in their cohort. These are referred to as “achievement points.” The MVC cohorts are groups of hospitals determined to be peers using bed size, case mix index, and teaching status.

While participants are scored on both improvement and achievement, members receive the higher of the two scores for each condition. Hospitals are also eligible to earn a bonus point for each condition provided all hospitals in their respective cohort who selected the same condition reduced spending by five percent. For the 2021 program year, the Coordinating Center added two additional bonus points that could have been earned by attending both semiannual meetings (one point) and by completing a site visit with MVC in 2021 (one point). A maximum of 10 points were awarded for participating members. Figure 2 shows the distribution of total points earned by hospitals for the 2021 program year.

Figure 2. Distribution of Total P4P Scores for PY21

On average, hospitals earned 6.8 points total, an increase of 1.3 points from the 2020 program year average of 5.5 points. A majority (88%) of hospitals earned at least one of the two possible participation bonus points. In addition, 31 cohort bonus points were distributed within COPD, CHF, and joint replacement. Consistent with previous years, the condition with the highest average point total was joint replacement at 4.5 points with CABG coming in second at 2.9 points (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Average Points by Service Line

When looking at the episode payments behind the point totals, MVC found that hospitals that selected CABG, CHF, and joint replacement saw a decrease in payments from 2018 to 2020 (see Figure 4). Taking into account case counts for all conditions in the baseline year, MVC also found that payments decreased overall for the selected P4P conditions by $7.7 million dollars in program year 2021.

Figure 4. Payment Change by P4P Condition

If you have any questions regarding the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program, please reference the P4P Technical Document for Program Years 2020 and 2021 and the MVC P4P FAQ PY 2020-2021. If you would like to set up a meeting to review your hospital’s performance, please contact the Coordinating Center at michiganvaluecollaborative@gmail.com. The Coordinating Center will be evaluating and releasing a report on the 2020 and 2021 program year cycle later in 2022.

0
View Post
Michigan Value Collaborative Value Coalition Campaign. Introducing the Preoperative Testing VCC and Report Series.

Michigan Value Collaborative Value Coalition Campaign. Introducing the Preoperative Testing VCC and Report Series.

In 2020, the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) introduced the Preoperative Testing Value Coalition Campaign (VCC) with the aim of reducing the use of unnecessary preoperative testing for surgical procedures.  As part of this new campaign to improve quality, reduce cost, and improve the equity of care delivery in Michigan, the Coordinating Center developed and distributed preoperative testing reports to collaborative members earlier this week. The goal of these reports is to introduce the VCC and provide benchmarking data for some of the common preoperative tests to members.

Currently, the VCC is focused on three elective, outpatient, low-risk surgeries. This includes cholecystectomy, lumpectomy, and inguinal hernia repair. These surgeries were chosen to identify a population unlikely to require much, if any preoperative testing. Metrics included in the reports evaluate hospital testing rates for electrocardiography (EKG), trans-thoracic echocardiography (TTE), cardiac stress tests, chest X-ray (CXR), urinalysis, complete blood count (CBC), basic metabolic panel, coagulation tests, and pulmonary function tests (PFT).  As shown in Figure 1, there is wide variation across the collaborative for overall preoperative testing rates, ranging from 20% to 96%.

Whilst the report provides the MVC all and regional averages as benchmarks, the variation suggests that there is significant room for improvement among Michigan hospitals, and even facilities that are average likely have the possibility to reduce preoperative testing. Furthermore, to allow hospitals to identify areas of opportunity, a more granular grouping of laboratory testing including CBC, basic metabolic panel, coagulation tests, and urinalysis for the three low-risk surgeries is depicted in Figure 2.  To allow hospitals and physician organizations to view more comprehensive preoperative testing data, the MVC Coordinating Center is in the preliminary stages of developing a new preoperative testing report for the MVC registry.

Although many preoperative tests are relatively low cost, large-scale overuse when not necessary can increase episode costs. For these three low-risk procedures, an annual preoperative testing payment of $3.2 million dollars was noted in 2019 across MVC hospitals and according to MVC data, annual preoperative testing payments for these conditions has increased steadily over the last 5 years. In addition, overuse of preoperative testing has the potential to harm patients. Patients with borderline or false positive tests may be subjected to additional testing, have their surgeries postponed, or even experience unnecessary harm from invasive follow up tests.  Questions about appropriate preoperative testing  guidelines can be answered at the Choosing Wisely website.

Please provide us with your feedback on the utilization of these or any other MVC reports, or if you would be interested in joining the MVC Preoperative Testing Stakeholder Group, please reach out to MichiganValueCollaborative@gmail.com.

0
View Post
Opportunity to Share your Perspective in Institutional Participation in the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program

Opportunity to Share your Perspective in Institutional Participation in the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program

MVC Senior Advisor and former Director, Dr. Scott Regenbogen recently received funding from The Donoghue Foundation to lead a team of investigators to learn more about institutional participation in the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program.

As part of this study, Dr. Regenbogen is interested in conducting virtual interviews with lead administrators who were involved with selecting service lines for performance year 2017-2018

What is the value of participating? While participation in this study is completely voluntary and does not carry any bearing on P4P scoring, the insights gleaned from this work will help us to continue improving the MVC measure for the benefit of our members, and improve our understanding of successful strategies in commercial episode-based payment incentives.

What is The Donoghue Foundation? The Foundation supports a diverse portfolio of research projects, from understanding the mechanisms of disease, to improving clinical treatments, to public health initiatives that prevent illness – all founded on excellent science. To learn more about the organization and their mission, please visit https://donaghue.org/

Meet the Key Study Personnel

  • Scott Regenbogen, MD, MPH.  Dr. Regenbogen is an Associate Professor of Surgery and Chief of the Division of Colorectal Surgery at the University of Michigan (UM), and a Senior Advisor of the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC). His research has focused on the role of perioperative care protocols in the costs, outcomes, and value of care around episodes of inpatient surgery, with a particular focus on older adults.
  • Shelytia Cocroft, PhD.  Dr. Cocroft is an applied medical sociologist and mixed-methodologist (qualitative and quantitative research designs).  She is currently a qualitative research analyst at the University of Michigan’s Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy (CHOP) and is collaborating on qualitative centric projects designed to identify systemic and structural mechanisms within surgical care that perpetuate inequalities in access, quality, and delivery of care.
  • Ashley Duby, MS.  Ms. Duby is the Research Director for the Division of Colorectal Surgery within the Department of Surgery and has been working with Dr. Regenbogen for the past 6 years. She has extensive experience in development and deployment of fieldwork protocols in diverse settings – including patient and provider populations.

If you have any questions or would like further information related to this project, please contact Ashley Duby, Research Director at agay@med.umich.edu.

0
View Post
MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program: PY20 in Review

MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program: PY20 in Review

In early January, the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) distributed 2020 Program Year (PY) scores to hospitals for the MVC Component of the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) Pay for Performance (P4P) program. This marked the completion of the first year of a two-year cycle for which hospitals have selected two service lines (out of seven) to be scored on their episode spending using MVC data. These service lines include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), colectomy, congestive heart failure (CHF), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), joint replacement, pneumonia, and spine surgery. Figure 1 shows the frequency of hospital service line selections for the two-year program cycle.

Figure 1.

The program evaluates hospital’s risk-adjusted, price standardized, average 30-day episode payments for their two selected conditions through two methods. One way that hospitals earn points in the program is by reducing their payments from the baseline period (index admissions in 2017) to the performance period (index admissions in 2019). These are termed ‘improvement points’. Alternatively, hospitals are able to earn points by being less expensive than the other hospitals in their cohort. These are referred to as ‘achievement points’. The MVC cohorts are groups of hospitals determined to be peers using bed size, case mix index, and teaching status.

While participants are scored on both improvement and achievement, members receive the higher of the two scores for each service line. Hospitals are also eligible to earn a bonus point for each service line provided all hospitals in their respective cohort who selected the same condition reduce spending by five percent. A maximum of ten points can be awarded for participating members. Figure 2 shows the distribution of total points earned by hospitals for Program Year 2020.

Figure 2.

On average, hospitals earned six points, an increase of around one point from the 2019 program year average. Twenty-four hospitals received bonus points within the COPD, colectomy, joint replacement, and pneumonia service lines. Consistent with previous years, joint replacement had the average points, with pneumonia coming in a close second (see Figure 3).

Figure 3.

If you have any questions regarding the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P program, please refer to the P4P Technical Document for Program Years 2020 and 2021 and the MVC P4P FAQ PY 2020-2021 . If you would like to set up a meeting to review your hospital’s performance, please contact the Coordinating Center at MichiganValueCollaborative@gmail.com.