"ProvenCareSM": a provider-driven pay-for-performance program for acute episodic cardiac surgical care

Quality, patient safety, and the cardiac surgical team

After more than a decade of attention, the risks inherent in cardiac surgery have been well documented, but examples of effective interventions to reduce this risk remain scarce. The need is great, because the patient population is vulnerable and the potential consequences of poor outcomes are ever present and significant. This article reviews a decade of discussion surrounding quality and safety issues in cardiac surgery, and concludes with examples of strategies that have shown great promise for improving cardiac surgery quality and safety.

Patient engagement as an emerging challenge for healthcare services: mapping the literature

Patients' engagement in healthcare is at the forefront of policy and research practice and is now widely recognized as a critical ingredient for high-quality healthcare system. This study aims to analyze the current academic literature (from 2002 to 2012) about patient engagement by using bibliometric and qualitative content analyses. Extracting data from the electronic databases more likely to cover the core research publications in health issues, the number of yearly publications, the most productive countries, and the scientific discipline dealing with patient engagement were quantitatively described. Qualitative content analysis of the most cited articles was conducted to distinguish the core themes. Our data showed that patient engagement is gaining increasing attention by all the academic disciplines involved in health research with a predominance of medicine and nursing. Engaging patients is internationally recognized as a key factor in improving health service delivery and quality. Great attention is up to now paid to the clinical and organizational outcomes of engagement, whereas there is still a lack of an evidence-based theoretical foundation of the construct as well as of the organizational dimensions that foster it.

Analyzing shifts in economic risks to providers in proposed payment and delivery system reforms

A key consideration in implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 will be changing Medicare payments to providers to slow the growth in costs and spur improvements in health care delivery. In addition to the technical feasibility of new payment models, a crucial issue will be the capacity of the health care system to assume more economic risk. This article analyzes some of the major models under consideration and assesses how feasible their implementation would be.

Using financial incentives to improve value in orthopaedics

BACKGROUND

A variety of reforms to traditional approaches to provider payment and benefit design are being implemented in the United States. There is increasing interest in applying these financial incentives to orthopaedics, although it is unclear whether and to what extent they have been implemented and whether they increase quality or reduce costs.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We reviewed and discussed physician- and patient-oriented financial incentives being implemented in orthopaedics, key challenges, and prerequisites to payment reform and value-driven payment policy in orthopaedics.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE database using as search terms various provider payment and consumer incentive models. We retrieved a total of 169 articles; none of these studies met the inclusion criteria. For incentive models known to the authors to be in use in orthopaedics but for which no peer-reviewed literature was found, we searched Google for further information.

RESULTS

Provider financial incentives reviewed include payments for reporting, performance, and patient safety and episode payment. Patient incentives include tiered networks, value-based benefit design, reference pricing, and value-based purchasing. Reform of financial incentives for orthopaedic surgery is challenged by (1) lack of a payment/incentive model that has demonstrated reductions in cost trends and (2) the complex interrelation of current pay schemes in today's fragmented environment. Prerequisites to reform include (1) a reliable and complete data infrastructure; (2) new business structures to support cost sharing; and (3) a retooling of patient expectations.

CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient literature reporting the effects of various financial incentive models under implementation in orthopaedics to know whether they increase quality or reduce costs. National concerns about cost will continue to drive experimentation, and all anticipated innovations will require improved collaboration and data collection and reporting.

Medicare's bundled payment pilot for acute and postacute care: analysis and recommendations on where to begin

In the National Pilot Program on Payment Bundling, a subset of Medicare providers will receive a single payment for an episode of acute care in a hospital, followed by postacute care in a skilled nursing or rehabilitation facility, the patient's home, or other appropriate setting. This article examines the promises and pitfalls of bundled payments and addresses two important design decisions for the pilot: which conditions to include, and how long an episode should be. Our analysis of Medicare data found that hip fracture and joint replacement are good conditions to include in the pilot because they exhibit strong potential for cost savings. In addition, these conditions pose less financial risk for providers than other common ones do, so including them would make participation in the program more appealing to providers. We also found that longer episode lengths captured a higher percentage of costs and hospital readmissions while adding little financial risk. We recommend that the Medicare pilot program test alternative design features to help foster payment innovation throughout the health system.

Payment Incentives and Integrated Care Delivery: Levers for Health System Reform and Cost Containment

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act encourages use of payment methods and incentives to promote integrated care delivery models including patient-centered medical homes, accountable care organizations, and primary care and behavioral health integration. These models rely on interdisciplinary provider teams to coordinate patient care; health information and other technologies to assure, monitor, and assess quality; and payment and financial incentives such as bundling, pay-for-performance, and gain-sharing to encourage value-based health care. In this paper, we review evidence about integrated care delivery, payment methods, and financial incentives to improve value in health care purchasing, and address how these approaches can be used to advance health system change.

ProvenCare lung cancer: a multi-institutional improvement collaborative

Geisinger's ProvenCare™ Program (for elective coronary artery bypass surgery, total hip replacement, and others) has shown that the principles of reliability science, facilitated by a robust electronic health record and institutional commitment, allow the re-engineering of complicated clinical processes. This eliminates unwarranted variation and promotes the completion of evidence-based elements of care. It has not been established that ProvenCare can be generalized to other institutions. Now, under the auspices of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer, ProvenCare has been adapted to a multi-institutional collaborative for the care of the patient with resectable lung cancer.

Inefficiency as the major driver of excess costs in lung resection

BACKGROUND

Risk-adjusted outcomes of surgical care are important for quality and cost assessments. Although cardiac surgery is commonly studied, risk-adjusted analysis of excess costs of lung resection has not been pursued.

METHODS

We used 2002 to 2005 National Inpatient Sample of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data to evaluate adverse outcomes and costs in elective lung resections in hospitals with more than 20 cases during that period. Adverse outcomes were inpatient death or excessive risk-adjusted postoperative stay. Logistic models were defined to predict adverse outcomes. Linear models were designed to predict costs. Hospital-specific adverse outcome rates and costs were measured to define performance outliers. Cost-effective reference hospitals were used to define total excess costs.

RESULTS

Among 12,182 patients at 215 hospitals undergoing lung resection, there were 336 inpatient deaths (2.8%) and 880 live discharges with prolonged risk-adjusted postoperative stay (7.2%). Predictive models for mortality and risk-adjusted postoperative stay had C statistics of 0.773 and 0.643, respectively. There were 11 ineffective hospitals (5.1%) with excessive adverse outcomes (P < .005) and 34 inefficient hospitals (15.8%) meeting quality measures but with higher than predicted costs (P < .0005). Ineffective hospitals had costs $1020 per case lower than predicted. Inefficient hospitals had costs $9978 higher than predicted.

CONCLUSIONS

Inefficiency is the major factor in excess inpatient costs associated with lung resection in this model. Although refinements in databases, including total physician costs and postdischarge adverse event costs, will alter models, excess costs of lung resection appear to be driven by inefficiency, not adverse outcomes.

ProvenCare perinatal: a model for delivering evidence/ guideline-based care for perinatal populations

BACKGROUND

Geisinger Health System (GHS) has applied its ProvenCare model to demonstrate that a large integrated health care delivery system, enabled by an electronic health record (EHR), could reengineer a complicated clinical process, reduce unwarranted variation, and provide evidence-based care for patients with a specified clinical condition. In 2007 GHS began to apply the model to a more complicated, longer-term condition of "wellness"--perinatal care. ADAPTING PROVENCARE TO PERINATAL CARE: The ProvenCare Perinatal initiative was more complex than the five previous ProvenCare endeavors in terms of breadth, scope, and duration. Each of the 22 sites created a process flow map to depict the current, real-time process at each location. The local practice site providers-physicians and mid-level practitioners-reached consensus on 103 unique best practice measures (BPMs), which would be tracked for every patient. These maps were then used to create a single standardized pathway that included the BPMs but also preserved some unique care offerings that reflected the needs of the local context.

RESULTS

A nine-phase methodology, expanded from the previous six-phase model, was implemented on schedule. Pre- to postimplementation improvement occurred for all seven BPMs or BPM bundles that were considered the most clinically relevant, with five statistically significant. In addition, the rate of primary cesarean sections decreased by 32%, and birth trauma remained unchanged as the number of vaginal births increased.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary experience suggests that integrating evidence/guideline-based best practices into work flows in inpatient and outpatient settings can achieve improvements in daily patient care processes and outcomes.

Episode-based performance measurement and payment: making it a reality

Proposals to use episodes of care as a basis for payment and performance measurement are largely conceptual at this stage, with little empirical work or experience in applied settings to guide their design. Based on analyses of Medicare data, we identified key issues that will need to be considered related to defining episodes and determining which provider is accountable for an episode. We suggest a number of applied studies and demonstrations that would facilitate more rapid movement of episode-based approaches from concept to implementation.

Continuous innovation in health care: implications of the Geisinger experience

To achieve the diverse health care goals of the United States, health care value must increase. The capacity to create value through innovation is facilitated by an integrated delivery system focused on creating value, measuring innovation returns, and receiving market rewards. This paper describes the Geisinger Health System's innovation strategy for care model redesign. Geisinger's clinical leadership, dedicated innovation team, electronic health information systems, and financial incentive alignment each contribute to its innovation record. Although Geisinger's characteristics raise serious questions about broad applicability to nonintegrated health care organizations, its experience can provide useful insights for health system reform.

How Geisinger's advanced medical home model argues the case for rapid-cycle innovation

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 provides for a number of major payment and delivery system initiatives. These potential changes need to be tested, scaled, and adapted with an urgency not evident in previous demonstration projects of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. We discuss lessons learned from our iterative tests of care reengineering at Geisinger--specifically, through our advanced medical home model, ProvenHealth Navigator, and the way we continuously modified the model to improve quality and value. We hypothesize that the most important ingredient in our model has been the embedding of nurse case managers into our community practices and the real-time feedback of data on the use of health services by the most complex patients.

Case volume, quality of care, and care efficiency in coronary artery bypass surgery

BACKGROUND

How case volume and quality of care relate to hospital costs or length of stay (LOS) are important questions as we seek to improve the value of health care.

METHODS

We conducted an observational study of patients 18 years or older who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting surgery in a network of US hospitals. Case volumes were estimated using our data set. Quality was assessed by whether recommended medications and services were not received in ideal patients, as well as the overall number of measures missed. We used multivariable hierarchical models to estimate the effects of case volume and quality on hospital cost and LOS.

RESULTS

The majority of hospitals (51%) and physicians (78%) were lowest-volume providers, and only 18% of patients received all quality of care measures. Median LOS was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR], 6-11 days), and median costs were $25 140 (IQR, $19 677-$33 121). In analyses adjusted for patient and site characteristics, lowest-volume hospitals had 19.8% higher costs (95% CI, 3.9%-38.0% higher); adjusting for care quality did not eliminate differences in costs. Low surgeon volume was also associated with higher costs, though less strongly (3.1% higher costs [95% CI, 0.6%-5.6% higher]). Individual quality measures had inconsistent associations with costs or LOS, but patients who had no quality measures missed had much shorter LOS and lower costs than those who missed even one.

CONCLUSION

Avoiding lowest-volume hospitals and maximizing quality are separate approaches to improving health care efficiency through reducing costs of coronary bypass surgery.

Systematic review: Effects, design choices, and context of pay-for-performance in health care

BACKGROUND

Pay-for-performance (P4P) is one of the primary tools used to support healthcare delivery reform. Substantial heterogeneity exists in the development and implementation of P4P in health care and its effects. This paper summarizes evidence, obtained from studies published between January 1990 and July 2009, concerning P4P effects, as well as evidence on the impact of design choices and contextual mediators on these effects. Effect domains include clinical effectiveness, access and equity, coordination and continuity, patient-centeredness, and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

The systematic review made use of electronic database searching, reference screening, forward citation tracking and expert consultation. The following databases were searched: Cochrane Library, EconLit, Embase, Medline, PsychINFO, and Web of Science. Studies that evaluate P4P effects in primary care or acute hospital care medicine were included. Papers concerning other target groups or settings, having no empirical evaluation design or not complying with the P4P definition were excluded. According to study design nine validated quality appraisal tools and reporting statements were applied. Data were extracted and summarized into evidence tables independently by two reviewers.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-eight evaluation studies provide a large body of evidence -to be interpreted with caution- concerning the effects of P4P on clinical effectiveness and equity of care. However, less evidence on the impact on coordination, continuity, patient-centeredness and cost-effectiveness was found. P4P effects can be judged to be encouraging or disappointing, depending on the primary mission of the P4P program: supporting minimal quality standards and/or boosting quality improvement. Moreover, the effects of P4P interventions varied according to design choices and characteristics of the context in which it was introduced.Future P4P programs should (1) select and define P4P targets on the basis of baseline room for improvement, (2) make use of process and (intermediary) outcome indicators as target measures, (3) involve stakeholders and communicate information about the programs thoroughly and directly, (4) implement a uniform P4P design across payers, (5) focus on both quality improvement and achievement, and (6) distribute incentives to the individual and/or team level.

CONCLUSIONS

P4P programs result in the full spectrum of possible effects for specific targets, from absent or negligible to strongly beneficial. Based on the evidence the review has provided further indications on how effect findings are likely to relate to P4P design choices and context. The provided best practice hypotheses should be tested in future research.

Commentary: health care payment reform and academic medicine: threat or opportunity?

Discussion of the flaws of the current fee-for-service health care reimbursement model has become commonplace. Health care costs cannot be reduced without moving away from a system that rewards providers for providing more services regardless of need, effectiveness, or quality. What alternatives are likely under health care reform, and how will they impact the challenged finances of academic medical centers? Bundled payment methodologies, in which all providers rendering services to a patient during an episode of care split a global fee, are gaining popularity. Also under discussion are concepts like the advanced medical home, which would establish primary care practices as a regular source of care for patients, and the accountable care organization, under which providers supply all the health care services needed by a patient population for a defined time period in exchange for a share of the savings resulting from enhanced coordination of care and better patient outcomes or a per-member-per-month payment. The move away from fee-for-service reimbursement will create financial challenges for academic medicine because of the threat to clinical revenue. Yet academic health centers, because they are in many cases integrated health care organizations, may be aptly positioned to benefit from models that emphasize coordinated care. The author also has included a series of recommendations for how academic medicine can prepare for the implementation of new payment models to help ease the transition away from fee-for-service reimbursement.

Accountability in health care--transplant community offers leadership

Two concerns expressed by the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) are that (1) the new Medicare regulations for transplant hospitals take a 'punitive' approach and that (2) the outcome requirement may thwart innovation by not including certain risk factors into the risk adjustment used to calculate expected outcomes. This article explains efforts by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to encourage quality improvement. CMS limits outcomes-related enforcement to situations where failure rates exceed certain substantial 'tolerance limits', ensuring opportunity for quality improvement to be effective prior to enforcement. Transplantations involving a disproportionate share of risk factors not incorporated into the risk-adjustment methodology can also be raised through CMS''mitigating factors' process. Of the 22 mitigating factor requests completed through March 10, 2009, 7 raised issues of risk adjustment (none involved experimental protocols). Four of the seven requests were approved for other reasons (evidence of effective program changes and improved outcomes). CMS concluded that none of the seven made a persuasive case based on risk factors. The early data indicate that program deficiencies may outweigh risk adjustment issues. CMS agrees to consider the ASTS suggestions for future action and continues to monitor the situation in case a different pattern emerges.

Payment reform options: episode payment is a good place to start

New strategies to control U.S. health spending growth are urgently needed. Although provider payment cuts are likely, cutting fee-for-service (FFS) payments will hurt quality and access. A more sensible approach would be to restructure the delivery system into organized networks of providers delivering reliable, evidence-based care. But restructuring will not occur without payment policy reform. Four policy options are commonly cited: recalibrating FFS, instituting pay-for-performance, creating episode-based payments, and adopting global payments. We argue that episode payments are the most immediately viable approach, and we recommend that payment reforms precede any payment reductions so that new delivery models can gain traction.

Hospital-physician collaboration: landscape of economic integration and impact on clinical integration

CONTEXT

Hospital-physician relationships (HPRs) are an important area of academic research, given their impact on hospitals' financial success. HPRs also are at the center of several federal policy proposals such as gain sharing, bundled payments, and pay-for-performance (P4P).

METHODS

This article analyzes the HPRs that focus on the economic integration of hospitals and physicians and the goals that HPRs are designed to achieve. It then reviews the literature on the impact of HPRs on cost, quality, and clinical integration.

FINDINGS

The goals of the two parties in HPRs overlap only partly, and their primary aim is not reducing cost or improving quality. The evidence base for the impact of many models of economic integration is either weak or nonexistent, with only a few models of economic integration having robust effects. The relationship between economic and clinical integration also is weak and inconsistent. There are several possible reasons for this weak linkage and many barriers to further integration between hospitals and physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful HPRs may require better financial conditions for physicians, internal changes to clinical operations, application of behavioral skills to the management of HPRs, changes in how providers are paid, and systemic changes encompassing several types of integration simultaneously.

Patterns of technical error among surgical malpractice claims: an analysis of strategies to prevent injury to surgical patients

OBJECTIVE

To identify the most prevalent patterns of technical errors in surgery, and evaluate commonly recommended interventions in light of these patterns.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The majority of surgical adverse events involve technical errors, but little is known about the nature and causes of these events. We examined characteristics of technical errors and common contributing factors among closed surgical malpractice claims.

METHODS

Surgeon reviewers analyzed 444 randomly sampled surgical malpractice claims from four liability insurers. Among 258 claims in which injuries due to error were detected, 52% (n = 133) involved technical errors. These technical errors were further analyzed with a structured review instrument designed by qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-nine percent of the technical errors caused permanent disability; an additional 16% resulted in death. Two-thirds (65%) of the technical errors were linked to manual error, 9% to errors in judgment, and 26% to both manual and judgment error. A minority of technical errors involved advanced procedures requiring special training ("index operations"; 16%), surgeons inexperienced with the task (14%), or poorly supervised residents (9%). The majority involved experienced surgeons (73%), and occurred in routine, rather than index, operations (84%). Patient-related complexities-including emergencies, difficult or unexpected anatomy, and previous surgery-contributed to 61% of technical errors, and technology or systems failures contributed to 21%.

CONCLUSIONS

Most technical errors occur in routine operations with experienced surgeons, under conditions of increased patient complexity or systems failure. Commonly recommended interventions, including restricting high-complexity operations to experienced surgeons, additional training for inexperienced surgeons, and stricter supervision of trainees, are likely to address only a minority of technical errors. Surgical safety research should instead focus on improving decision-making and performance in routine operations for complex patients and circumstances.