Gettel CJ, Han CR, Canavan ME, Bernheim SM, Drye EE, Duseja R, Venkatesh AK. The 2018 Merit-based Incentive Payment System: Participation, Performance, and Payment Across Specialties.
Med Care 2022;
60:156-163. [PMID:
35030565 PMCID:
PMC8820355 DOI:
10.1097/mlr.0000000000001674]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) incorporates financial incentives and penalties intended to drive clinicians towards value-based purchasing, including alternative payment models (APMs). Newly available Medicare-approved qualified clinical data registries (QCDRs) offer specialty-specific quality measures for clinician reporting, yet their impact on clinician performance and payment adjustments remains unknown.
OBJECTIVES
We sought to characterize clinician participation, performance, and payment adjustments in the MIPS program across specialties, with a focus on clinician use of QCDRs.
RESEARCH DESIGN
We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the 2018 MIPS program.
RESULTS
During the 2018 performance year, 558,296 clinicians participated in the MIPS program across the 35 specialties assessed. Clinicians reporting as individuals had lower overall MIPS performance scores (median [interquartile range (IQR)], 80.0 [39.4-98.4] points) than those reporting as groups (median [IQR], 96.3 [76.9-100.0] points), who in turn had lower adjustments than clinicians reporting within MIPS APMs (median [IQR], 100.0 [100.0-100.0] points) (P<0.001). Clinicians reporting as individuals had lower payment adjustments (median [IQR], +0.7% [0.1%-1.6%]) than those reporting as groups (median [IQR], +1.5% [0.6%-1.7%]), who in turn had lower adjustments than clinicians reporting within MIPS APMs (median [IQR], +1.7% [1.7%-1.7%]) (P<0.001). Within a subpopulation of 202,685 clinicians across 12 specialties commonly using QCDRs, clinicians had overall MIPS performance scores and payment adjustments that were significantly greater if reporting at least 1 QCDR measure compared with those not reporting any QCDR measures.
CONCLUSIONS
Collectively, these findings highlight that performance score and payment adjustments varied by reporting affiliation and QCDR use in the 2018 MIPS.
Collapse