TY - JOUR
T1 - Emergency clinician participation and performance in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System
AU - Gettel, Cameron J.
AU - Han, Christopher R.
AU - Granovsky, Michael A.
AU - Berdahl, Carl T
AU - Kocher, Keith E.
AU - Mehrotra, Abhishek
AU - Schuur, Jeremiah D.
AU - Aldeen, Amer Z.
AU - Griffey, Richard T.
AU - Venkatesh, Arjun K.
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr. Gettel is supported by the Yale National Clinician Scholars Program and by CTSA Grant Number TL1 TR00864 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Dr. Venkatesh is supported in part by the American Board of Emergency Medicine National Academy of Medicine Anniversary fellowship and previously by the Yale Center for Clinical Investigation grant KL2 TR000140 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Science of the NIH. Dr. Griffey and Kocher are supported by grant R01 HS027811‐01 from the Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research. Dr. Griffey is also supported by K12 HL137942 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and #3676 from the Foundation for Barnes‐Jewish Hospital. Dr. Kocher is also supported by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network. The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and preparation or approval of the manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
PY - 2022/1
Y1 - 2022/1
N2 - Background: The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is the largest national pay-for-performance program and the first to afford emergency clinicians unique financial incentives for quality measurement and improvement. With little known regarding its impact on emergency clinicians, we sought to describe participation in the MIPS and examine differences in performance scores and payment adjustments based on reporting affiliation and reporting strategy. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 2018 Quality Payment Program (QPP) Experience Report data set. We categorized emergency clinicians by their reporting affiliation (individual, group, MIPS alternative payment model [APM]), MIPS performance scores, and Medicare Part B payment adjustments. We calculated performance scores for common quality measures contributing to the quality category score if reported through qualified clinical data registries (QCDRs) or claims-based reporting strategies. Results: In 2018, a total of 59,828 emergency clinicians participated in the MIPS—1,246 (2.1%) reported as individuals, 43,404 (72.5%) reported as groups, and 15,178 (25.4%) reported within MIPS APMs. Clinicians reporting as individuals earned lower overall MIPS scores (median [interquartile range {IQR}] = 30.8 [15.0–48.2] points) than those reporting within groups (median [IQR] = 88.4 [49.3–100.0]) and MIPS APMs (median [IQR] = 100.0 [100.0–100.0]; p < 0.001) and more frequently incurred penalties with a negative payment adjustment. Emergency clinicians had higher measure scores if reporting QCDR or QPP non–emergency medicine specialty set measures. Conclusions: Emergency clinician participation in national value-based programs is common, with one in four participating through MIPS APMs. Those employing specific strategies such as QCDR and group reporting received the highest MIPS scores and payment adjustments, emphasizing the role that reporting strategy and affiliation play in the quality of care.
AB - Background: The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is the largest national pay-for-performance program and the first to afford emergency clinicians unique financial incentives for quality measurement and improvement. With little known regarding its impact on emergency clinicians, we sought to describe participation in the MIPS and examine differences in performance scores and payment adjustments based on reporting affiliation and reporting strategy. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 2018 Quality Payment Program (QPP) Experience Report data set. We categorized emergency clinicians by their reporting affiliation (individual, group, MIPS alternative payment model [APM]), MIPS performance scores, and Medicare Part B payment adjustments. We calculated performance scores for common quality measures contributing to the quality category score if reported through qualified clinical data registries (QCDRs) or claims-based reporting strategies. Results: In 2018, a total of 59,828 emergency clinicians participated in the MIPS—1,246 (2.1%) reported as individuals, 43,404 (72.5%) reported as groups, and 15,178 (25.4%) reported within MIPS APMs. Clinicians reporting as individuals earned lower overall MIPS scores (median [interquartile range {IQR}] = 30.8 [15.0–48.2] points) than those reporting within groups (median [IQR] = 88.4 [49.3–100.0]) and MIPS APMs (median [IQR] = 100.0 [100.0–100.0]; p < 0.001) and more frequently incurred penalties with a negative payment adjustment. Emergency clinicians had higher measure scores if reporting QCDR or QPP non–emergency medicine specialty set measures. Conclusions: Emergency clinician participation in national value-based programs is common, with one in four participating through MIPS APMs. Those employing specific strategies such as QCDR and group reporting received the highest MIPS scores and payment adjustments, emphasizing the role that reporting strategy and affiliation play in the quality of care.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85113359348&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/acem.14373
DO - 10.1111/acem.14373
M3 - Article
C2 - 34375479
AN - SCOPUS:85113359348
SN - 1069-6563
VL - 29
SP - 64
EP - 72
JO - Academic Emergency Medicine
JF - Academic Emergency Medicine
IS - 1
ER -