Bundling Strategy Comparison and Contrast with Traditional Medicare Fee-for-Service
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2010) there are several FFS medical plans that are utilized in the private industry. The type that is most widely utilized are the preferred provider organizations (PPOs). Additional systems comprise of point-of-service, private provider organizations, and traditional plans deprived of networks.
The Medicare FFS payment system, providers are rewarded for the volume and concentration of services provided. Consequently providers are not rewarded for efforts to improve care quality, such as through spending time on care management and guaranteeing patients obtain necessary preventive care services (Froimson et al., 2013).
In comparison to the fee-for-service reimbursement model, bundled payments support, and pay care coordination, while reducing cost among a patient’s provider. A bundled payment compensates all of a patient’s health care suppliers with a sole, fixed, all-inclusive payment that shields suggested clinical services associated to the patient’s treatment, episode, or illness over a well-defined period of time (Association, 2013). These disbursements can be modified and constructed based on the patient’s health status.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) identify that bundle payments create incentives for health care providers to take comprehensive accountability for patient care, outcomes, and use of resource.
Pay-for-performance payment model – healthcare payment systems that offer financial rewards to providers who achieve, improve or excel their performance on specified quality of care and cost measures (HealthCare Incentives Improvement Institute, N.D.)
Bundled payments are a forerunner of what other payers will do and are already beginning to do in their contracts with hospitals.
There are several types of private payer plans including preferred provider organizations (PPO’s), health maintenance organizations (HMO’s), and point of service (POS). Indemnity plans would cost the most for employees and they usually choose a PPO plan. A trend that is gaining popularity with employees and employers is the consumer driven health plan (CDHP) that has a high deductable combined with a funding option of some type. All of the plans have unique features for coverage of services and financial responsibility.
Healthcare is often driven by consumers and insurance companies; there is strong pushes for insurance companies to start paying better through Patient Care Medical Homes (PCMH) or Accountable Care Organizations (ACO) rather than paying at a per-visit basis (Hamlin, 2015). With PCMH or ACOs payment is made on a continuum of care, encouraging the provider to be involved in all aspects affecting health of the patient (Derksen, & Whelan,
The care delivery enterprise must be re-tooled so that it functions in a fee-for-value reimbursement environment as is has in a fee-for-service reimbursement environment. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is leading the
A mixed payment system combined with physician monitoring, will provide physicians with incentives to consider costs and benefits of different treatment options, which will lead to an efficient level and quality of care. (1,2)
Another type of managed care program that was introduced is the Preferred Provider Organization (PPO). A PPO is comprised of a group of physicians, hospitals and other medical service providers who contract with employers, insurance companies or other plan sponsors. The PPO offers discounted pricing to these contracted organizations due to the high volume of business received. PPO’s typically have up-front cost sharing in the form of deductibles and/or co-insurance, which vary depending upon the actual plan chosen.
In the past several years, there have been several changes in economic policy at federal and state levels. The two economic policies that present to be the most precedent for healthcare leaders with concern to facility reimbursement are the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the switch from volume to value reimbursement. First, there is the ACA policy, which have affected healthcare facilities and their reimbursement methods. In fact, ever since this policy was implemented, provider reimbursement has started to decrease in terms of fee-for-service payments (The Common-Wealth Fund, 2015). In other words, the intention of this policy was to provide budget relief to the government payers as well as giving providers an incentive to provider patients with great quality of care.
Accountable Care Organizations – “ ‘National Pilot Program On Payment Bundling’ - The Secretary shall establish a pilot program for integrated care during an episode of care provided to an applicable beneficiary around a hospitalization in order to improve the coordination, quality, and efficiency of health
When Medicare was first established, Medicare adopted the payment methods of Blue Cross Blue Shield which meant that the program was paid hospitals on the basis of their own costs and physicians were being reimbursed by the fees that they charged which caused hospitals and physicians to provide care without boundaries (Anderson et al., 2015). This method caused Medicare to dissipate the budget that was established for beneficiaries to utilize. Now, with the ACA being implemented, Medicare had done an overhaul of payment reimbursement. Medicare is now moving toward a volume to value payment initiative that links payment to patient outcomes, experience of care, while giving providers an incentive to limit spending
There is a growing trend in the United States called pay-for-performance. Pay-for-performance is a system that is used where providers are compensated by payers for meeting certain pre-established measures for quality and efficiency (What is Pay-for-Performance, n.a.). We are going to be discussing what pay-for-performance is. There are different aspects of pay-for-performance which include; the effects of reimbursement by this approach, the impact cost reductions has on quality and efficiency of health care, the affects to the providers and patients, and the effects on the future of health care.
Revenue determination is an important tool for health care organizations because it allows for efficient management of payment systems. This paper will look at the different components that form the payment-determination bases of revenue determination. Moreover, the difference between specific and bundled service payments will be discussed. Lastly, the three ways health care providers control their revenue function will be highlighted.
The goal of the initiative is to increase efficiency of care, improve quality of care, and lower costs. This initiative consists of four different bundled payment models. The first three bundled payment models are retrospective payment arrangements based on patients’ historical data. However, the fourth model is proposed for the future. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) make a single bundled payment to the hospital for all services during inpatient stays for hospitals, physicians, and other medical professional specialists.
Space prevents a full breakdown of the differences between fee-for-service and managed care. There are important characteristics of each that affect how trade-offs between quality and cost are made. For fee-for-service: There is no “defined population” for which the insurance company is responsible. Connections with the system are initiated by the patients. The main focus is on treating sick patients. Neither physicians nor insurance companies are responsible for providing care beyond what is specified when patients seek care (Eddy, 1997). The responsibility of the insurance company is to pay the bills. Importantly, the insurance company is not responsible for the overall health of its subscribers or for the quality of care delivered by individual physicians. Physicians are left to decide what care their patients should receive.
The positive outcomes that have resulted due to value base programs have caused the model to gain traction and ignite one of the largest changes in history in the health care marketplace. By linking reimbursements to service quality, insurers such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have facilitated a massive leap forward in the performance of United States health care providers. This achievement is a considerable accomplishment in the face of an institution that has received reimbursement from insurers via a fee-for-service model during the last 75 years. Soon, valued based payment models will represent the norm as more insurers support initiatives such as shared savings program, integrated clinical care, and accountable care payment models.