Meaningful Use

The Oregon-based network said the new electronic health record system will help it improve care quality and coordination.

The pressure to shift to value-based care means providers must understand their patients more deeply than in the past. Achieving that as part of a population health management program demands rethinking existing processes.

Implementation of MACRA will impact not only physicians, but also the hospitals with whom they partner, the American Hospital Association told Andy Slavitt, acting administrator of CMS, and the U.S. House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Health on Wednesday. Health Subcommittee members met with Slavitt Wednesday on the implementation of the Medicare Access and the CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015. MACRA's Quality Payment Program, released by CMS on April 27, consolidates a patchwork of programs into two paths for physicians receiving Medicare payments: the Merit-based Incentive Payment Systems (MIPS); and an Advanced Alternative Payment Model (APM). The AHA said it applauds MACRA's streamlining of the physician reporting burden, but still has concerns, especially for smaller practices, and is disappointed the federal government is providing no financial incentives for upfront investments in technology to meet the demands of implementation. The estimated investment is $11.6 million for a small accountable care organization and $26.1 million for a medium ACO, the AHA said. [See also: A deep dive on the 'overwhelmingly complex' MACRA proposed rule.] "Hospitals that employ physicians directly may bear the cost of implementation of an ongoing compliance with the new physician performance reporting requirements under the Merit-based Incentive Payment Systems, as well as be at risk for any payment adjustments," the AHA said in a statement. "Moreover, hospitals may be called upon to participate in alternative payment models so that the physicians with whom they partner can qualify for bonus payments and exemption from MIPS reporting requirements that accompanies the APM 'track.'" House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Health Chairman Pat Tiberi, R-Ohio, asked Slavitt about concerns he's heard about the difficulty smaller practices may have coming into compliance, saying the rural provider, and one or two-person provider group "has a bunch of angst right now." Slavitt said the data shows that smaller and solo practices can succeed as well as physicians in larger-size groups as long as they report. It's up to CMS to make the reporting burden as easy as possible, Slavitt said. "Importantly we are looking for additional steps and ideas as people review the rules, but I will say that we are focusing on technical assistance, providing access to medical home models, opportunities to report in groups and using a reporting process that automatically feeds data, reduces the number of measures and overall lowers the burden for small practices," Slavitt said. Small physicians can report in groups and other physicians may not have to report at all because they're under a minimum threshold for the number of Medicare patients they see, Slavitt said. Slavitt said he's heard from physicians that they want to focus on care, not reporting. Congress has provided funding for MACRA technical assistance to small practices, rural practices and others, he said. MACRA replaces the sustainable growth rate and changes the way physicians and providers are paid, moving the healthcare system closer to CMS's goal of tying 50 percent of Medicare payments to alternative payment models by 2018. CMS is taking comment on the MACRA proposal for 60 days. "Success will come from adopting approaches that are practice-driven," Slavitt said. "It is our intent to align the MIPS and the Advanced APM components of the Quality Payment Program, allowing maximum flexibility for clinicians to switch between MIPS and participation in Advanced APMS based on what works best for them and their patients." To spur motivation, MACRA established an 11-member independent advisory committee, the Physician-Focused Payment Model Technical Advisory Committee, PTAC, that will meet quarterly to review payment models. [See also: A deep dive on the 'overwhelmingly complex' MACRA proposed rule.] The AHA has formed its own clinical advisory group to identify  important policy and operational implications of MIPS and APMS for hospitals. The AHA recommends hospital-based physicians be able to use their hospital's quality reporting and pay-for-performance program to measure performance in MIPS; employ risk adjustment rigorously, including for sociodemographics to ensure providers do not perform poorly simply because they care for more complex patients; and align EHR Incentive Program changes for physicians with those of eligible hospitals. The AHA applauded CMS's proposal to reduce the number of measures for quality reporting from nine to six, and also for its recent work with private insurers and physician groups to reach agreement on a common set of physician quality measures that can be used in both CMS and private payer pay-for-performance programs. "Physicians and hospitals alike spend significant resources reporting on multiple versions of measures assessing the same aspect of care to meet the differing requirements of CMS and individual private payers," the AHA said. The AHA is disappointed CMS has proposed a narrow definition of financial risk in advanced APMs for purposes of MACRA bonus payments, in not recognizing the upfront investment made by providers to implement alternative payment models. The AHA also said fraud and abuse laws need to be modified for a "legal safe zone" where physicians and hospitals can share information Twitter: @SusanJMorse

"With respect to some business practices: It's time to lead, follow or get out of the way," CMS Acting Administrator Andy Slavitt said at the 2016 Health Datapalooza in Washington, D.C. "If you want to lead the way with innovations that help consumers, great; if you want to follow by using established standards for data and measurement and technology, also great," he added. "If you have a business model which relies on silo-ing data, not using standards or not allowing data to follow the needs of patients – pick a new business model or pick a new business." On the heels of the April announcement of the proposed MACRA ruling, Slavitt spoke to healthcare innovators, industry leaders and developers early Tuesday evening. And while he had no further news to share with the specifics of the proposal, it was clear his intentions were firm. "What Vice President Biden said should stick with us: As taxpayers, we did not spend $35 billion so companies could build their own silos," Slavitt said. "At this stage, there's no room for business practices that don’t match the need of patients." On the forefront of Slavitt's thoughts were patients with the least access to care and an "obsession with a plight of the independent physician." However, "physicians are baffled by what feels like the 'physician data paradox.' They're overloaded on data entry and yet rampantly under-informed," Slavitt said. And the majority of providers are seeing a chasm between the time needed to invest in making the IT work and the actual positive results within their practices. "Technology isn’t doing the things we know it can," he added. "Help us make smarter decisions, reduce our wasted time, help us communicate or understand what to expect next." While these issues are troubling, according to Slavitt, the solution isn't the need for more IT inventions. But rather five crucial steps to initiate change in the healthcare industry: the massive release of data; changing incentives to reward providers for patient outcomes; creating "core" quality measures across all payers; advancing interoperability; and the proposed replacement of meaningful use. "These steps are designed to make it easier for you to innovate, to open up competition and to move the focus from designing around regulations, to allowing you to design around patients’ and physicians’ needs," Slavitt said. "The opportunity for you to transform healthcare into an information industry has never been more ripe or more urgent." Twitter: @JessieFDavis Email the writer: jessica.davis@himssmedia.com Like Healthcare IT News on Facebook and LinkedIn

Many physicians have waited with bated breath for the end of meaningful use, looking forward to a new era of less burdensome compliance requirements and more realistic reporting guidelines. This may not be what they had in mind.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services chief Andy Slavitt asks hospital executives for 'meaningful engagement' with the proposed new MACRA policy, and hints they should follow Washington rule-making closely in the near future.

A group of Republican senators who have been looking to "reboot" meaningful us since 2013 released new draft legislation this week they say aims to make the incentive program work better for providers and taxpayers. U.S. Senators John Thune, R-South Dakota, Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, Mike Enzi, R-Wyoming, Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, Richard Burr, R-North Carolina and Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana – all of whom voted against the 2009 ARRA law that helped establish meaningful use through the HITECH Act – wrote this week to HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell and CMS Acting Administrator Andy Slavitt, looking for feedback on the bill. [Also: Republican senators want to ‘reboot’ MU] The draft legislation would shorten the reporting period for eligible physicians and hospitals from 365 days to 90 days, which would give providers more time to implement EHR systems, relax the all-or-nothing nature of the current program requirement, and extend the ability for eligible providers and hospitals to apply for a hardship exemption from the meaningful use requirements. "These policies seek to provide CMS with the tools and guidance necessary to advance the use of EHRs as part of utilizing health IT to the benefit of patients in a manner that protects the significant taxpayer investment in our nation’s health care system," the legislators write. Thune, Alexander, Enzi, Roberts, and Burr are original members of the Senate’s health IT working group, known as Re-examining the Strategies Needed to Successfully Adopt Health IT, or REBOOT. Back in 2013, they published a white paper outlining their complaints about lack of momentum toward interoperability, patient privacy concerns, EHRs' potential to enable fraud and abuse and other concerns about federal health IT policy. [Also: EHRA critiques GOP's MU 'reboot' plan] "We received critical feedback in response to our 2013 report which has informed our work on these issues," the senators wrote to Burwell and Slavitt this week. "We also engaged with stakeholders including health IT developers, providers, and patient-focused organizations to assess their experiences with the meaningful use program, as well as their concerns with the state of health IT, specifically EHRs, over the years. "In response to this feedback we have identified a few key policy changes outlined in the enclosed draft legislation, and we respectfully request feedback as part of our continued constructive dialogue on these issues."

On Twitter, former National Coordinator for Health IT Farzad Mostashari, MD, called it the "most substantive change to how healthcare is paid for in a couple of decades." The propsed MACRA rule put forth by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on Wednesday also holds some pretty big changes for how health IT can be put to work by physicians to drive quality improvement and cost efficiencies. [Also: MACRA proposed rule published by HHS, streamlining federal programs including meaningful use] "By proposing a flexible, rather than a one-size-fits-all program, we are attempting to reflect how doctors and other clinicians deliver care and give them the opportunity to participate in a way that is best for them, their practice and their patients," said Patrick Conway, MD, chief medical officer at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, in announcing the rule. "Reducing burden and improving how we measure performance supports clinicians in doing what they do best – caring for their patients." So far, most industry reaction to the notice for proposed rulemaking is positive – recognizing the fact CMS seems to have taken the feedback from more than 6,000 frontline healthcare stakeholders to heart, crafting a rule that's attuned to the needs of physicians. In a statement, HIMSS applauded the "significantly streamlined reporting and the acknowledgement process for MIPS-eligible clinicians" in the new rule. "We are encouraged by CMS's effort to coordinate reporting periods across federal programs and the decision to align with the ONC Interoperability and Certification Programs," HIMSS officials said. "With the first MIPS performance full-year reporting period expected to begin on January 1, 2017, we're further analyzing the MACRA rule to ensure that Medicare providers will be able to meet the proposed requirements." American Medical Association President Steven Stack, MD, meanwhile, said it's "hard to overstate the significance of these proposed regulations for patients and physicians." In particular, he was pleased that CMS has been listening to physicians’ concerns and "has made significant improvements, by recasting the EHR meaningful use program and by reducing quality reporting burdens." American Health Information Management Association CEO Lynne Thomas Gordon released a statement saying AHIMA supports the MIPS progam's "emphasis on interoperability, information exchange and security measures, which we believe are critical to reaching the rule’s stated long-term goal of ‘better care, smarter spending, and healthier people.'" The Premier healthcare alliance was less pleased, however – specifically taking issue with one part of the two-pronged MACRA approach to value-based care: its provisions related to advanced payment models, or APMs. CMS "made a significant mistake in not including any bundled payment or Track 1 Medicare Shared Savings Program ACOs as qualifying advanced payment models under MACRA," said Blair Childs, senior vice president of public affairs at Premier Inc. "Rather than rejecting bundled payment programs, we believe CMS should focus on ways to alter the bundled payment programs to demonstrate use of certified EHR technology and align measures with other Advanced APMs. "We also believe CMS seriously erred in excluding Track 1 MSSP ACOs in the APMs for failing to meet the more than 'nominal risk' financial requirement," said Childs. "As we've learned through members in our Population Health Management Collaborative, these programs require providers to not only forego revenue through a lower volume of services, but also investment millions of dollars in redesigning care through new technologies, data analytics, additional staff, etc.," he said. "We think most businessmen would call that more than nominal risk, yet CMS choses to define it as only cases where there is risk to the government." Elsewhere in the Twitterverse, the response was mostly positive – with some skepticism and a bit of I-told-you-so mixed in. And "Meaningful Use" is going "away" by changing its name to "Advancing Care Information" #MACRA #livetweeting as I read the proposed rule — Joy Rios (@askjoyrios) April 28, 2016 or basically what #MU should have been from day 1 @Travis_Broome — Harold Smith III (@haroldsmith3rd) April 28, 2016 1/Bottom Line #MACRA NPRM Game changer. Lots of great changes, 100's of thoughtful details and decisions. Biggest blind spot can be fixed — Farzad Mostashari (@Farzad_MD) April 27, 2016 Really good YouTube "whiteboard" connecting the dots of our MACRA announcement. Plain English. No acronyms. Wow. https://t.co/qLHSpYnWRX — Andy Slavitt (@ASlavitt) April 27, 2016 A tree died for this #MACRA #MIPS #Medicare pic.twitter.com/YsiSd3R9Mf — Amanda Narod (@AmandaBinDC) April 28, 2016

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued a long-awaited proposed rule for the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015, or MACRA, on Wednesday, ushering in some big changes for the ways physicians are assessed for quality of care and use of information technology.    

The Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT said it can harness data it already has to help providers make better electronic health record purchasing decisions.