THCB

The Thing to Watch in the Medicare ACO Regulations

By VINCE KURAITIS

Health care lobbyists and advocates are bracing for six pages of the health care reform law to explode into more than 1,000 pages of federal regulations when the Department of Health and Human Services releases its long-delayed accountable care organization rules this week. Politico

What should you be looking for as you snuggle by the fireplace this weekend reading the draft ACO regs?

Rob Lazerow writes a helpful article listing 5 Things to Watch in the Medicare Shared Savings Program Proposed Rule. His list of five key design issues includes:

  1. How will patients be assigned to ACOs?
  2. To what cost benchmark will ACOs be compared?
  3. How will bonuses be calculated and paid?
  4. For which quality metrics will ACOs be responsible?
  5. What is the application process?

I’d like to add a sixth  item — which actually would be #1 on my list.

As I’ve previously written, IMHO the central issue around ACOs is:

Are (hospitals and doctors) viewing ACOs as a way to truly develop patient centric, collaborative care or as a means toward consolidating market power against payers? We really don’t know.

So here’s item #6:

6. What incentives and safeguards will assure that ACOs are focused on coordinating and integrating clinical care vs. consolidating market power?

Here are some specifics I’ll be looking for:

  • How meaningful are guidelines, metrics and thresholds that define and specify elements of clinical integration?
  • Are doctors and hospitals incentivized to provide value? How will this be measured?
  • Will there be explicit safe harbors clarifying anti-trust and other regulatory issues? Will there be allowances for meaningful collaboration among providers? Will there be penalties for collusion leading to higher prices?
  • Are the ACO Shared Savings regs designed to be an end point financing/delivery model or a first step in a transition toward shifting some downside risk to care providers (e.g., bundled payments or episodic payments)? There’s a danger that this initial Medicare shared savings ACO approach could become the worst of both worlds:
    • retaining the perverse incentives of current fee-for-service payment while adding potential for bonuses
    • not providing sufficient long-term incentives for care providers to change systems and workflow to improve patient care.
  • Will there be specific requirements for ACO information technology?
  • …and others (please add your comments).

Vince Kuraitis JD, MBA, is a health care consultant and primary author of the e-CareManagement blog where this post first appeared.

Livongo’s Post Ad Banner 728*90

6
Leave a Reply

6 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
6 Comment authors
DufreisJesse Cole M.D.Barry CarolPeterMD as HELL Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Dufreis
Guest

I think it’s all because of the 2012 elections

Jesse Cole M.D.
Guest
Jesse Cole M.D.

ACO’s are not patient centric, and the idea that people will be able to seek care out of the ACO is laughable. ACO’s pit doctors and ACO’s against patients for their living. Not somewhere I want to be when I am in need of medical care. This whole ACO concept is ill thought out and based on hopes and wishes, but most of all, the desire of a lot of different players to get their hands on the money. The idea that hospitals can save health care dollars is laughable. NEJM article of March 24 showed that ACO’s lose money… Read more »

Barry Carol
Guest
Barry Carol

My understanding is that assigning patients to an ACO is more of an accounting concept than an HMO concept. Patients will be allowed to seek care outside of the ACO but for tracking and accounting purposes, all healthcare care costs incurred by a given patient will be assigned to a specific ACO. I’m troubled by plans to reward providers with bonuses if they provide care at a total cost below a predetermined benchmark but not penalize them if care costs exceed the target. The potential to earn a bonus needs to be balanced by the risk of penalties for exceeding… Read more »

Peter
Guest
Peter

I agree with MD, it’ll be Republican fodder for big government scare tactics. Interestingly single-pay/government controlled systems in other countries don’t appear to strictly control access to care providers.

http://healthcarecostmonitor.thehastingscenter.org/richardsaltman/doctor-choice-abroad/

MD as HELL
Guest
MD as HELL

Assigning patients like you own them is going to be great for the 2012 election.

Margalit Gur-Arie
Guest

Vince, I would argue that in view of #1, your concerns about patient centric care are superfluous because this is not going to be a patient centric proposal, at least not the way I understand the term patient centric. I am in the middle of reading this little jewel from PCPCC, Dartmouth and the Commonwealth Fund http://www.pcpcc.net/files/better_best_guide_full_2011.pdf and just came across this nugget: “If patients are assigned providers under an ACO model, we may see consumer pushback as they perceive their choices are being made for them, rather than in collaboration with them. There is a need for “first principles”… Read more »