Specialty Societies to MedPAC: MIPS Should Stay Put | Healthcare Informatics Magazine | Health IT | Information Technology Skip to content Skip to navigation

Specialty Societies to MedPAC: MIPS Should Stay Put

October 26, 2017
by Rajiv Leventhal
| Reprints

The Alliance of Specialty Medicine has said it opposes the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission’s (MedPAC’s) recent suggestion to repeal MIPS (the Merit-based Incentive Payment System) in its current form.

The coalition of specialty societies, which represents more than 100,000 specialty physicians from 13 specialty and subspecialty societies, wrote a letter to MedPAC’s Chairman Francis J. Crosson, M.D., responding to MedPAC’s October meeting in which the Congressional agency came to near-unanimous agreement that MIPS should be scrapped.

MACRA’s (the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act) Quality Payment program is inclusive of two payment paths that eligible Medicare-participating physicians could partake in—MIPS and the advanced alternative payment model (APM) track—and began in January 2017.

According to a story in MedPage Today, MedPAC analysts have discussed an alternative policy approach that leverages population-based measures. As the MedPage report noted, “The Voluntary Value Program, as they've dubbed the alternative, would get rid of the MIPS program and all three types of reporting requirements—Advancing Care Information (ACI), Clinical Practice Improvement Activities (CPIA), and quality measures—and scrap CMS support for electronic health records [EHRs] reporting.”

In this new model, all clinicians would see a portion of their fee schedule dollars withheld, which would be lumped into a pool. Clinicians would then have three options: choose to be measured with a "sufficiently large entity" of clinicians and be eligible for value payments; choose to participate in an advanced APM model (and receive withhold back); or make no election and lose the withheld fee schedule dollars.

During the October meeting, almost all MedPAC members said they are in favor of a MIPS repeal.

But the specialty societies are in major disagreement with MedPAC. They wrote that they strongly oppose this policy option and recommendation for several reasons: first, a lack of A-APMs for specialists to meaning fully engage exists; second, the limitations of population-based measures in determining quality and cost of specialty medical care will hinder specialists’ performance in “large” entities; third, MACRA very clearly intended to promote the development of clinically relevant, specialty-based quality measures; fourth, most physicians do not practice in “large” entities; thus impeding these individuals or groups from successful participation; and finally, fee-for-service remains a viable reimbursement structure for many specialists and subspecialists where alternative models of care and payment have already addressed the value equation for the vast majority of their services.

The Alliance specifically references a Leavitt Partners report which said that not every provider has a path forward under the A-APM track of the QPP, and some specialty providers have no opportunity to be in that track at all. The letter noted, “Specialists, such as ophthalmologists, neurosurgeons, and rheumatologists, will see 153 (0.7 percent), 46 (0.8 percent) and 79 (1.4 percent) of their respective specialty physicians in Medicare qualify for an incentive under the APM track, whereas the remaining will participate in the MIPS program.”

As such, the letter concluded, “Eliminating MIPS in favor of MedPAC’s proposed new quality program would discourage specialty physicians from developing robust quality and outcomes measures, including the establishment of high-value clinical data registries, and would thwart efforts to collect and report performance data.”

It should be noted that according to that MedPage report, not all MedPAC members supported the new model despite favoring a MIPS repeal. One member said that since it’s voluntary, providers can always choose to go back to traditional fee-for-service, which would not be beneficial. Another member pondered if the proposed model was too close to the advanced-APM structure.

Get the latest information on Health IT and attend other valuable sessions at this two-day Summit providing healthcare leaders with educational content, insightful debate and dialogue on the future of healthcare and technology.

Learn More

Topics

News

Study will Leverage Connecticut HIE to Help Prevent Suicides

A new study will aim to leverage CTHealthLink, a physician-led health information exchange (HIE) in Connecticut, to help identify the factors leading to suicide and to ultimately help prevent those deaths.

Duke Health First to Achieve HIMSS Stage 7 Rating in Analytics

North Carolina-based Duke Health has become the first U.S. healthcare institution to be awarded the highest honor for analytic capabilities by HIMSS Analytics.

NIH Releases First Dataset from Adolescent Brain Development Study

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced the release of the first dataset from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, which will enable scientists to conduct research on the many factors that influence brain, cognitive, social, and emotional development.

Boston Children's Accelerates Data-Driven Approach to Clinical Research

In an effort to bring a more data-driven approach to clinical research, Boston Children’s Hospital has joined the TriNetX global health research network.

Paper Records, Films Most Common Type of Healthcare Data Breach, Study Finds

Despite the high level of hospital adoption of electronic health records and federal incentives to do so, paper and films were the most frequent location of breached data in hospitals, according to a recent study.

AHA Appoints Senior Advisor for Cybersecurity and Risk

The American Hospital Association (AHA) has announced that John Riggi has joined the association as senior advisor for cybersecurity and risk.