Reschovsky James D, Converse Larisa, Rich Eugene C
James D. Reschovsky (
Larisa Converse is a research analyst at Mathematica Policy Research.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2015 Apr;34(4):689-96. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.1429. Epub 2015 Mar 11.
Congress is again attempting to repeal the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula. The formula is a failed mechanism intended to constrain Medicare Part B physician spending by adjusting annual physician fee updates. Congress has averted formula-driven physician fee cuts each year beginning in 2003 by overriding the SGR, usually accompanied with last-minute disputes about how these overrides should be paid for. Last year Congress achieved bipartisan and bicameral agreement on legislation to replace the SGR—the SGR Repeal and Medicare Provider Payment Modernization Act of 2014, which we refer to as the "2014 SGR fix"—but was unable to find a way to pay for the legislation under current budget rules. Current congressional deliberations appear focused on how to pay for the fix, with wide consensus that the 2014 legislation should remain the basic model for reform. We describe key features of the 2014 SGR fix, place it in the context of both past and ongoing Medicare health policy, assess its strengths and weaknesses as a mechanism to foster improved care and lower costs in Medicare, and suggest further actions to ensure success in meeting these goals.
国会再次试图废除可持续增长率(SGR)公式。该公式是一种失败的机制,旨在通过调整年度医生费用更新来限制医疗保险B部分的医生支出。自2003年起,国会每年都通过否决SGR来避免公式驱动的医生费用削减,通常还伴随着关于如何支付这些否决费用的最后一刻争议。去年,国会就取代SGR的立法达成了两党和两院的共识——2014年的《SGR废除与医疗保险提供者支付现代化法案》,我们将其称为“2014年SGR修正法案”——但在现行预算规则下未能找到支付该立法费用的方法。当前国会的审议似乎集中在如何支付修正费用上,人们普遍认为2014年的立法应继续作为改革的基本模式。我们描述了2014年SGR修正法案的关键特征,将其置于过去和当前医疗保险健康政策的背景下,评估其作为一种在医疗保险中促进改善医疗服务和降低成本的机制的优缺点,并提出进一步行动以确保在实现这些目标方面取得成功。