Liao Joshua M, Pauly Mark V, Navathe Amol S
Joshua M. Liao is medical director of payment strategy, director of the Value and Systems Science Lab, and an assistant professor in the Department of Medicine, University of Washington, in Seattle, and an adjunct senior fellow at the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia.
Mark V. Pauly is the Bendheim Professor in the Health Care Management Department at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2020 Feb;39(2):305-309. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00570.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services continues to propose and implement alternative payment models (APMs) to shift Medicare payment away from fee-for-service and toward approaches that emphasize health care value. As APMs expand in scope, one critical question is whether they should engage providers on a voluntary or a mandatory basis. Clinicians and policy makers may view the benefits and drawbacks of these two modes of participation differently. In this Analysis we compare the benefits and drawbacks of mandatory and voluntary participation, based on clinical versus policy perspectives, and we argue that both modes are necessary for APMs to achieve the goal of improving value. Policy makers should match the mode of participation and related financial incentives to each clinical scenario in which an APM is implemented. We propose ways to coordinate mandatory and voluntary APMs based on clinical scenarios.
医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心继续提出并实施替代支付模式(APM),以使医疗保险支付从按服务收费转向强调医疗保健价值的方式。随着APM范围的扩大,一个关键问题是它们应以自愿还是强制的方式让提供者参与。临床医生和政策制定者可能对这两种参与模式的利弊有不同看法。在本分析中,我们从临床和政策角度比较了强制参与和自愿参与的利弊,并认为这两种模式对于APM实现提高价值的目标都是必要的。政策制定者应根据实施APM的每种临床情况,匹配参与模式和相关财务激励措施。我们提出了基于临床情况协调强制性和自愿性APM的方法。