Cabaniss Brian, Williams Korwyn, Ward Meghan, Cremeen Desiree, Nair Kavita
Emory University (BC), Atlanta, GA; Phoenix Children's Hospital (KW), Phoenix, AZ; Intermountain Medical Group (MW), Murray, UT; American Academy of Neurology (DC), Minneapolis, MN; and University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (KN), Aurora, CO.
Neurol Clin Pract. 2022 Jun;12(3):270-272. doi: 10.1212/CPJ.0000000000001153.
The American Academy of Neurology (AAN) has recently proposed 3 outcome metrics crafted to be both broadly applicable across neurologic diseases and to function as potential tools to facilitate quality improvement. These measures should be of interest to physicians and payers due to the increasing linkage of reimbursement to quality care. However, the use of quality measures cannot exist in a vacuum as external factors outside of physician control can negatively affect these metrics. The original Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) value-based programs illustrate the necessity for iterative review and revision of outcome metrics to allow for risk adjustment to avoid unjust penalties. Accordingly, at this time, the Neurology Outcome Measurement Set is not suitable for inclusion in a quality payment program.
美国神经病学学会(AAN)最近提出了3种结果指标,旨在广泛适用于各种神经系统疾病,并作为促进质量改进的潜在工具。由于报销与优质医疗服务之间的联系日益紧密,这些措施应该会引起医生和支付方的兴趣。然而,质量指标的使用不能孤立存在,因为医生无法控制的外部因素可能会对这些指标产生负面影响。最初的医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)基于价值的项目表明,有必要对结果指标进行反复审查和修订,以便进行风险调整,避免不合理的处罚。因此,目前,神经病学结果测量集不适合纳入质量支付计划。