Merit-Based Incentive Payment System: longitudinal performance and uneven rewards for safety-net providers over 5 years.

INTRODUCTION

Medicare Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), established by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to transition Medicare reimbursement toward value-based care, has faced criticism for its administrative complexity and potential inequities affecting safety-net providers (SNPs).

METHODS

This study analyzed 5-year data (2018-2022) to evaluate the performance and financial outcomes of clinicians consistently participating in MIPS, focusing on disparities between SNPs and non-SNPs.

RESULTS

We found that safety-net specialists were 31% more likely than non-safety-net specialists to consistently receive positive payment adjustments and earned modestly higher average adjustment rates (0.35% points). However, despite this superior performance, safety-net specialists did not achieve greater cumulative financial rewards due to MIPS's percentage-based adjustment structure, which disadvantages clinicians with smaller billing volumes. Our analysis also showed that MIPS financial incentives were generally modest-ranging from $300 to $4000 over 5 years-far below the estimated $12 000 in annual administrative compliance costs per physician reported in prior research.

CONCLUSION

To address these disparities and inefficiencies, policymakers should consider alternative models such as the American Medical Association's proposed Data-Driven Performance Payment System, which reduces administrative burden by simplifying the reporting process and ensures fairer financial rewards by uncoupling incentive payments from billing volume-thereby improving equity for safety-net clinicians.