Medicare's Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS): quality measurement and beneficiary attribution.

Medicare & medicaid research review Pub Date : 2014-06-25 eCollection Date: 2014-01-01 DOI:10.5600/mmrr.004.02.a04
Bryan Dowd, Chia-hsuan Li, Tami Swenson, Robert Coulam, Jesse Levy
{"title":"Medicare's Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS): quality measurement and beneficiary attribution.","authors":"Bryan Dowd,&nbsp;Chia-hsuan Li,&nbsp;Tami Swenson,&nbsp;Robert Coulam,&nbsp;Jesse Levy","doi":"10.5600/mmrr.004.02.a04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To explore two issues that are relevant to inclusion of PQRS reporting in a value-based payment system: (1) what are the characteristics of PQRS reports and the providers who file them; and (2) could PQRS provide active attribution information to supplement existing attribution algorithms?</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>Using data from five states for the years 2008 (the first full year of the program) and 2009, we examined the number and type of providers who reported PQRS measures and the types of measures that were reported. We then compared the PQRS reporting provider to the provider who supplied the plurality of the beneficiary's non-hospital evaluation and management (NH-E&M) visits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Although PQRS-reporting providers provide only 17 percent of the beneficiary's NH-E&M visits on average in 2009, the provider who provided the plurality of visits supplied only 50 percent of such visits, on average.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>PQRS reporting alone cannot solve the attribution problem that is inherent in traditional fee-for-service Medicare, but as PQRS participation increases, it could help improve both attribution and information regarding the quality of health care services delivered to Medicare beneficiaries.</p>","PeriodicalId":89601,"journal":{"name":"Medicare & medicaid research review","volume":"4 2","pages":"doi: 10.5600/mmrr.004.02.a04"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4077700/pdf/mmrr2014-004-02-a04.pdf","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicare & medicaid research review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5600/mmrr.004.02.a04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2014/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

Purpose: To explore two issues that are relevant to inclusion of PQRS reporting in a value-based payment system: (1) what are the characteristics of PQRS reports and the providers who file them; and (2) could PQRS provide active attribution information to supplement existing attribution algorithms?

Design and methods: Using data from five states for the years 2008 (the first full year of the program) and 2009, we examined the number and type of providers who reported PQRS measures and the types of measures that were reported. We then compared the PQRS reporting provider to the provider who supplied the plurality of the beneficiary's non-hospital evaluation and management (NH-E&M) visits.

Results: Although PQRS-reporting providers provide only 17 percent of the beneficiary's NH-E&M visits on average in 2009, the provider who provided the plurality of visits supplied only 50 percent of such visits, on average.

Implications: PQRS reporting alone cannot solve the attribution problem that is inherent in traditional fee-for-service Medicare, but as PQRS participation increases, it could help improve both attribution and information regarding the quality of health care services delivered to Medicare beneficiaries.

Abstract Image

医疗保险医师质量报告系统(PQRS):质量测量和受益人归属。
目的:探讨与在基于价值的支付系统中纳入PQRS报告相关的两个问题:(1)PQRS报告的特征和提交它们的提供者;(2) PQRS能否提供主动归因信息来补充现有的归因算法?设计和方法:使用来自五个州2008年(项目的第一个完整年度)和2009年的数据,我们检查了报告PQRS测量的提供者的数量和类型以及报告的测量类型。然后,我们将PQRS报告提供者与提供多次受益人非医院评估和管理(NH-E&M)访问的提供者进行比较。结果:尽管pqrs报告提供者在2009年平均只提供了受益人NH-E&M就诊的17%,但提供多次就诊的提供者平均只提供了50%的此类就诊。结论:仅靠PQRS报告无法解决传统按服务收费的医疗保险中固有的归因问题,但随着PQRS参与的增加,它可以帮助改善向医疗保险受益人提供的医疗保健服务质量的归因和信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信