1
Click to edit Master title style
8/24/2016 1
Meaningful Use: Past, Present and Future
Bruce Maki, MA
M-CEITA / Altarum Institute Regulatory Analyst and Project Manager
Meaningful Use: Past, Present and Future Bruce Maki, MA M-CEITA / - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Click to edit Master title style Meaningful Use: Past, Present and Future Bruce Maki, MA M-CEITA / Altarum Institute Regulatory Analyst and Project Manager 8/24/2016 1 1 Agenda Overview of M-CEITA Meaningful Use Where have we
1
8/24/2016 1
M-CEITA / Altarum Institute Regulatory Analyst and Project Manager
2
3
▲ Michigan Center for Effective Information
Technology Adoption (M-CEITA)
▲ One of 62 ONC Regional Extension
Centers (REC) originally funded to provide education & technical assistance to primary care providers across the country
▲ Founded as part of the HITECH Act to
accelerate the adoption, implementation, and effective use of electronic health records (EHR), e.g. 90-days of MU
▲ Originally Funded by ARRA of 2009
(Stimulus Plan)
▲ Purpose: support the Triple Aim by
achieving 5 overall performance goals
Meaningful Use
Improve Quality, Safety & Efficiency Performance Measurement
Certified Technology Infrastructure
Engage Patients & Families Improve Care Coordi- nation Improve Population And Public Health Ensure Privacy And Security Protections Improve patient experience Improve population health Reduce costs
4
Technical assistance, including workflow redesign, security risk assessment and MU compliance. (e.g. patient portal and clinical quality measures) Support meeting the requirements of MU Measure: Protect Electronic Health Information, including an assessment using our exclusive tool. A workflow analysis and redesign of core processes using Lean principles to increase efficiency and reduce duplication. (e.g. chart prep, document management, test tracking, revenue cycle, etc.) A review of Meaningful Use attestation documentation using our exclusive Audit File Checklist to correct any issues before completing the process.
Technical Assistance for the Physician Quality Reporting System including measure selection as well as reporting method selection and assistance.
No cost Technical Assistance to eligible providers in support of quality improvement initiatives, PQRS support, and preparing for upcoming advanced payment model changes under MACRA/MIPS.
5
6
Role Changing Paradigm Healthcare Combating Illness Improving Wellness Physicians Directors of Care Collaborators in Care Patients Passive Recipients Active Participants Health Information Siloed and Episodic Integrated and Longitudinal Health IT Supporting Tasks Enhancing Understanding This paradigm shift requires significant investments, innovative people and extensible tools.
7
HIT & HIE
Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act HITECH Act
A system plagued by inefficiencies Paper Records EHR Incentive Programs and 62 Regional Extension Centers (RECs) Widespread adoption and meaningful use of HIT
8
▲ Meaningful Use is using certified electronic health record
– Improve quality, safety, efficiency, and reduce health disparities – Engage patients and families – Improve care coordination and population and public health – Maintain privacy and security of patient health information
▲ Ultimately, it is hoped that Meaningful Use compliance will
– Better clinical outcomes – Improved population health outcomes – Increased transparency and efficiency – Empowered individuals – More robust research data on health systems
9
Stage 1 Data capture and sharing Stage 2 Advanced clinical processes Stage 3 Improved
For more information on meaningful use of EHRs, visit: http://www.cms.gov/EHRIncentivePrograms/35_Meaningful_Use.asp
systems
10
1 CPOE for medications (entered into the electronic record) 30% 2 Drug-drug and drug-allergy interaction checks (enable only) YES 3 Problem list of current & active diagnoses 80% 4 E-Prescribing (transmission to pharmacy) 40% 5 Active medication list 80% 6 Active medication allergy list 80% 7 Demographics recorded as structured data 50% 8 Record/chart changes in vitals (height, weight and blood pressure, etc.) 50% 9 Record smoking status as structured data, 13+ years old 50% 10 Clinical Quality Measures (CQM) YES 11 Implement (1) clinical decision support rule YES 12 Electronic copy of patient health information, upon request w/in 3 days 50% 13 Clinical Summaries, within 3 business days 50% 14 Electronic exchange of key clinical information among providers of care YES 15 Protect electronic health information (SRA) YES
11
1 Drug Formulary Checks – implemented (enable only) YES 2 Clinical lab test results (as structured data) 40% 3 Patient lists (by specific condition) YES 4 Patient reminders (65+ years, and < 5 years) 20% 5 Patient electronic access (patient portal) 10% 6 Patient-specific education resources 10% 7 Medication reconciliation 50% 8 Transition of care summary 50% 9 Immunization registries data submission YES 10 Syndromic Surveillance data submission YES *Public health objective: At least one public health objective must be selected.
12
13
14
▲ Stage 1 and Stage 2 objectives and measures restructured to align
▲ Streamlined the program by removing redundant, duplicative, and
▲ One set of objectives and measures for all participants ▲ Patient engagement objectives that require “patient action” were
▲ Limited accommodations for “Scheduled” Stage 1 EPs in 2016
▲ Significant changes to the Public Health objective ▲ Optional “Alternate Exclusions” added to Public Health (2015-2016)
– No proof of intent/documentation required to claim Alt Exclusions
15
– New Participants: Any continuous 90 days within the Calendar Year (CY) – Returning Participants: Full Calendar Year (366 days)
– New Participants: Any continuous 90 days within the CY – Providers electing Stage 3: Any continuous 90 days within the CY (requires 2015 CEHRT) – Returning Participants: Full Calendar Year (365 days)
16
17
attestation
** EPs scheduled to be in Stage 1 in 2016 are not required to report on Lab and Radiology orders, only Medication orders
18
19
2011 - 2013 2014 2015 - 2017 2018 Stage 1 15 Core 5 Menu 6 CQMs Stage 1 13 Core 5 Menu 9 CQMs Stage 2 17 Core 3 Menu 9 CQMs Modified Stage 2 10 Objectives 9 CQMs Stage 3 Optional: 2017 8 Objectives, some with lowered thresholds Stage 3 8 Objectives CQM reporting is required by regulations; Medicare rulemaking to address reporting requirements
20
21
Objectives Modified Stage 2 Stage 3 (2018)* SRA Conduct or Review during CY and prior to attestation including addressing encryption/security of data created or maintained in CEHRT CPOE Medications > 60% > 60% Labs > 30% > 60% Radiology > 30% > 60% eRx > 50% of all permissible prescriptions are queried for a drug formulary AND transmitted electronically > 60% of all permissible prescriptions are queried for a drug formulary AND transmitted electronically Clinical Decision Support Rules 5 Enabled for Entire Reporting Period (RP) Interactions Enabled for Entire Reporting Period (RP)
22
Objectives Modified Stage 2 Stage 3 (2018)* Patient Education > 10% Incorporated into Patient Electronic Access View, Download and Transmit (VDT) Access > 50% w/in 4 days Incorporated into Patient Electronic Access Usage > 5% Incorporated into Coordination of Care through Patient Engagement Patient Electronic Access Access N/A > 80% of all unique patients are provided timely access to VDT their health information AND ensure health information is available for the patient to access using any application of their choice that is configured to meet the technical specifications of the API in the EPs CEHRT Patient Education For > 35% of unique patients, CEHRT is used to identify educational resources to which electronic access is provided Secure Messaging > 5% Incorporated into Coordination of Care through Patient Engagement
23
Objectives Modified Stage 2 Stage 3 (2018)* Coordination of Care through Patient Engagement VDT N/A > 10% of unique patients engage with EHR by either 1) VDT health information or 2) access health information via an API or 3) a combination of both Secure Messaging > 25% of unique patients, or in response to a secure message sent by patient Patient Generated Health Data > 5% of unique patients incorporate non-clinical setting data into the CEHRT Medication Reconciliation > 50% Incorporated into Health Information Exchange
24
Objectives Modified Stage 2 Stage 3 (2018)* Health Information Exchange Provide SoC Electronically Use CEHRT to create a SoC AND transmit electronically for > 10% of ToCs Use CEHRT to create a SoC AND transmit electronically for > 50% of ToCs Receive or Retrieve SoC N/A EP receives or retrieves a SoC for > 40% of ToCs in which the EP has never encountered the patient AND incorporates it into the patient’s CEHRT record Reconciliation of Clinical Information N/A Perform a reconciliation of clinical information for > 80% of transitions/referrals or for patient encounters in which the EP has never encountered the patient
25
Objectives Modified Stage 2 Stage 3 (2018)* Public Health Imms Registry Actively Engaged w/2 of 3 Actively Engaged w/3 of 5 Syndromic Surveillance Specialized Registry Electronic Case Reporting N/A PH Registry Reporting Included as Specialized Registry Clinical Data Registry Reporting * As Stage 3 is optional in 2017, some measure thresholds have been reduced to allow early adopters ease in transitioning to the 2018 Stage 3 required thresholds
26
27
▲ Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA).
▲ Bipartisan legislation (yes, really) that replaced the flawed Sustainable
▲ MACRA is more predictable than SGR. It will increase the number of
▲ Extends funding for Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for
▲ MANY of the details have yet to be determined, and there were several
▲ And introduces…
28
Clinicians who receive a substantial portion of their revenues (at least 25% of Medicare revenue in 2018-2019 and threshold will increase
time) from qualifying alternative payment mechanisms will not be subject to MIPS. Incentives: They will receive a 5% bonus each year from 2019 to 2024 (based on aggregate payments from Medicare for the preceding year). Payment rates in 2019 will be maintained through 2025 but with + / - adjustments based
the composite performance score of each eligible physician or other health professional on a 0-100 point scale based
four performance measures (more to come on the measures). Incentives: More to come on that too…
Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) Alternative Payment Model (APM)
29
30
31
Note:
categories
*Source: CPR 2014 National Scorecard on Payment Reform, based on the National commercial market using 2013 data.
32
▲ Combines multiple Medicare Part B quality reporting programs
▲ This new, single program is based on:
*MACRA does not alter or end the Medicaid EHR Incentive Program
33
▲ MIPS payment adjustments based on Composite Performance Score
▲ Budget neutral unless an exception applies ▲ Additional funding for positive adjustments for exceptional
▲ Incentive payments for certain eligible clinicians (ECs) who
▲ Higher update rate for “qualifying APM participants” (QPs) beginning
34
▲ Resource Use – 10% ▲ Clinical Practice Improvement Activities – 15% ▲ Advancing Care Information – 25% ▲ Quality – 50%
35
Objective Measure
Protect Patient Health Information Security Risk Analysis Electronic Prescribing ePrescribing Patient Access Patient-Specific Education View, Download and Transmit (VDT) Secure Messaging Patient-Generated Health Data Exchange Information with Other Physicians or Clinicians Exchange Information with Patients Clinical Information Reconciliation Immunization Registry Reporting (Optional) Syndromic Surveillance Reporting (Optional) Electronic Case Reporting (Optional) Public Health Registry Reporting (Optional) Clinical Data Registry Reporting
MIPS Advancing Care Information Objectives and Measures
Patient Electronic Access Coordination of Care Through Patient Engagement Health Information Exchange Public Health and Clinical Data Registry Reporting
36
(statutory floor for ACI weight is 15%)
(Yrs 1 and 2 HHS Secretary will establish threshold)
37
▲ Adjustments applied 2 years after performance year (e.g. 2019 payment
adjustment is based on 2017 performance year)
▲ Performance threshold is mean or median of the composite score for all
MIPS providers (except in first 2 years where Secretary will set)
▲ Linear payment adjustment based on composite score, as compared to
performance threshold (may be +, - or =)
▲ If you score in the lowest quartile of providers, you will automatically be
adjusted down to the maximum penalty
▲ Higher scores receive proportionally larger incentive payments, up to
three times the maximum positive adjustment for the year (4% x 3 = 12% in 2019)
▲ Highest performers are eligible for an “exceptional performance bonus” – Additional payment adjustment of +10% for MIPS providers exceeding the 25th percentile of all MIPS scores above the performance threshold (through 2024)
38
*MACRA allows potential 3x upward adjustment which will be used to maintain budget neutrality
39
40
▲ Alternative Payment Model or APM is a generic term describing a
payment model in which providers take responsibility for cost and quality performance and receive payments to support the services and activities designed to achieve high value
▲ According to MACRA, APMs include:
– Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) ACOs – Demonstrations under the Health Care Quality Demonstration Program – CMS Innovation Center Models – Demonstrations required by Federal Law (i.e. door is open for others to form)
▲ MACRA does not change how any particular APM pays for medical care
and rewards value
▲ APM participants may receive favorable scoring under certain MIPS
performance categories
▲ Only some of these APMs are “Advanced APMs”
41
▲ Advanced APMs offer greater potential inherent risks and rewards than MIPS ▲ Under MACRA, qualifying APM participants in “eligible” APMs:
− Are exempt from MIPS − Receive annual 5% lump sum bonus payments from 2019-2024 − Receive a higher fee schedule update for 2026 and onward (.25% or .75%)
42
43
▲ A “qualifying APM” is one that meets increasing thresholds for the
▲ An individual Eligible Clinician (EC) in a qualifying APM is a
▲ QP status is awarded to all advanced APM participants collectively
▲ If ECs advanced APM does not meet the volume threshold to qualify it’s
members for QP status, members are considered “Partially Qualifying”
▲ If an individual EC chooses to stay in the APM track, s/he will not receive the
5% bonus, but also will not be subject to MIPS
▲ If EC chooses, s/he can report MIPS measures and participate in the MIPS
incentive track
44
45
46
47
48
Bruce Maki bruce.maki@altarum.org 734-302-4744