OBJECTIVE: Identify changes and trends in the real value of Medicare payments for anesthesia services between 2000 and 2020 and how it may affect practices.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis.
METHODS: We utilized the Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary (PSPS) datasets of Medicare Part B claims to identify high volume anesthesia services in 2020 with 20 years of data. The Consumer Price Index was used as a measure of inflation to adjust prices.
METHODS: The PSPS datasets contain summaries of all annual Medicare Part B claims and payment amounts by carrier and locality.
METHODS: Patients receiving anesthesia services.
METHODS: For each service, identified by Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, we trended the average Medicare payment per procedure from 2000 to 2020 and calculated year to year changes and compound annual growth rate (CAGR). We also evaluated base and time units for each CPT code and the national Medicare anesthesia conversion factor (CF) for the same years.
RESULTS: The average Medicare payment in the study sample increased 20.1% from 2000 to 2020. After adjusting for inflation, the average Medicare payment per anesthesia service decreased by 20.8% over that period. The Medicare anesthesia CF increased 24.9% in the same period, and after adjusting for inflation, the real value of the CF decreased 16.9%. Average CAGR across the 20 anesthesia services was 0.88%, compared to the average annual inflation at 2.06%.
CONCLUSIONS: Average Medicare payment for common anesthesia services after adjusting for inflation have decreased from 2000 to 2020, consistent with findings in other physician specialties. Understanding these trends is important for practice viability and suggests significant financial implications for anesthesia practices and hospitals if the trend were to continue.

The provision of dental sleep medicine (DSM) has caused the rapid growth and expansion of an industry that includes health care providers, manufacturers, and retailers. Sleep is used as a vital sign by health care providers to screen and test for sleep disorders and to prevent future health issues, disease, and catastrophic events. Professional services and devices continue to be developed to enhance and foster better sleep hygiene and environment and to encourage improved sleep by building a comprehensive portfolio of sleep solutions, including DSM. However, the provision of DSM requires compliance with applicable state and federal regulations.

Background: Telehealth and in-person behavioral health services have previously shown equal effectiveness, but cost studies have largely been limited to travel savings for telehealth cohorts. The purpose of this analysis was to compare telehealth and in-person cohorts, who received behavioral health services in a large multisite study of usual care treatment approaches to examine relative value units (RVUs) and payment. Methods: We used current procedural terminology codes for each encounter to identify RVUs and Medicare payment rates. Mixed linear regression models compared telehealth and in-person cohorts on RVUs, per-encounter payment rates, and total-episode payment rates. Results: We found the behavioral health services provided by telehealth to have modest, but statistically significantly lower RVUs (i.e., less provider work in time spent and case complexity), per-encounter payments, and total episode payments than the in-person cohort. Despite Medicare rates discounting payments for nonphysician providers and the in-person cohort using clinical social workers more frequently, the services provided by the telehealth cohort still had lower payments. Thus, the differences observed are due to the in-person cohort receiving higher payment RVU services than the telehealth cohort, which was more likely to receive briefer therapy sessions and other less expensive services. Conclusions: Behavioral health services provided by telehealth used services with lower RVUs than behavioral health services provided in-person, on average, even after adjusting for patient demographics and diagnosis. Observed differences in Medicare payments resulted from the provider type and services used by the two cohorts; thus, costs and insurance reimbursements may vary for others.

To investigate the impact of Medicare\'s skilled nursing facility (SNF) copayment policy, with a large increase in the daily copayment rate on the 20th day of a benefit period, on length of stay, patient outcomes, and costs.
Retrospective cohort study from 2012 to 2016 using Medicare claims and SNF assessment data, including SNF admissions for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries.
We first estimate how changes in Medicare\'s SNF copayment on the 21st day of a patient\'s benefit period affect length of SNF stay. We then use benefit day on admission as an instrumental variable to estimate the impact of SNF length of stay related to the copayment policy on readmission and Medicare payment.
From 2012 to 2016, we examined 291 134 SNF admissions. Higher benefit day on SNF admission was strongly associated with shorter SNF stays. A 1-day shorter SNF stay was associated with higher readmission rate within 30 days of hospital discharge (1.5 percentage points; 95% CI 1.4-1.6, P < .001) and within 30 days of SNF discharge (0.9 percentage points; 95% CI 0.8-1.0), lower total Medicare payment for the 90-day episode after hospital discharge ($396; 95% CI 361-431, P < .001), but $179 higher payment for the 90 days after SNF discharge (95% CI 149-210, P < .001), offsetting the lower payment for the shorter index SNF stay.
Medicare\'s SNF copayment policy is associated with shorter lengths of stay and worse patient outcomes, suggesting the copayment policy has unintended and negative effects on patient outcomes.

Facing projected growth in federal deficits, policymakers may increasingly look to Medicare for opportunities to slow spending. Medicare Advantage, which has grown to over one-third of the Medicare population, now costs the federal government over $230 billion a year. Competition in the program is weak in many parts of the country and federal subsidies are distributed unevenly to beneficiaries who are enrolled. This article offers a potential approach toward reforming the Medicare Advantage payment system, which could lower federal costs and enhance equity in the program. It builds a simple framework containing policy options and uses 2015 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data to estimate the stylized impact on federal spending and enrollee benefits.

This article examines the work and leadership of the American Geriatrics Society in making payment for services provided under new, innovative payment codes a reality for geriatrics healthcare professionals. We examine more than a decade of work spanning from a proposal to pay for comprehensive geriatric assessments in 2003 to the multiyear effort that led to Medicare coverage for transitional care management (2013), chronic care management (2015, 2017), and assessment and care planning for cognitive impairment (2017). We review the forces that created an environment for change and the concurrent work of the American Medical Association and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that made this possible. We highlight opportunities seized that led to seats on crucial panels and legislative victories that helped us make our case for improved payment for geriatrics care. Finally, we address lessons learned and address opportunities where we are currently active. J Am Geriatr Soc 66:2059-2064, 2018.

There is a growing interest in providing high quality and low-cost care to Americans. A pursuit exists to measure not only how well hospitals are performing but also at what cost. We examined the variation in costs associated with carotid endarterectomy (CEA), to determine which components contribute to the variation and what drives increased payments.
Patients undergoing CEA between 2009 and 2012 were identified in the Medicare provider and analysis review database. Hospital quintiles of cost were generated and variation examined. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors of high-payment hospitals for both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients undergoing CEA.
A total of 264,018 CEAs were performed between 2009 and 2012; 250,317 were performed in asymptomatic patients in 2302 hospitals and 13,701 in symptomatic patients in 1851 hospitals. Higher payment hospitals had a higher percentage of nonwhite patients and comorbidity burden. The largest contributors to variation in overall payments were diagnosis-related groups, postdischarge, and readmission payments. After accounting for clustering at the hospital level, independent predictors of high-payment hospitals for all patients were postoperative stroke, length of stay, and readmission ,whereas in the symptomatic group, additional drivers included yearly volume and serious complications.
CEA Medicare payments vary nationwide with diagnosis-related group, readmission, and postdischarge payments being the largest contributors to overall payment variation. In addition, stroke, length of stay, and readmission were the only independent predictors of high payment for all patients undergoing CEA.

In 2016, Medicare\'s Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HAC-RP) will reduce hospital payments by $364 million. Although observers have questioned the validity of certain HAC-RP measures, less attention has been paid to the determination of low-performing hospitals (bottom quartile) and the assignment of penalties. This study investigated possible bias in the HAC-RP by simulating hospitals\' likelihood of being in the worst-performing quartile for 8 patient safety measures, assuming identical expected complication rates across hospitals. Simulated likelihood of being a poor performer varied with hospital size. This relationship depended on the measure\'s complication rate. For 3 of 8 measures examined, the equal-quality simulation identified poor performers similarly to empirical data (c-statistic approximately 0.7 or higher) and explained most of the variation in empirical performance by size (Efron\'s R2 > 0.85). The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services could address potential bias in the HAC-RP by stratifying by hospital size or using a broader \"all-harm\" measure.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this manuscript is to provide an overview and analysis of bundled payment models for joint replacement and select spine procedures. Advantages and disadvantages of bundled payment models will be discussed.
RESULTS: In select populations, bundled payment models have been shown to reduce costs while maintaining satisfactory outcomes. These models have not been tested with complex patient cohorts, such as older adults with fragility hip fractures, and limited data exist with bundled payment analysis in spine procedures. The reduction of healthcare costs, satisfactory patient outcomes, and favorable payments to healthcare systems can be achieved through bundled payments. Modifications of existing bundled payment models should be critically tested prior to implementation across higher risk populations. Bundled payment models will also require healthcare systems to define what services are necessary for an episode of care regarding a specific condition or disease.

Commencing in 2017, the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) of 2015 will change how Medicare pays health professionals. By enacting MACRA, Congress brought an end to the (un)sustainable growth rate formula while also setting forth a vision for how to transform the U.S. healthcare system so that clinicians deliver higher-quality care with smarter spending by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). In October 2016, CMS released the first of what stakeholders anticipate will be a number of (annual) rules related to implementation of MACRA. CMS received extensive input from stakeholders including the American Geriatrics Society. Under the Quality Payment Program, CMS streamlined multiple Medicare value-based payment programs into a new Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS). CMS also outlined how it will provide incentives for participation in Advanced Alternative Payment Models (called APMs). Although Medicare payments to geriatrics health professionals will not be based on the new MIPS formula until 2019, those payments will be based upon performance during a 90-day period in 2017. This article defines geriatrics health professionals as clinicians who care for a predominantly older adult population and who are eligible to bill under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule. Given the current paucity of eligible APMs, this article will focus on MIPS while providing a brief overview of APMs.