From the Journals

Is the patient-centered medical home on life support?

View on the News

Pending CMS changes should bolster primary care efforts

Financial support for primary care varies around the country and can also vary by payer within an individual region. Dr. Bujold describes very limited commercial-payer support for the care his practice delivers. In contrast, Rhode Island required that all payers increase the percent of total medical dollars for fully insured members paid to primary care by 1% annually from 2010 to 2014 and then sustain that increased percentage. This requirement resulted in substantial support for sustained practice changes in care delivery.

Starting in 2011, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) began programs to test new changes in primary care delivery and payment. Comprehensive Primary Care Plus, the largest such Medicare model to date, is being tested in 14 regions of the country, as well as 4 more regions starting in 2018, and is evaluated independently by region; the 5-year program is designed to strengthen primary care through multipayer-payment reform and care-delivery transformation.

The model includes two primary care practice tracks with incrementally advanced care-delivery requirements and payment options. Practices in both tracks work to improve patient access and continuity, provide care management to the patients at highest risk, engage patients and caregivers, focus on planned care and population health, and increase the comprehensiveness and coordination of care.

Primary care – and the patient-centered medical home – can be saved, but there is considerable work to be done. In our view, the delivery of comprehensive primary care requires population-based payments aligned across payers to ensure adequate support for care-delivery changes for all the patients in the practice. Policies and payment across the health care system should be aligned to support a robust primary care infrastructure that delivers on its promise of higher health care quality at lower costs.

Patients should experience the benefits of comprehensive primary care. They should expect their insurer to pay for it and their primary care practice to deliver it.

Dr. Patrick Conway was formerly affiliated with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

Dr. Patrick Conway

Laura L. Sessums, MD, JD, and Patrick H. Conway, MD, are with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, although Dr. Conway will be leaving the CMS Oct. 1. They reported having no financial disclosures. This text was extracted from an invited commentary that appeared online Sept. 25, 2017, in JAMA Internal Medicine ( 2017 Sep 25. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.4991 ).


 

FROM JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE

The way Edward J. Bujold, MD, sees it, the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) as a model of care has become unsustainable in the current health care landscape.

In an opinion piece published online in JAMA Internal Medicine, Dr. Bujold describes how he reinvested Medicare incentive payments to build a solo family medicine practice into a patient-centered medical home with a staff of 14 full-time and part-time employees, including an embedded psychologist, pharmacist, physical therapist, and dietitian.

“Although only about one-quarter of the patients cared for at our practice are Medicare beneficiaries, other insurers and those they insure have benefited immensely,” wrote Dr. Bujold, owner of Granite Falls (N.C.) Family Medical Care Center (JAMA Internal Med. 2017 Sept 25. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.4651).

The bonuses from the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ Meaningful Use and Physician Quality Reporting System “enabled us to develop and support the financial structure required to create the PCMH,” he noted. “For the most part, this financial support ended in December 2015. Our financial losses in 2016 are enough to jeopardize the foundation of our PCMH.”

When Congress voted to end the Medicare Sustainable Growth Rate formula, the Primary Care Incentive Payment Program authorized under the Affordable Care Act also ended.

“During 2017, a value-based payment system to replace and hopefully increase our reimbursement is to be phased in,” Dr. Bujold wrote. “The problem for practices like ours is the Medicare Access and Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015/Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MACRA/MIPS) does not take effect until 2019, and there is no guarantee we will receive any more money than we receive now. We may receive less.”

Citing studies from Oregon and from the Patient-Centered Primary Care Collaborative, Dr. Bujold said that for every dollar invested in primary care, the overarching health system saves about $13.

“The 80% reduction in hospital admissions for our practice is a testimony to these savings,” he stated. “The irony for me is that, 5 years ago, I generated a substantial amount of my income from the hospital portion of my practice, because I was seeing an average of five patients per day in the hospital.”

As a result of transitioning his practice to a PCMH, however, he now sees “one or two and sometimes no hospital patients per day.” At the same time, his office’s overhead cost is 65% and increasing – up from 50% when he opened his practice 31 years ago.

Dr. Bujold noted that about 60% of primary care physicians are employed by hospital organizations, which are able to charge a facility fee “above and beyond what the independent primary care physician charges in his or her office. This increases the cost of care in general by 20%-30% and the patient out-of-pocket costs by a factor of 2 or 3.”

In his view, “we have large hospital systems, the pharmaceutical industry, large insurance companies, and other moneyed players and their lobbyists with vested financial interests. The view from my practice is that these industries seem to hold all of the cards, and it is very difficult to move forward. I am more pessimistic than I was 5 years ago.”

Despite his current misgivings, Dr. Bujold ended his opinion piece by stating that the best way to “heal the health care system in the United States” is one directed by primary care and rooted in high-functioning PCMHs.

“The trajectory must be changed,” Dr. Bujold wrote. “In many areas, payers are not supporting PCMH transformation, and states are not engaging practices or working with Medicare to support transformation. Investing in high-functioning PCMH practices is the right thing to do.”

Dr. Bujold disclosed that he is employed by KPN Health as chief physician strategist and is an advisory board member of the Patient-Centered Primary Care Collaborative.

Recommended Reading

Doctors testify on health insurance stabilization
MDedge ObGyn
Female physicians can face breastfeeding challenges at work
MDedge ObGyn
E-cigarettes most popular among youngest adults
MDedge ObGyn
CMS alerts physicians of payment reductions for PQRS noncompliance
MDedge ObGyn
Docs, insurers condemn latest ‘repeal and replace’ plan
MDedge ObGyn
Residents getting unprecedented attention from employers
MDedge ObGyn
Battling physician burnout delivers monetary benefits for health care organizations
MDedge ObGyn
Sen. Collins deals likely fatal blow to GOP’s health bill
MDedge ObGyn
Reengineering your office to be perfect for your patients
MDedge ObGyn
Top translator apps can help you communicate with patients who have limited English proficiency
MDedge ObGyn