Bundled payment models for actinic keratosis management

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

IMPORTANCE Recent legislation encourages alternative payment models, such as bundled payments. There are no clear recommendations on bundled payment design, and research on bundled payments for dermatologic care is limited. OBJECTIVE To investigate severalmethods to develop bundled payment models for actinic keratosis (AK) management and the likely effect on the cost of AK management. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Cohort cost identification study using claims from Highmark Insurance and the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters databases. Patients with claims for AK during the study period, January 2010 to December 2012, were included (N = 118 129). Utilization measures, such as visits and procedures, and direct costs were calculated and 8 bundled payment models were developed. Indirect costs were not included. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The actual health care costs and theoretical cost differences for the bundled payments. Costs are reported in 2012 US dollars and were adjusted for inflation. The proportion of patients and clinicians with annual AK claim costs less than or equal to the bundled payments were calculated. RESULTS Eight bundled payment models were developed and 2, based on the 75th percentile payment, did not result in theoretical savings for any of the patient samples (increased annual spending of 1.04 million to 6.88 million). The median-based payment without adjustments resulted in the largest theoretical savings (decreased spending of 2.22 million to 6.43 million). In contrast, the mean-based payment with adjustments resulted in the smallest theoretical savings. The median-based with indirect payment (65.2%for patients and 62.0% for clinicians) and mean-based adjusted payments, with (68.9%and 66.2%) and without (68.1%and 65.6%) discount, were equal to or greater than the actual health care costs for similar proportions of patients and clinicians, respectively. In addition, both resulted in a decrease in overall health care costs for the patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE It is important to consider alternative payment models, such as bundled payments, in preparation for payment reform. The dermatology profession needs to understand disease management in dollar terms to advocate on behalf of clinicians and patients for fair and reasonable reimbursement, regardless of payment type.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)789-796
Number of pages8
JournalJAMA Dermatology
Volume152
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2016

Fingerprint

Actinic Keratosis
Costs and Cost Analysis
Health Care Costs
Economic Inflation
Disease Management
Dermatology
Insurance
Legislation
Research Design
Databases

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dermatology

Cite this

@article{7a3fcc7c18e44d4b84607af90e6984d8,
title = "Bundled payment models for actinic keratosis management",
abstract = "IMPORTANCE Recent legislation encourages alternative payment models, such as bundled payments. There are no clear recommendations on bundled payment design, and research on bundled payments for dermatologic care is limited. OBJECTIVE To investigate severalmethods to develop bundled payment models for actinic keratosis (AK) management and the likely effect on the cost of AK management. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Cohort cost identification study using claims from Highmark Insurance and the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters databases. Patients with claims for AK during the study period, January 2010 to December 2012, were included (N = 118 129). Utilization measures, such as visits and procedures, and direct costs were calculated and 8 bundled payment models were developed. Indirect costs were not included. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The actual health care costs and theoretical cost differences for the bundled payments. Costs are reported in 2012 US dollars and were adjusted for inflation. The proportion of patients and clinicians with annual AK claim costs less than or equal to the bundled payments were calculated. RESULTS Eight bundled payment models were developed and 2, based on the 75th percentile payment, did not result in theoretical savings for any of the patient samples (increased annual spending of 1.04 million to 6.88 million). The median-based payment without adjustments resulted in the largest theoretical savings (decreased spending of 2.22 million to 6.43 million). In contrast, the mean-based payment with adjustments resulted in the smallest theoretical savings. The median-based with indirect payment (65.2{\%}for patients and 62.0{\%} for clinicians) and mean-based adjusted payments, with (68.9{\%}and 66.2{\%}) and without (68.1{\%}and 65.6{\%}) discount, were equal to or greater than the actual health care costs for similar proportions of patients and clinicians, respectively. In addition, both resulted in a decrease in overall health care costs for the patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE It is important to consider alternative payment models, such as bundled payments, in preparation for payment reform. The dermatology profession needs to understand disease management in dollar terms to advocate on behalf of clinicians and patients for fair and reasonable reimbursement, regardless of payment type.",
author = "Kirby, {Joslyn S.} and Amber Delikat and Douglas Leslie and Miller, {Jeffrey J.}",
year = "2016",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.0502",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "152",
pages = "789--796",
journal = "JAMA Dermatology",
issn = "2168-6068",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "7",

}

Bundled payment models for actinic keratosis management. / Kirby, Joslyn S.; Delikat, Amber; Leslie, Douglas; Miller, Jeffrey J.

In: JAMA Dermatology, Vol. 152, No. 7, 07.2016, p. 789-796.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bundled payment models for actinic keratosis management

AU - Kirby, Joslyn S.

AU - Delikat, Amber

AU - Leslie, Douglas

AU - Miller, Jeffrey J.

PY - 2016/7

Y1 - 2016/7

N2 - IMPORTANCE Recent legislation encourages alternative payment models, such as bundled payments. There are no clear recommendations on bundled payment design, and research on bundled payments for dermatologic care is limited. OBJECTIVE To investigate severalmethods to develop bundled payment models for actinic keratosis (AK) management and the likely effect on the cost of AK management. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Cohort cost identification study using claims from Highmark Insurance and the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters databases. Patients with claims for AK during the study period, January 2010 to December 2012, were included (N = 118 129). Utilization measures, such as visits and procedures, and direct costs were calculated and 8 bundled payment models were developed. Indirect costs were not included. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The actual health care costs and theoretical cost differences for the bundled payments. Costs are reported in 2012 US dollars and were adjusted for inflation. The proportion of patients and clinicians with annual AK claim costs less than or equal to the bundled payments were calculated. RESULTS Eight bundled payment models were developed and 2, based on the 75th percentile payment, did not result in theoretical savings for any of the patient samples (increased annual spending of 1.04 million to 6.88 million). The median-based payment without adjustments resulted in the largest theoretical savings (decreased spending of 2.22 million to 6.43 million). In contrast, the mean-based payment with adjustments resulted in the smallest theoretical savings. The median-based with indirect payment (65.2%for patients and 62.0% for clinicians) and mean-based adjusted payments, with (68.9%and 66.2%) and without (68.1%and 65.6%) discount, were equal to or greater than the actual health care costs for similar proportions of patients and clinicians, respectively. In addition, both resulted in a decrease in overall health care costs for the patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE It is important to consider alternative payment models, such as bundled payments, in preparation for payment reform. The dermatology profession needs to understand disease management in dollar terms to advocate on behalf of clinicians and patients for fair and reasonable reimbursement, regardless of payment type.

AB - IMPORTANCE Recent legislation encourages alternative payment models, such as bundled payments. There are no clear recommendations on bundled payment design, and research on bundled payments for dermatologic care is limited. OBJECTIVE To investigate severalmethods to develop bundled payment models for actinic keratosis (AK) management and the likely effect on the cost of AK management. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Cohort cost identification study using claims from Highmark Insurance and the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters databases. Patients with claims for AK during the study period, January 2010 to December 2012, were included (N = 118 129). Utilization measures, such as visits and procedures, and direct costs were calculated and 8 bundled payment models were developed. Indirect costs were not included. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The actual health care costs and theoretical cost differences for the bundled payments. Costs are reported in 2012 US dollars and were adjusted for inflation. The proportion of patients and clinicians with annual AK claim costs less than or equal to the bundled payments were calculated. RESULTS Eight bundled payment models were developed and 2, based on the 75th percentile payment, did not result in theoretical savings for any of the patient samples (increased annual spending of 1.04 million to 6.88 million). The median-based payment without adjustments resulted in the largest theoretical savings (decreased spending of 2.22 million to 6.43 million). In contrast, the mean-based payment with adjustments resulted in the smallest theoretical savings. The median-based with indirect payment (65.2%for patients and 62.0% for clinicians) and mean-based adjusted payments, with (68.9%and 66.2%) and without (68.1%and 65.6%) discount, were equal to or greater than the actual health care costs for similar proportions of patients and clinicians, respectively. In addition, both resulted in a decrease in overall health care costs for the patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE It is important to consider alternative payment models, such as bundled payments, in preparation for payment reform. The dermatology profession needs to understand disease management in dollar terms to advocate on behalf of clinicians and patients for fair and reasonable reimbursement, regardless of payment type.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84979696894&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84979696894&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.0502

DO - 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.0502

M3 - Article

C2 - 27028662

AN - SCOPUS:84979696894

VL - 152

SP - 789

EP - 796

JO - JAMA Dermatology

JF - JAMA Dermatology

SN - 2168-6068

IS - 7

ER -