2019 HSC Section 2 - Practice Management

Rathi et al

control. Early experience with bundled payment for joint replacement suggests that medical device and post–acute care costs can be lowered to achieve significant savings without decreased quality. 8 Furthermore, otolaryngologists should consider negotiating with payers to facilitate invest- ments in information technology and practice staff to address increased administrative burden, as noted in a recent pilot of bundled payments for head and neck cancer. 9 The scope of bundled payments in otolaryngology remains to be seen. Although there are challenges associated with the model, this novel method of reimbursement may also present an opportunity for otolaryngologists to reassess how best to deliver high-value care. Author Contributions Vinay K. Rathi , study conception and design, drafting the article, revising manuscript critically for important intellectual content, final approval; Ralph Metson , study conception and design, draft- ing the article, revising manuscript critically for important intellec- tual content, final approval; Mark A. Varvares , study conception and design, drafting the article, revising manuscript critically for important intellectual content, final approval; Matthew R. Naunheim , study conception and design, drafting the article, revising manuscript critically for important intellectual content, final approval; Stacey T. Gray , study conception and design, drafting the article, revising manu- script critically for important intellectual content, final approval.

2. Chernew ME, Golden WE, Mathis CH, Fendrick M, Motley MW, Thompson JW. The Arkansas Payment Improvement Initiative: early perceptions of multi-payer reform in a fragmen- ted provider landscape. Am J Accountable Care . 2015;6:34-38. 3. Arkansas Center for Health Care Improvement. Arkansas Health Care Payment Improvement Initiative: 3rd annual state- wide tracking report. http://www.achi.net/Content/Documents/ ResourceRenderer.ashx?ID=482. Published 2017. Accessed July 18, 2018. 4. Rathi VK, Naunheim MR, Varvares MA, Holmes K, Gagliano N, Hartnick CJ. The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS): a primer for otolaryngologists [published online May 1, 2018]. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg . doi:10.1177/0194599818774033 5. Denneny J. Comment letter on CMS’ request for information on episode-based cost measure development for the Quality Payment Program. http://www.entnet.org/sites/default/files/ aaohns_episode_based_cost_measure_rfi_comment_letter_final. pdf. Published April 2017. Accessed July 18, 2018. 6. Abt Associates. First annual report from the evaluation of the Oncology Care Model: baseline period. https://downloads.cms. gov/files/cmmi/ocm-baselinereport.pdf. Published 2018. Accessed July 18, 2018. 7. Kline RM, Muldoon LD, Schumacher HK, et al. Design chal- lenges of an episode-based payment model in oncology: the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Oncology Care Model. J Oncol Pract . 2017;13:e632-e645. 8. Navathe AS, Troxel AB, Liao JM, et al. Cost of joint replace- ment using bundled payment models. JAMA Intern Med . 2017; 177:214-222. 9. Spinks T, Guzman A, Beadle BM, et al. Development and feasi- bility of bundled payments for the multidisciplinary treatment of head and neck cancer: a pilot program. J Oncol Pract . 2018; 14:e103-e112.

Disclosures Competing interests: None. Sponsorships: None. Funding source: None.

References

1. Alphs Jackson H, Walsh B, Abecassis M. A surgeon’s guide to bundled payment models for episodes of care. JAMA Surg . 2016;151:3-4.

20