Refinements to the CMS-HCC Model For Risk Adjustment of Medicare Capitation Payments Contact: John Kautter, PhD, RTI International is.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
Advertisements

AGVISE Laboratories %Zone or Grid Samples – Northwood laboratory
1 The Foreign-Born Population in the United States: 2003.
Disability status in Ethiopia in 1984, 1994 & 2007 population and housing sensus Ehete Bekele Seyoum ESA/STAT/AC.219/25.
Lisa Dubay, Ph.D., Sc.M. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Center for Children and Families Getting to the Finish Line:
1 Physicians Involved in the Care of Patients with Recently Diagnosed Cancer CanCORS Provider Composition Writing Group Academy Health Annual Research.
Disease Burden and Intensity of Antidiabetic Drug Use by Medicare Beneficiaries with Diabetes: Will Part D Make a Difference? AcademyHealth June 25, 2006.
Development and Evaluation of CMS-HCC Concurrent Risk Adjustment Models Presented by Eric Olmsted, Ph.D. Gregory Pope, M.S. John Kautter, Ph.D. RTI International.
Paying for Care Coordination Gerard Anderson, PhD Johns Hopkins University.
The Impact of Drug Benefit Caps Geoffrey Joyce, PhD.
1 Caring for the New Uninsured: Hospital Charity Care for the Elderly without Coverage Academy Health Annual Research Meeting Tuesday June 27, 2006 Derek.
TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1.0: Trends in the Overall Health Care Market Chart 1.1: Total National Health Expenditures, 1980 – 2005 Chart 1.2: Percent Change.
TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1.0: Trends in the Overall Health Care Market Chart 1.1: Total National Health Expenditures, 1980 – 2007 Chart 1.2: Percent.
TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1.0: Trends in the Overall Health Care Market Chart 1.1: Total National Health Expenditures, 1980 – 2005 Chart 1.2: Percent.
TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1.0: Trends in the Overall Health Care Market Chart 1.1: Total National Health Expenditures, 1980 – 2006 Chart 1.2: Percent.

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1.0: Trends in the Overall Health Care Market Chart 1.1: Total National Health Expenditures, 1980 – 2010 Chart 1.2: Percent.
Appendices. Appendix 1: Supplementary Data Tables Trends in the Overall Health Care Market.

Overview. Chartbook 2004 In 2003, Congress passed the most sweeping reform to the Medicare program since its inception by adding outpatient prescription.
CLOSING THE DIVIDE: HOW MEDICAL HOMES PROMOTE EQUITY IN HEALTH CARE Results from the Commonwealth Fund 2006 Health Care Quality Survey THE COMMONWEALTH.
Describing Data: Measures of Dispersion
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Title Subtitle.
1 Targeted Case Management (TCM) Changes Iowa Medicaid Enterprise October 14, 2008.
Undergraduates in Minnesota: Who are they and how do they finance their education? Tricia Grimes Shefali Mehta Minnesota Office of Higher Education November.
Addition Facts
ZMQS ZMQS
RTI International RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. Maternal Depressive Symptoms and Healthcare Expenditures.
Presented by the Illinois Department of Insurance Andrew Boron, Director November 2012.
Current Types of Payments in the U.S. Healthcare System
DataBrief: Did you know… DataBrief Series September 2011 No.17 Differences in Medicare Spending by Disability and Residence Medicare spends almost four.
The basics for simulations
ABC Technology Project
1 Building the Foundation: Health Care Costs Presentation to the Citizens Health Care Working Group May 13, 2005 Richard S. Foster and Stephen Heffler.
Exhibit 1 NOTES: Other setting of usual care includes: neighborhood or family health center, free standing surgery center, rural health clinic, company.
Name of presenter(s) or subtitle Canadian Netizens February 2004.
Lets play bingo!!. Calculate: MEAN Calculate: MEDIAN
US cost-effectiveness of simvastatin in 20,536 people at different levels of vascular disease risk: randomised placebo-controlled trial UK Medical Research.
Chapter 5 Test Review Sections 5-1 through 5-4.
2011 WINNISQUAM COMMUNITY SURVEY YOUTH RISK BEHAVIOR GRADES 9-12 STUDENTS=1021.
Before Between After.
SEPTEMBER 2011MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAID POLICY INSTITUTE DUAL ELIGIBLES IN MASSACHUSETTS: A PROFILE OF HEALTH CARE SERVICES AND SPENDING FOR NON-ELDERLY ADULTS.
Benjamin Banneker Charter Academy of Technology Making AYP Benjamin Banneker Charter Academy of Technology Making AYP.
2011 FRANKLIN COMMUNITY SURVEY YOUTH RISK BEHAVIOR GRADES 9-12 STUDENTS=332.
Addition 1’s to 20.
25 seconds left…...
Subtraction: Adding UP
Week 1.
Survey Enhancements to Inform the Affordable Care Act National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) Clarice Brown Division of Health Care Statistics U.S.
We will resume in: 25 Minutes.
Static Equilibrium; Elasticity and Fracture
Discrepancies Between National and International Data By Shelton Kanyanda (Chief Statistician Malawi)
UK Renal Registry 17th Annual Report Figure 5.1. Trend in one year after 90 day incident patient survival by first modality, 2003–2012 cohorts (adjusted.
Chapter 8: Dialysis Providers 2014 ANNUAL DATA REPORT VOLUME 2: E ND -S TAGE R ENAL D ISEASE.
1 Where the Boys Aren’t: Recent Trends in U.S. College Enrollment Patterns Patricia M. Anderson Department of Economics Dartmouth College And NBER.
Risk Adjustment Hierarchical Condition Categories (HCC Coding)
Medicare Risk Adjustment
Risk Adjustment Data For Business Insight Health Care Service Corporation September 2012.
Risk Adjustment Models
INFORMATION NOT RELEASABLE TO THE PUBLIC UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY LAW: This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.
RISK ADJUSTMENT CODING
Diagnosis-Based Risk Adjustment for Medicare Prescription Drug Plan Payments John Robst Melvin Ingber Jesse Levy Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
1 A Risk Adjustment System for the Medicare Capitated ESRD Program.
Copyright 2003, Johns Hopkins University, 10/19/2003 Medicare Risk Adjustment Development by Johns Hopkins Chad Abrams, MA Johns Hopkins.
Risk Adjustment Chapter 6. 2 Medicare AAPCC: Adjusted Average Per Capita Costs Average Medicare Part A + Part B expenditures Average Medicare Part A +
Eric Schone and Randy Brown Mathematica Policy Research
Medicare Risk Adjustment Update
Presented by: John Kautter, Ph.D. Gregory Pope, M.S.
Presentation transcript:

Refinements to the CMS-HCC Model For Risk Adjustment of Medicare Capitation Payments Contact: John Kautter, PhD, RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. Presented by: John Kautter, Ph.D. Gregory Pope, M.S. Eric Olmsted, Ph.D. RTI International

2 History of Medicare Risk Adjustment n Demographics (AAPCC) l Doesnt explain cost variation l Favorable selection => higher program costs n Principal inpatient diagnoses (PIP-DCG model, 2000) l Incentive to admit l Penalizes plans that avoid admissions n Inpatient and ambulatory diagnoses (2004)

3 CMS-HCC Model n Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Hierarchical Condition Categories (HCC) model n Prospective n Inpatient and outpatient diagnoses w/o distinction n 70 diagnostic categories (HCCs) n Hierarchical within diseases

4 CMS-HCC Model (continued) n Cumulative (additive) across diseases n 6 disease interactions n Discretionary diagnoses are excluded n Demographic factors included n Calibrated on 1999/2000 Medicare 5% Sample

5 CMS-HCC Model Performance n Percentage of cost variation explained l Age/Sex:0.8% l PIP-DCG:5.5% l CMS-HCC:10.0%

6 CMS-HCC Models for Medicare Subpopulations n Disabled n End-stage renal disease n Institutionalized n New enrollees n Secondary payer status n Frail elderly

7 Disabled n Over 10% of Medicare population n Under age 65 n Model estimated separately for aged and disabled l Overall cost patterns similar l For 5 diagnostic categories, incremental expense of the disabled is higher n 5 disease interactions for disabled in final CMS- HCC model

8 End-Stage Renal Disease n About 1% of Medicare population n Very expensive: approximately $50,000/year n 3-segment model l Dialysis patients u CMS-HCC model calibrated on dialysis patients l Transplant period (3 months) u Lump-sum payment l Post-transplant period u Aged/disabled CMS-HCC model w/add- on for drugs

9 Institutionalized Beneficiaries n About 5% of Medicare population n Costly, but less expensive than community residents for same diagnostic profile n Combined CMS-HCC model l Overpredicts costs for institutionalized l Underpredicts costs for community frail elderly

10 Institutionalized Beneficiaries (continued) n Different cost patterns by age and diagnosis for community and institutionalized n CMS-HCC model calibrated separately on community and institutionalized n Current year institutional status reported by nursing homes

11 New Enrollees n Lack 12 months of base year enrollment n Two-thirds are 65 year olds n New enrollees versus continuing enrollees l Much less costly at age 65 l Similar costs at other ages n Merged new/continuing enrollee sample n Separate cost weights for 65 year olds n Demographic model

12 Medicare as Secondary Payer n Beneficiaries with active employee employer- sponsored insurance n Costs are lower n Multiplier scales cost predictions down n Multiplier is ratio of mean actual to mean predicted expenditures

13 Frail Elderly n Diagnosis-based models underpredict expenditures for the functionally impaired n Medicare specialty plans (e.g., PACE) serve functionally-impaired populations n Frailty adjuster to better predict their costs l Predicts costs unexplained by CMS-HCC l Based on difficulties in ADLs l ADLs collected from surveys or assessments

14 CMS-HCC Model Refinements n Additional HCCs added to model n 100% institutional sample used for institutional model calibration n Changes in diagnostic classification n 2002/2003 Medicare FFS data used for calibration of all models

15 Availability of Additional HCCs n For Part D risk adjuster, plans required to submit diagnoses for 127 HCCs n Additional 57 HCCs available for CMS-HCC models (127 – 70 = 57)

16 Adding HCCs n Benefits l Greater accuracy in predicting illness burden l Rewards plans who enroll and treat beneficiaries with these diagnoses u E.g., Special Needs Plans (SNPs) n Drawbacks l Creates greater opportunities for diagnostic upcoding

17 HCCs Added to CMS-HCC Model n Available additional HCCs reviewed by project team to determine which were appropriate for payment model n Number of HCCs increased from 70 to 101

18 Examples of HCCs Added to CMS-HCC Model Refined CMS-HCC Model HCCCommunityInstitutional Type I Diabetes Mellitus$1,557$1,435 Dementia/ Cerebral Degeneration$1,576 Hypertension$388$919

19 100% Institutional Sample n CMS-HCC institutional model calibrated on 5% institutional sample (n = 65,593) n To increase statistical accuracy and stability, refined CMS-HCC institutional model calibrated on 100% institutional sample (n = 1,238,842)

20 Distribution of Annualized Medicare Expenditures, % Community 100% Institutional Sample Size 1,380,978 1,238,842 Expenditures Mean $6,541 $11,252 95th Percentile $31,285 $47, th Percentile $17,682 $31,553 Median $1,445 $3, th Percentile $56 $538 5 th Percentile $0 $349

21 Changes in Diagnostic Classification n Diabetes complications moved to diabetes hierarchy l E.g., diabetic neuropathy moved from HCC 71 Polyneuropathy to HCC 16 Diabetes with Neurologic or Other Specified Manifestation n HCC 119 Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy and Vitreous Hemorrhage deleted and most moved to HCC 18 Diabetes with Ophthalmologic or Unspecified Manifestation n Cerebral Palsy consolidated in HCC 70 Cerebral Palsy and Muscular Distrophy

22 Refined CMS-HCC Community and Institutional Models % of Cost Variation Explained# HCCs CMS-HCC Community9.8%70 Institutional6.0%69 Refined CMS-HCC Community11.0%101 Institutional8.9%90

23 Refined CMS-HCC Model Performance – I n Predictive ratios, prior year expenditure quintiles Age/Sex CMS-HCC First Second Third Fourth Fifth

24 Refined CMS-HCC Model Performance – II n Predicted ratios by CMS-HCC predicted expenditure deciles Age/SexCMS-HCC First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Eighth Ninth Tenth

25 Conclusions n Medicare risk adjustment has been evolving l Demographic Inpatient All-Encounter (AAPCC)(PIP-DCG) (CMS-HCC) n The refined CMS-HCC model represents a more comprehensive all-encounter risk adjustment model l Increases payment accuracy for plans u Viability of plans –Beneficiaries access to plans