Healthmonix Advisor

If you keep up to date about healthcare payment model trends, you may have noticed a newly re-ignited concern about the future of value-based care. A recent Quest Diagnostics survey highlighted perceptions that physicians lack the tools to succeed under the payment model, and that payers and providers are not well aligned in this endeavor. The survey further showed that over two-thirds of health plan executives and physicians believed the U.S. has a fee-for-service healthcare system versus a value-based care system. Overall, the study concluded that physicians and health plan executives perceive that progress toward value-based care has stalled.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released the 2019 Proposed Rule for the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule on July 12, 2018. The release of the 2019 proposed rule is advantageous in deciding what to conquer under the Quality Payment Program for both this year and in the future, which is why we published a series of posts summarizing the major proposed changes you should be aware of. But what if you have a suggestion that would improve the rule?

It’s that time of year again: CMS has released final QPP performance feedback for 2017, including final scores and payment adjustment information. Here at Healthmonix, we believe in turning data into outcomes, taking control of performance, and driving revenue through value-based payments—which is why, now that you have access to your feedback, we’re outlining a few important next steps your practice can take to use that feedback in a meaningful way.

Today, CMS posted CY 2019 Updates to the Quality Payment Program to the Federal Register. Many clinicians are still trying to wrap their heads around how to report MIPS in 2018, but the release of the 2019 proposed rule is advantageous in deciding what to conquer both this year and in the future.

Today, CMS posted CY 2019 Updates to the Quality Payment Program to the Federal Register. Many clinicians are still trying to wrap their heads around how to report MIPS in 2018, but the release of the 2019 proposed rule is advantageous in deciding what to conquer both this year and in the future.

Today, CMS posted CY 2019 Updates to the Quality Payment Program to the Federal Register. Many clinicians are still trying to wrap their heads around how to report MIPS in 2018, but the release of the 2019 proposed rule is advantageous in deciding what to conquer both this year and in the future. As the title suggests, this document also covers other Quality Payment Program tracks, like Advanced APMs; however, for now we will just focus on the MIPS component of the proposed rule.

In today’s quality-focused healthcare environment, patient satisfaction is commonly used as a metric for success—which means that it can affect your bottom line. But what if a patient becomes dissatisfied before the appointment even begins? Unfortunately, this happens daily in practices across the nation, as patients grow frustrated from long and unpredictable wait times.

Clients may consider options outside of their EHR to report MIPS for a number of reasons. They may want to combine Quality data from multiple EHRs, or report on measures only supported by registries. They may need to report for a practice that is transitioning to a new EHR.

Healthmonix has worked with clients using over 200 different EHRs to successfully report for MIPS through MIPSPRO, and in that time we’ve identified a few steps that EHRs can take right now to help keep their clients satisfied and stress-free when it comes to external MIPS reporting.

I was intrigued by a recent Becker’s article which outlines the results of Mount Sinai’s use of the “Hospital at Home” model for acute care. According to the article, patient experience showed improvement and readmission rates were noticeably lower. I had to know more, so I decided to do some research into exactly what this model of care looks like.

Healthmonix has just announced several types of increased functionality in the MIPSPRO measure engine, including new options to input the outcome of a measure for a visit using an “English” code. In this post, we’ll outline exactly what that entails, and what it means for our users and the future of interoperability.

Our measure status upload functionality will soon provide you with the ability to “tell” MIPSPRO the outcome of a measure for a visit using an English code, such as “Met”, “Not Met”, or “Exception”. Plain English expressions can be used in either spreadsheet or manual entry situations. This new feature will especially save time and energy for users whose EMR already tracks data in this or a similar format.