Practice Management

 View Only
  • 1.  Revised 2020 MIPS Benchmarks

    Posted 03-02-2020 10:42

    Hello,

    Has anyone had time to review the recent changes that have been made to the 2020 MIPS Historical Quality Benchmarks? If I am reading this correctly, Measure 146 and 406 are now topped out and have a seven point cap. This change was just made on 2/19/20.

    Is this correct?

    I thought Measure 146 was devalued in 2019, but revalued back to 10 points in 2020 and I am unsure why Measure 406 is now considered as topped out. It's only in its 2nd life cycle.

     

    Here are the notes from QPP for the 2/19/20 version history.

     

     

     

     

    Thanks!

    Kim Smiley, CPC, RCC

    Coding Manager

    ph:  (317) 328-7256  |  fax: (317) 715-9955

    kim@northwestradiology.com

     

    Description: Description: Description: Description: NWR_50YR_Color_small

     



  • 2.  RE: Revised 2020 MIPS Benchmarks

    Posted 03-02-2020 10:53
    It's becoming increasingly difficult (at least for us) to find and submit measures that are the full 10 point value. Anyone else having the same issue?







  • 3.  RE: Revised 2020 MIPS Benchmarks

    Posted 03-03-2020 10:58

    It is indeed getting tougher for radiology practices to receive the type of MIPS bonuses CMS promotes for the reasons you mentioned.  Two things...do what you can to avoid a penalty at all costs, the penalties are steep as you know, and.....look into CDSR measures that are quality bonuses above and beyond what MIPS can provide.  We're using SaferMD to submit rad specific measures that, for now, focus on critical findings timeframes.    

     

    Dennis J Chaltraw, CRCE Director Revenue Cycle Management │ Oregon Imaging Centers (OIC) / Radiology Associates, PC (RAPC) │ 1200 Hilyard Street, Suite 330, Eugene, OR  97401│ (w) 541.302.7771 (c) 541.999.1848 | fax 458-215-4079www.oregonimaging.com

    CONFIDENTIALITY & PRIVACY NOTICE: The information contained in this email transmission is privileged, proprietary and/or confidential. Unauthorized use, review and/or distribution of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please promptly notify the sender so our records can be corrected. Please delete the original and copy of this email and destroy any print copies that may have been generated from this transmission.

     




    CONFIDENTIALITY & PRIVACY NOTICE: The information contained in this email transmission is privileged, proprietary and/or confidential. Unauthorized use, review and/or distribution of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please promptly notify the sender so our records can be corrected. Please delete the original and copy of this email and destroy any print copies that may have been generated from this transmission.





  • 4.  RE: Revised 2020 MIPS Benchmarks

    Posted 03-02-2020 14:27
    Yikes!  It seems really unfair to change the rules in the middle of the game, not to mention pretty darned sneaky to do it without any kind of announcement other than posting a revised file.

    I reviewed the updated file and I see the same thing.  Good catch!

    ------------------------------
    David Smith FACMPE
    Executive Director
    United Imaging Consultants
    Mission KS
    (785) 393-8387
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: Revised 2020 MIPS Benchmarks

    Posted 03-02-2020 14:44
    Wow! ACR, please help.

    We are a breast imaging only practice so we literally have 2 MIPS measures to report (146 and 225). 

    Bruce F. Schroeder, M.D.
    Medical Director
    Carolina Breast Imaging Specialists, PLLC
    252-214-7200 (office)
    252-565-8958 (fax)
    252-414-9348 (mobile)





  • 6.  RE: Revised 2020 MIPS Benchmarks

    Posted 03-04-2020 08:46
    Kim,

    Thanks for beginning this incredibly important forum topic.

    As we all know strategic planning to position our groups to optimize their MIPS scores is paramount to achieve the highest upward payment adjustment possible. Groups must use this upward payment adjustment to recoup their initial  investment made to report their data through registry reporting as well as miscellaneous costs of all administrative work. In addition, groups are looking to offset all historical CMS cuts to the Medicare Part B fee schedule and upside risk assumed in participating with certain value-based payment models.

    Any group that has been involved in the process to preparing for an upcoming MIPS performance year knows that ​it takes much time and effort to filter through the year over year changes to the QPP that are published in the final rule each November. From this point, the planning begins based on what groups know at that time.

    Even the best forecasters of where the MIPS program is headed in the future could not possibly foreshadow CMS updating the quality measure benchmarking for PY 2020 6+ weeks into the new year. While this is an unprecedented move by CMS, we are left to ask ourselves why a check and balance of accountability, transparency and support does not seem to go both ways. CMS has historically published each year's original benchmarking the week between X-mas and New Year with the PY 2020 benchmarking published on New Year's Eve this year, hours before the start of this new performance year.

    It is this very benchmarking that becomes the last piece of critical information groups need to finalize their planning, communicate to their coding teams, execute programming to assist in automating data extraction, communicate any measure changes to MIPS eligible clinicians, implement new measures, etc. With multiple MIPS team stakeholders involved we know this takes more than a couple of hours to execute the day before start of a new PY.

    While this planning is butted up against the end of last year, we all find ways to be successful in all implementation necessary to begin reporting our chosen measure sets.

    Fast forward 6+ week into this new 2020 PY. CMS, in an unprecedented move published updated benchmarks that have completely changed the game for groups that had just spent the last few months preparing for a new reporting year. We must encourage our strong radiology community to ask ourselves some obvious questions, "Is this fair?", "What gives CMS the liberty to do this?", "Is this ethical?", "How can quality healthcare show continuous improvement when the organization that governs this initiative is unaccountable to the eligible providers that bear this newfound, uphill burden 6+ weeks into a reporting period?", "Does CMS know the effect this move has on groups' original plans, while diminishing their opportunities to achieve optimal performance scoring while building their credibility as a provider that delivers the highest quality healthcare?", "Who does this updated benchmarking truly benefit?", "Finally, what efforts must our radiology community embark on to even the playing field CMS has preserved to monopolize?".

    ------------------------------
    Gregory D. Wertz MS
    Director of Industry Research and Relations
    Practice Manager
    MBMS, LLC
    State College, PA 16801
    Mobile: (814) 203-0088
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: Revised 2020 MIPS Benchmarks

    Posted 03-04-2020 11:25
      |   view attached
    Well said.  In a nutshell, this is nuts!

    Trusted to provide 
    expert and caring radiology services for over 60 years

    Wayne Baldwin
    CEO
    (805) 879-7577

    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail  may contain information that is confidential, privileged, proprietary, or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message, any part of it, or any attachments. If you have received this message in error, please delete this message and any attachments from your system without reading the content and notify the sender immediately of the inadvertent transmission. There is no intent on the part of the sender to waive any privilege that may attach to this communication. Thank you for your cooperation.




    Attachment(s)

    tiff
    PastedGraphic-7.tiff   30 KB 1 version