Report
Practice Expense Methodology and Data Collection Research and Analysis
Aug 4, 2020
Aspects of the practice expense (PE) valuation methodology used to determine the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) may contribute to misvalued payment rates. This report recommends policy changes for improving the rate setting of PE and updating indirect practice cost estimates. Improving payment accuracy would support improved payment policies in other areas of the U.S. health care system.
Format | File Size | Notes |
---|---|---|
PDF file | 3.7 MB | Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience. |
This report addresses concerns that aspects of the practice expense (PE) valuation methodology used to determine the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) contribute to misvalued payment rates. The fee for each service is denominated in relative value units (RVUs). The report proposes potential improvements in the current methodology used to allocate indirect practice costs in determining PE RVUs for a service and assesses alternative data sources that could be used to regularly update indirect practice cost estimates. A number of potential policy changes are recommended for improving the rate setting of PE. The most sweeping change would be to adopt relative values for total PE based on the Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS), which is used to value outpatient hospital visits. Potentially, OPPS-based costs could be used to inform or replace the MPFS PE valuations. This change would reduce site of service payment differentials, simplify Medicare payment policy, and improve returns from rate-setting resources since cost information would be shared between the two Medicare payment systems. There are a number of methodological issues that would need to be resolved before this change could be implemented, but the potential benefits are great enough to justify investments to further develop this option. Alternatively, new data could be collected to update PE valuations using the current framework. The report proposes survey processes that could minimize survey burden in order to facilitate on-going data collection. Improving payment accuracy would support improved payment policies in many other areas of the country's health care system.
Chapter One
Introduction
Chapter Two
Updating Data Sources for Physician Practice Expense
Chapter Three
Valuing Practice Expense Using Practice Characteristics
Chapter Four
Developing Alternative Indirect Cost Allocation Bases
Chapter Five
Changes to Specialty Adjustments
Chapter Six
Valuing Indirect PE for Services Provided in Facility Settings
Chapter Seven
Using OPPS Costs to Determine PE Values
Chapter Eight
Summary, Policy Recommendations, Conclusions
Appendix A
Summary of the Current Algorithm Used in the PE Valuation Process
Appendix B
Defining Place of Service, Type of Practice, and Ownership
Appendix C
Supplemental Information for the OPPS Analyses
Appendix D
MGMA Specialty and PPIS Specialty Crosswalk
This study was funded by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and conducted by RAND Health.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.