mass. health reform

RECENT POSTS

Mass. Hospitals Balk At Fees To Access Trove Of Medical Claims Data

The state’s painfully wonky sounding All-Payer Claims Database (APCD) – a catalog of medical, dental and pharmacy claims, as well as other patient-related information — is truly tantalizing in its potential.

For researchers, tapping into this recently released data — a centerpiece of the newly created Center for Health Information and Analysis and part of the state’s overall plan for health care reform and cost control — can offer “a deep understanding of the Massachusetts health care system by providing access to timely, comprehensive, and detailed data,” according to the APCD website. It promises to “be an essential tool to improve quality, reducing costs, and promote transparency.” (Though not necessarily for the average patient: basically, you need an analyst by your side to really comprehend the trove of complex information.)

(401(K) 2012/flickr)

(401(K) 2012/flickr)

But wait a minute. To access this important data for one year will cost a mid-size organization, like a community hospital, about $40,000, according to the Massachusetts Hospital Association, which argues that the fees are too high. “We’re very disappointed,” says the MHA’s Senior Director of Managed Care, Karen Granoff. “I think [the pricing] is going to discourage many providers from trying to access it.”

The Center For Health Information and Analysis says the proposed fee schedule is based on four factors:

(1) the type applicant requesting the data; (2) the type and number of data files requested; (3)the data elements requested; and (4) the number of years of data requested. The Center may reduce or waive the applicable fees for qualified applicants.

(Also, the final fee schedule is still being determined. It’s slated for release around June 1.)

Still, in written testimony to CHIA earlier this month, the hospital association argued that the proposed fee structure is simply unmanageable, particularly when the state is pressuring hospitals and providers to re-invent themselves as Accountable Care Organizations and to provide less costly and higher quality care and patient management.

“It would be an unintended consequence if the Commonwealth’s multi-year, ambitious effort to control healthcare costs were to fail due to barriers to data access set up by the agency itself,” Granoff wrote.

But hospitals already have all the claims data on their own patients, right? So why the brouhaha over the more comprehensive claims data? Here’s why the information is important, says Granoff:

The purpose of APCDs is to support health care transparency, health care reform initiatives, and improve care for patients. Access to data from all payers (commercial and government) will be vital to the successful development of ACOs and other integrated models of care. While it is true that providers may currently have access to data from one payer at a time, the timeframes, content, frequency, and ability to mesh data from different sources does not exist outside of the APCD.

The legislature recognized the importance of the APCD to providers when it included language specifying that:

“CHIA shall, to the extent feasible, make data in the APCD available to payers and providers in real time. Providers and provider organizations, among others, be permitted to have access to de-identified data for the purposes of lowering costs, coordinating care, performing quality analyses, and for administrative or planning purposes, etc.
Providers and provider organizations be given access to data with patient identifiers for the purpose of carrying out treatment and coordinating care.”

Regarding the APCD and its use by providers, it will allow performance analysis based upon previously unavailable data from private and public health insurance plans, including

*Follow-up after medical or surgical hospitalization
*Readmission rates Continue reading

New Board Begins Work To Control Health Care Costs

Monday, August 6, 2012 – Governor Patrick joins legislators, advocates and stakeholders in Nurses Hall at the State House to sign S. 2400, launching the next phase of health care reform that builds on the Commonwealth’s nation-leading access to care through landmark measures that will lower costs and make quality, affordable care a reality for all Massachusetts residents (Photo: Office Of Gov. Patrick/flickr)

A new 11-member board began work today on what Governor Deval Patrick calls an historic effort to control the interminable problem of rising health care costs.  WBUR’s Martha Bebinger offers this initial report:

The main goal of this board, including consumers, employers, providers and health care experts, will be to make sure Massachusetts meets the new goal of keeping health care spending in line with the state’s overall economic growth.  Governor Patrick swore in commission members this morning.

“It’s important for them to realize that they’ve been called to this moment by history. We a model for national health care reform in terms of access. And in terms of cost control, we’re going to be a model for the country on how to crack that code,” he said.

The board’s chairman, Prof. Stuart Altman, a Brandeis economist, asked members to make sure they represent the interests of the state as a whole, not their special interests on health care spending.

Boros Named Director Of New Center To Implement Cost-Control Law

This just in from the Patrick administration:

Governor Deval Patrick, Attorney General Martha Coakley and Auditor Suzanne Bump today selected Áron Boros to serve as the first Executive Director of the Center for Health Information and Analysis (CHIA), furthering the Commonwealth’s efforts to lower health care costs and make quality, affordable care a reality for all Massachusetts residents. Currently the Commissioner of the Division of Health Care Finance and Policy (HCFP), Boros has helped shape the development of the Commonwealth’s landmark cost containment law.

Aron Boros is named the first Executive Director of the Center for Health Information and Analysis

“Áron brings valuable experience and a proven commitment to this critical role,” said Governor Patrick. “This is another important step forward in the Commonwealth’s efforts to create a health care system that is as affordable as it is accessible.”

“The Center for Health Information and Analysis will play a vital role in continuing to increase transparency and understanding of the health care market,” said Attorney General Coakley. “We are pleased that Áron Boros will lead CHIA as we begin the next stage of health care reform in Massachusetts, with a strong focus containing costs.”

“Áron Boros is the right choice, given the leadership role he has played at the HCFP and his understanding that good data and analytics are the foundation upon which good public policy must be built,” said Auditor Bump. Continue reading

Gov. Touts Health Reform: Prevention Up, Smoking & Cervical Cancer Down

(Photo by Dominick Reuter for WBUR/flickr)

In a speech to the Massachusetts Medical Society today, Gov. Deval Patrick took the opportunity to crow about health improvements linked to reforms that started in 2006. There were the usual statistics about coverage: 98.2 percent of the total population and 99.8 percent of children in the state have health insurance. But the governor also cited some other, less familiar numbers. Here are a few (all quotes from Patrick’s prepared remarks):

– More businesses offer health insurance to their employees today than before our 2006 reforms took effect, some 78 percent of Massachusetts businesses as compared to the national average of about 69 percent

– Preventive care is up: more people are receiving cancer screenings, more women are getting pre-natal care and visits to emergency rooms have decreased. 150,000 people have stopped smoking because we expanded coverage for smoking cessation programs. A recent study by the National Bureau of Economic Research documents improvements in physical health, mental health, functional limitations, and joint disorders as a result of increased access to care in Massachusetts. Women, minorities and low-income people have experienced the biggest health improvements.

– Among Hispanic males, a notably underinsured population in Massachusetts before health care reform, the detection of testicular cancer has more than doubled and the majority of cases are now detected at an early stage.

– And with wider access to screenings, we’ve seen a 36 percent decrease in cervical cancer in women.

– Over 90 percent of our residents have a primary care physician, and 4 out of 5 have seen their doctor in the last 12 months.

Continue reading

A New Approach To Cutting MA’s Health Costs: Throw Spaghetti

(401k/flickr)

By Rachel Zimmerman and Carey Goldberg

When Massachusetts passed sweeping health insurance reform in 2006, a crucial piece was missing from the landmark legislation: how to control rising medical costs.

Today, state lawmakers unveiled an ambitious new proposal to do just that, including new ways to pay doctors and hospitals, a specific cap on health-care spending tethered to economic growth and a tax on the state’s most expensive hospitals if they can’t justify their prices.

MIT economics professor Jonathan Gruber, an architect of the state’s 2006 health law and an advisor to President Barack Obama on the national Affordable Care Act calls the new House proposal “aggressive, broad and visionary.”

“This is an incredibly hard problem,” said Gruber, speaking on WBUR’s Radio Boston today. “What I like about this…is that it’s really taking the spaghetti approach to cost control; let’s throw a bunch of things against the wall and see what sticks. They’re doing a bunch of different things all of which might work.”

So, what does it mean for patients?

Rep. Steve Walsh, the House chair of the joint Committee on Health Care Financing, said the plan would save $160 billion over 15 years. As far as savings for patients, Walsh said: “The first thing I’d tell [a patient] is five years from now, her family plan is going to be $2,000 cheaper than it is today.” Walsh said businesses would also find their health costs cut significantly.

House Speaker Robert DeLeo added: “With this bill, I think everyone’s gotten a little something they want and everyone’s gotten a little something they don’t want. So that’s what this legislation is all about, but at the end of the day, most importantly what it’s going to provide is some real health care cost containment. That’s what the bill is all about.”

One of the greatest challenges, he said, was to contain costs while not undermining a key industry in the state, with 1 in 7 jobs here linked to health care. Clearly some folks will be disappointed that the plan didn’t go far enough. Gov. Deval Patrick introduced legislation in February 2011 that would have allowed greater government oversight of contracts between insurers and health care providers and moved more medical groups into global payment systems that put doctors and medical groups on a budget.

But DeLeo also made the point that once again, the state is in the forefront of health reform. “I look at this as Massachusetts being a leader once again in terms of what’s going on in the health care field in the country.”

Here are some details of the House bill, officially the Health Care Quality Improvement and Cost Reduction Act of 2012, presented today by lawmakers. The state Senate is expected to introduce its own version of the plan next week.

1. Oversight: A new, quasi-governmental agency called the Division of Health Care Cost and Quality would oversee the transition to the new payment and delivery system with a board including consumer, government and industry representatives.

2. Cost-Cutting: To curb the increase in medical spending, the plan establishes a cap for health-care spending linked to the local economy, the Gross State Product, minus one-half a percent.

3. Leveling The Field: The state could impose a 10 percent “luxury tax” on pricey hospitals that charge more than 20 percent of the state median price for a given service without being able to justify that higher price. (Two earlier reports by Attorney General Martha Coakley found that certain hospitals exploited their market clout and charged higher prices without offering better quality care.) Hospitals would pay this penalty into a “distressed hospital” fund for institutions that serve a high proportion of poor and vulnerable patients. Continue reading

Breaking Report: House To Release Health Payment Reform Bill Friday

This just in from Michael Norton at State House News Service:

Stepping in front of a planned announcement from state senators, House leaders late Thursday said they’ll unveil a long-awaited health care payment reform and cost control bill on Friday.

According to House Speaker Robert DeLeo’s office, the bill will be unveiled during a 2:30 p.m. press conference in Nurses Hall with Health Care Financing Committee Co-chairman Rep. Steven Walsh (D-Lynn) and other members of the committee.

Senate President Therese Murray said last week the Senate planned to debate its version of Gov. Deval Patrick’s payment reform bill, filed in February 2011, in mid- May, after the bill emerged from the Senate Ways and Means Committee. This week, Murray said the Senate bill would be released next week.

Rumors began circulating on Beacon Hill Wednesday that a House health care bill might emerge on Friday, before the Senate bill. Until Thursday afternoon, House aides either declined to respond or declined comment when asked to confirm those plans or whether committee members were voting on bill. Continue reading

The Wonk Olympics: Sweeping New Health Cost-Cutting Plan Coming

In this April 12, 2006, file photo, then-Gov. Mitt Romney is seen with lawmakers and staffers after signing the state's universal health law at Faneuil Hall in Boston. (AP File)

In health policy circles, it’s as big as the Olympics, with major players, major maneuvering and all eyes watching. It’s a sweeping new plan to control health care costs through radical changes in how doctors are paid and other measures that will be soon be unveiled by state lawmakers in the next chapter of health reform, reports WBUR’s Martha Bebinger. Here’s a bit of her preview:

The House and Senate are expected to build on movements that are already under way: global payments, electronic health records and the increased focus on primary care. The House point person on health care, Steven Walsh, has outlined his proposals in meetings with dozens of groups.

Legislators are considering some controversial moves.

The Senate has talked about taxing insurance company profits. One House leader has a proposal to close the gap in payments to rich and poor hospitals. There’s a vigorous debate about how aggressive the state should be in trying to hold down health care costs. Continue reading

Nation Eyes Bay State As Cost-Cutting Health Reform Plan Emerges

(jimmywayne/flickr)

Here’s more evidence that as Massachusetts goes, so goes the nation. The Washington Post reports on details of the soon-to-be-released, highly anticipated Health Reform 2.0 bill, aka, the cost-control plan. Put succinctly by Brian Rosman, of Health Care For All:

“There’s a bit of Bay State pride tied up in this,” said Brian Rosman, research director for the Boston-based advocacy group Health Care for All. “We were the first to figure out universal coverage. Now we want to be the first to crack health-care costs.”

The Post report touches on various aspect of the wide-ranging cost-cutting plan, expected to be out later this month:

The payment-reform law that Massachusetts will soon debate could create new incentives for doctors, hospitals and providers to participate in a payment system that looks a lot like the Alternative Quality Contract.

In February 2011, Gov. Deval L. Patrick (D) introduced legislation that would have moved all Massachusetts health-care providers to value-based payments (arrangements like the Alternative Quality Contract) by June 2015. A new government entity, created by the bill, would facilitate that change, setting various benchmarks and timelines… Continue reading

Mass. Taxpayers Foundation Responds To Critics On Health Reform Spending

(401k/Flickr)

By Michael J. Widmer
Guest Contributor

A new Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation (MTF) study finds that in fiscal 2011, the state’s share of spending attributable to the 2006 health reform law was $453 million, or 1.4% of the $32 billion budget. And, when you look at the first five years of state spending for health reform, the annual increase, year-to-year, averaged about $91 million. In short, health reform hasn’t been a “budget-buster” as some critics have claimed. Pretty good news, right? Well, the Pioneer Institute‘s Josh Archambault and Amy Lischko aren’t so sure. While they largely accept the way MTF calculated the cost of health reform, they’ve applied some creative accounting to challenge the report’s conclusions.

A little background might be helpful: With our focus on the state budget, tax policy, and the Massachusetts economy, MTF’s engagement in health reform goes back many years. Prior to enactment of the 2006 law, we concluded that the state would have to increase spending by about $100 million a year to achieve the goal of nearly universal health insurance coverage. In 2008, with implementation well underway, some critics of the law began predicting “massive cost overruns” – up to $2 billion over ten years – with “back-breaking costs to the taxpayers.” So, in 2009, and again this year, MTF decided to take a look at the numbers and report on what was really going on. Specifically, we wanted to know how the health reform law was affecting state spending over time. Where has spending gone up because of the law and why; where has it gone down; what has been the net change year-over-year; and is it manageable in the context of the overall state spending?

Now, with the rate of uninsured in Massachusetts dipping below 2%, we have some answers. The amount Massachusetts spends to help low-income, uninsured residents gain access to needed health care has increased from $1.04 billion before the law was enacted to $1.95 billion after five years of reform. Since the federal government picks up approximately half the cost, the state’s share of the increase was $453 million. In separate blogs, Archambault and Lischko have raised a series of questions about how the spending figures should be interpreted. Continue reading

Five Myths About Massachusetts Health Reform (By A Former Romney Executive)

Updated at 4:11 PM, April 20th, 2012

Amy Lischko, Ph.D.

Amy Lischko, Ph.D.

Amy M. Lischko
Guest Blogger

Myth Number 1: Uninsured rates in Massachusetts are 2% compared to nation’s 16%

This is like comparing apples to oranges since the 16% is from the federal current population survey and the 2% from the state’s own survey. The two surveys use different methodologies making comparisons impossible. I do not understand why people keep using MA numbers from the state survey and comparing them to the federal US numbers. Isn’t the true and legitimate comparison impressive enough? And, although I’m a fan of the state’s survey, I question the 2% number when I see the health safety net numbers on the rise.

But, for those keeping score: In 2010, US = 16.3% and MA = 5.6%…down from 2006 reported rates of 9.6%.

Myth Number 2: There has been no evidence of crowd-out in Massachusetts

According to a report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, crowd-out has been defined in multiple ways but the most common definition: “compares the reduction in the share of the population with private coverage to the increase in the share of the population with public coverage due to the expansion.” Citing self-reported increases in employer offer rates is interesting, convenient, and certainly serves political interests but it is not evidence of the absence of crowd-out. We have yet to see any definitive studies conducted on this issue that fully assess the cause(s) of the observed increase in public and decrease in private coverage in Massachusetts since the reform. (Various reports from Division of Health Care Finance & Policy report the numbers differently but all reports note that public coverage has grown more than private coverage.) Whether more employers are offering or not is NOT part of this calculation.

Myth Number 3: The individual mandate is responsible for lowering premiums in the individual market

By far, the single most important factor contributing to the decline in premium rates in the individual market following the reform was its merger with the small group market. Some economists like to talk about the importance of the mandate in increasing the number of healthy lives brought into the risk pool but this has had little impact on the lowering of premium rates in the individual market. Around the margins the individual mandate may have brought in some healthy lives, however, they were spread out over the different markets (CommCare, CommChoice, Young Adult and small group), and the impact of those lives vs. the merging of the markets had to be pretty small.

Myth Number 4: The 2006 reform was never about costs

Of course it was about costs! The whole idea behind Governor Mitt Romney’s exchange was to bring more transparency of health care costs and quality, more choice, and more affordable products to small businesses and individuals. I recall talking about this to national audiences around the time the reform was passed with a slide titled, “Health Care Reform: Coverage and Cost Containment.” That these elements of reform were not emphasized by the Patrick administration during the reform’s implementation does not surprise me. However, to talk about the reform as if it was never intended to address costs is simply convenient revisionist history.

Myth Number 5: The additional state cost per year of the reform has averaged $91 million a year
Huh? Continue reading