Does the thought of the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) new Physician Quality Reporting Initiative (PQRI) — or “Pay for Performance” as it has often been referred to — cause a pit in your stomach? If so, then you’re not alone.
Many of you may be unwilling to participate in this government initiative because you’re concerned about too much extra paperwork for too little, or no, benefit — a common complaint among many physicians with regard to some past government-mandated programs.
However, as we report in this month’s cover story, beginning on page 46, dermatologists may stand to greatly benefit from complying with the three dermatology-based PQRI measures, of which focus on melanoma-based quality care initiatives.
What’s involved?
Dermatologists who report that they have performed the three melanoma measures may receive an incentive bonus of 1.5% of total allowable CMS fee schedule charges for the period from July 1 to December 31, 2007, and not just for those related to melanoma.
At least for this year, dermatology has far fewer and far less-complex reporting measures compared with other specialties, reported Dirk Elston, M.D., chair of AAD’s P4P Workgroup and co-chair of the American Medical Association’s Workgroup. Dermatology only has to be concerned with three of the 74 reporting initiatives approved by CMS for 2007.
Things Could Change . . .
Pay-for-performance initiatives are gearing up all over — not just at the federal level — and many physicians are wary of getting involved at all.
An article in the Journal of Oncology Practice a year ago noted that there were 110 pay-for-performance programs in the private sector, and those were 2006 figures.
In addition, a newly published survey of state Medicaid directors and programs that encompassed data from all directors countrywide indicated that presently more than half of all states currently operate one or more pay-for-performance programs and “nearly 85% expect to do so within the next five years,” noted a report published by the Commonwealth Fund, a private foundation geared toward an improved health system.
Interestingly, the Commonwealth Fund report also noted that “Medicaid is not a new entrant to the field of pay for performance: Almost half of all existing programs are more than five years old.”
It seems the time has finally come to ride the pay-for-performance wave.
Larisa Hubbs
Executive Editor
lhubbs@hmpcommunications.com
Does the thought of the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) new Physician Quality Reporting Initiative (PQRI) — or “Pay for Performance” as it has often been referred to — cause a pit in your stomach? If so, then you’re not alone.
Many of you may be unwilling to participate in this government initiative because you’re concerned about too much extra paperwork for too little, or no, benefit — a common complaint among many physicians with regard to some past government-mandated programs.
However, as we report in this month’s cover story, beginning on page 46, dermatologists may stand to greatly benefit from complying with the three dermatology-based PQRI measures, of which focus on melanoma-based quality care initiatives.
What’s involved?
Dermatologists who report that they have performed the three melanoma measures may receive an incentive bonus of 1.5% of total allowable CMS fee schedule charges for the period from July 1 to December 31, 2007, and not just for those related to melanoma.
At least for this year, dermatology has far fewer and far less-complex reporting measures compared with other specialties, reported Dirk Elston, M.D., chair of AAD’s P4P Workgroup and co-chair of the American Medical Association’s Workgroup. Dermatology only has to be concerned with three of the 74 reporting initiatives approved by CMS for 2007.
Things Could Change . . .
Pay-for-performance initiatives are gearing up all over — not just at the federal level — and many physicians are wary of getting involved at all.
An article in the Journal of Oncology Practice a year ago noted that there were 110 pay-for-performance programs in the private sector, and those were 2006 figures.
In addition, a newly published survey of state Medicaid directors and programs that encompassed data from all directors countrywide indicated that presently more than half of all states currently operate one or more pay-for-performance programs and “nearly 85% expect to do so within the next five years,” noted a report published by the Commonwealth Fund, a private foundation geared toward an improved health system.
Interestingly, the Commonwealth Fund report also noted that “Medicaid is not a new entrant to the field of pay for performance: Almost half of all existing programs are more than five years old.”
It seems the time has finally come to ride the pay-for-performance wave.
Larisa Hubbs
Executive Editor
lhubbs@hmpcommunications.com
Does the thought of the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) new Physician Quality Reporting Initiative (PQRI) — or “Pay for Performance” as it has often been referred to — cause a pit in your stomach? If so, then you’re not alone.
Many of you may be unwilling to participate in this government initiative because you’re concerned about too much extra paperwork for too little, or no, benefit — a common complaint among many physicians with regard to some past government-mandated programs.
However, as we report in this month’s cover story, beginning on page 46, dermatologists may stand to greatly benefit from complying with the three dermatology-based PQRI measures, of which focus on melanoma-based quality care initiatives.
What’s involved?
Dermatologists who report that they have performed the three melanoma measures may receive an incentive bonus of 1.5% of total allowable CMS fee schedule charges for the period from July 1 to December 31, 2007, and not just for those related to melanoma.
At least for this year, dermatology has far fewer and far less-complex reporting measures compared with other specialties, reported Dirk Elston, M.D., chair of AAD’s P4P Workgroup and co-chair of the American Medical Association’s Workgroup. Dermatology only has to be concerned with three of the 74 reporting initiatives approved by CMS for 2007.
Things Could Change . . .
Pay-for-performance initiatives are gearing up all over — not just at the federal level — and many physicians are wary of getting involved at all.
An article in the Journal of Oncology Practice a year ago noted that there were 110 pay-for-performance programs in the private sector, and those were 2006 figures.
In addition, a newly published survey of state Medicaid directors and programs that encompassed data from all directors countrywide indicated that presently more than half of all states currently operate one or more pay-for-performance programs and “nearly 85% expect to do so within the next five years,” noted a report published by the Commonwealth Fund, a private foundation geared toward an improved health system.
Interestingly, the Commonwealth Fund report also noted that “Medicaid is not a new entrant to the field of pay for performance: Almost half of all existing programs are more than five years old.”
It seems the time has finally come to ride the pay-for-performance wave.
Larisa Hubbs
Executive Editor
lhubbs@hmpcommunications.com
