Rogosin Manhattan East Dialysis
505 East 70th Street
New York, NY 10021
212-746-1566
Get Directions+
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2023 Aug 1;34(8):1315-1328. doi: 10.1681/ASN.0000000000000163. Epub 2023 Jul 3.
ABSTRACT
The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is a mandatory pay-for-performance program through the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) that aims to incentivize high-quality care, promote continuous improvement, facilitate electronic exchange of information, and lower health care costs. Previous research has highlighted several limitations of the MIPS program in assessing nephrology care delivery, including administrative complexity, limited relevance to nephrology care, and inability to compare performance across nephrology practices, emphasizing the need for a more valid and meaningful quality assessment program. This article details the iterative consensus-building process used by the American Society of Nephrology Quality Committee from May 2020 to July 2022 to develop the Optimal Care for Kidney Health MIPS Value Pathway (MVP). Two rounds of ranked-choice voting among Quality Committee members were used to select among nine quality metrics, 43 improvement activities, and three cost measures considered for inclusion in the MVP. Measure selection was iteratively refined in collaboration with the CMS MVP Development Team, and new MIPS measures were submitted through CMS's Measures Under Consideration process. The Optimal Care for Kidney Health MVP was published in the 2023 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Final Rule and includes measures related to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker use, hypertension control, readmissions, acute kidney injury requiring dialysis, and advance care planning. The nephrology MVP aims to streamline measure selection in MIPS and serves as a case study of collaborative policymaking between a subspecialty professional organization and national regulatory agencies.
PMID:37400103 | PMC:PMC10400097 | DOI:10.1681/ASN.0000000000000163
Kidney360. 2020 Apr 28;1(6):524-526. doi: 10.34067/KID.0001662020. eCollection 2020 Jun 25.
NO ABSTRACT
PMID:35368586 | PMC:PMC8809321 | DOI:10.34067/KID.0001662020
Kidney360. 2021 Aug 6;3(2):214-216. doi: 10.34067/KID.0004892021. eCollection 2022 Feb 24.
NO ABSTRACT
PMID:35378018 | PMC:PMC8967635 | DOI:10.34067/KID.0004892021
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2022 Jul;17(7):1082-1091. doi: 10.2215/CJN.10880821. Epub 2022 Mar 14.
ABSTRACT
Contemporary nephrology practice is heavily weighted toward in-center hemodialysis, reflective of decisions on infrastructure and personnel in response to decades of policy. The Advancing American Kidney Health initiative seeks to transform care for patients and providers. Under the initiative's framework, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation has launched two new care models that align patient choice with provider incentives. The mandatory ESRD Treatment Choices model requires participation by all nephrology practices in designated Hospital Referral Regions, randomly selecting 30% of all Hospital Referral Regions across the United States for participation, with the remaining Hospital Referral Regions serving as controls. The voluntary Kidney Care Choices model offers alternative payment programs open to nephrology practices throughout the country. To help organize implementation of the models, we developed Driver Diagrams that serve as blueprints to identify structures, processes, and norms and generate intervention concepts. We focused on two goals that are directly applicable to nephrology practices and central to the incentive structure of the ESRD Treatment Choices and Kidney Care Choices: (1) increasing utilization of home dialysis, and (2) increasing the number of kidney transplants. Several recurring themes became apparent with implementation. Multiple stakeholders from assorted backgrounds are needed. Communication with primary care providers will facilitate timely referrals, education, and comanagement. Nephrology providers (nephrologists, nursing, dialysis organizations, others) must lead implementation. Patient engagement at nearly every step will help achieve the aims of the models. Advocacy with federal and state regulatory agencies will be crucial to expanding home dialysis and transplantation access. Although the models hold promise to improve choices and outcomes for many patients, we must be vigilant that they not do reinforce existing disparities in health care or widen known racial, socioeconomic, or geographic gaps. The Advancing American Kidney Health initiative has the potential to usher in a new era of value-based care for nephrology.
PMID:35289764 | PMC:PMC9269631 | DOI:10.2215/CJN.10880821
Kidney Int Rep. 2022 Mar;7(3):633-637. doi: 10.1016/j.ekir.2021.12.006. Epub 2021 Dec 13.
NO ABSTRACT
PMID:34926872 | PMC:PMC8667463 | DOI:10.1016/j.ekir.2021.12.006
Am J Kidney Dis. 2022 May;79(5):746-749. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2021.06.029. Epub 2021 Aug 11.
NO ABSTRACT
PMID:34390789 | DOI:10.1053/j.ajkd.2021.06.029
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2021 Feb 8;16(2):284-286. doi: 10.2215/CJN.07440520. Epub 2020 Sep 18.
NO ABSTRACT
PMID:32948642 | PMC:PMC7863636 | DOI:10.2215/CJN.07440520
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2020 Dec 31;16(1):124-126. doi: 10.2215/CJN.08430520. Epub 2020 Sep 17.
NO ABSTRACT
PMID:32943397 | PMC:PMC7792651 | DOI:10.2215/CJN.08430520
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2020 Mar;31(3):602-614. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2019090869. Epub 2020 Feb 13.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Leveraging quality metrics can be a powerful approach to identify substantial performance gaps in kidney disease care that affect patient outcomes. However, metrics must be meaningful, evidence-based, attributable, and feasible to improve care delivery. As members of the American Society of Nephrology Quality Committee, we evaluated existing kidney quality metrics and provide a framework for quality measurement to guide clinicians and policy makers.
METHODS: We compiled a comprehensive list of national kidney quality metrics from multiple established kidney and quality organizations. To assess the measures' validity, we conducted two rounds of structured metric evaluation, on the basis of the American College of Physicians criteria: importance, appropriate care, clinical evidence base, clarity of measure specifications, and feasibility and applicability.
RESULTS: We included 60 quality metrics, including seven for CKD prevention, two for slowing CKD progression, two for CKD management, one for advanced CKD and kidney replacement planning, 28 for dialysis management, 18 for broad measures, and two patient-reported outcome measures. We determined that on the basis of defined criteria, 29 (49%) of the metrics have high validity, 23 (38%) have medium validity, and eight (13%) have low validity.
CONCLUSIONS: We rated less than half of kidney disease quality metrics as highly valid; the others fell short because of unclear attribution, inadequate definitions and risk adjustment, or discordance with recent evidence. Nearly half of the metrics were related to dialysis management, compared with only one metric related to kidney replacement planning and two related to patient-reported outcomes. We advocate refining existing measures and developing new metrics that better reflect the spectrum of kidney care delivery.
PMID:32054692 | PMC:PMC7062216 | DOI:10.1681/ASN.2019090869