Physician specialists are calling on Congress to isolate Medicare Part B drug reimbursements from payment adjustments under the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS).
A coalition of medical societies, large group practices, and patient advocacy groups has asked for an “intervention this year with a technical correction that ensures the [MIPS] score adjustment is not applied to Part B drug payments,” according to Jan. 18sent to the leaders of the Senate Finance Committee, House Energy and Commerce Committee, and the House Ways and Means Committee. “Since the 2018 MIPS year has begun, it is imperative that Congress acts quickly to ensure that patient access to critical treatments is not negatively impacted.”
Under, physicians are scored based on their performance across three categories: quality, improvement activities, and advancing care information. A fourth category, cost, is planned but not yet included in the score. Medicare payments, which currently include Part B drug reimbursements, are subject to bonuses and penalties based on performance scores.
In their November 2017to the Quality Payment Program, which includes MIPS, officials at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services said they would be moving forward with including Part B drug payments in the MIPS adjustment.
“This application of the adjustment ... is a significant departure from current policy and would disproportionately affect certain specialties,” according to the coalition’s letter.
Certain specialties, including rheumatology, oncology, and ophthalmology, have more to lose under the current policy because these specialists administer more Part B drugs than other specialists, according to health care consultancy
“Certain specialists administer more Part B drugs than others and, therefore, may be exposed to significant financial risk and payment swings year-over-year under the CMS [Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services] proposal,”, director at Avalere, said in a statement.
In 2018, physicians in those specialties could see drug payments increase or decrease by as much as 16%, according to Avalere.
The policy likely will have an even greater effect on smaller practices and those in rural settings and could lead to access issues, according to the coalition letter.
“Some patients already face access challenges because the budget sequester has eroded reimbursements to physicians, and this policy would exacerbate these problems,” the letter states. “Patients would be left with fewer locations where they could receive care, resulting in less access and higher costs. A growing number of patients would then have to seek care in a hospital, which would result in higher out-of-pocket expenses and, particularly in rural communities, may require traveling longer distances to receive care.”