• linkedin
  • Increase Font
  • Sharebar

    What urologists need to know about APMs

    Alternative models offer advantages, but opportunities for specialists are limited


    APM vs. Advanced APM

    The distinction between an APM and an Advanced APM is important. Under MACRA, all physicians will be subject to MIPS unless they meet one of three exceptions: They are in their first year of participation in Medicare, they do not exceed a low volume threshold of patients or payments, or they are a qualifying participant in an Advanced APM. These qualifying participants will receive a 5% lump-sum bonus (based on professional services only) in addition to any shared savings (or losses) in the APM itself, and not be subject to MIPS payment adjustments.

    In order to be considered a “qualifying participant in an Advanced APM,” the providers in that APM must collectively exceed a proportional threshold of Medicare beneficiaries or payments seen or received through the Advanced APM—20% of beneficiaries or 25% of payments in the first 2 years of the program. APM participants who do not meet this threshold will be subject to MIPS, but are eligible for favorable scoring under MIPS by virtue of participating in an APM (see below).

    You may have missed -  2016 financial outlook: Consider these strategies

    A provider’s status under MACRA is not an election, selection, or option on the part of the eligible clinician—it is determined by CMS each year, and the details of this complex determination process are clearly spelled out in the proposed rule. In summary, prior to the beginning of each performance year, CMS will post a list of APMs and Advanced APMs. At the end of each performance year, CMS will determine whether an eligible professional was assigned to one or more APMs based on official participation lists submitted by the APM.

    Next, CMS will determine for each Advanced APM whether participating groups (known as APM entities) collectively met the qualifying thresholds for that year; for providers/entities that participate in more than one APM, CMS has proposed using the calculation that is most favorable to the professional/entity. Those that exceed the threshold will be “qualifying participants”; there is also a lower bar for “partial qualification,” which earns the provider an option whether to participate in MIPS, though they do not qualify for the 5% bonus; everyone else will be subject to MIPS under APM scoring.

    Next: APMs confer MIPS score advantage

    APMs confer MIPS score advantage

    APM participation confers a significant advantage in the calculation of the MIPS composite score. First, MIPS APM entity participants will be treated as a group for the purposes of MIPS APM scoring—all providers in the entity would receive the same MIPS composite score. Second, MIPS APM participants are given substantial (50%) credit in the Clinical Practice Improvement Activity score simply for their participation. Third, CMS has proposed to reduce the reporting burden by using the quality measures already being submitted by the MIPS APM (a Medicare Shared Savings Program, for example) and not requiring separate reporting under MIPS.

    Fourth, the MIPS APM entity would not be assessed on resource use. Finally, the MIPS categories would be favorably reweighted for MIPS APM participants.

    More from Dr. Dowling: What overpayments rule means for your practice

    Bottom line: Urologists wishing to participate in an APM have very few options available to them today beyond a Medicare Shared Savings Program (without risk) or a Next Generation ACO, and most will be subject to MIPS even if they are in one of these APMs. Specialty physician-focused payment models are unlikely to be available in the first few performance years under MACRA.

    CMS is expected to release a final rule regarding MACRA in the fall. In the meantime, urologists may wish to survey available APMs in their community (see http://bit.ly/Savingsprograms and http://bit.ly/NextgenACOs), review conditions of participation, and determine whether the benefits of participation—including favorable treatment under MACRA—outweigh the risks.

    More from Urology Times:

    My $4.07 check from an insurer: A sign of the times

    IRAs: How to make an early withdrawal

    AACU on MACRA: Delay rollout, adjust low-volume threshold

    Robert A. Dowling, MD
    Dr. Dowling is president of Dowling Medical Director Services, a private health care consulting firm specializing in quality ...


    You must be signed in to leave a comment. Registering is fast and free!

    All comments must follow the ModernMedicine Network community rules and terms of use, and will be moderated. ModernMedicine reserves the right to use the comments we receive, in whole or in part,in any medium. See also the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Community FAQ.

    • No comments available