Currently Viewing:
The American Journal of Managed Care May 2019
Evaluation of Value-Based Insurance Design for Primary Care
Qinli Ma, PhD; Gosia Sylwestrzak, MA; Manish Oza, MD; Lorraine Garneau; and Andrea R. DeVries, PhD
Currently Reading
The Presurgical Episode: An Untapped Opportunity to Improve Value
Erika D. Sears, MD, MS; Rodney A. Hayward, MD; and Eve A. Kerr, MD, MPH
Open Doors to Primary Care Should Add a “Screen” to Reduce Low-Value Care
Betsy Q. Cliff, MS; and A. Mark Fendrick, MD
From the Editorial Board: Daniel B. Wolfson, MHSA
Daniel B. Wolfson, MHSA
Cost-Effectiveness of DPP-4 Inhibitor and SGLT2 Inhibitor Combination Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes
Manjiri Pawaskar, PhD; S. Pinar Bilir, MS; Stacey Kowal, MS; Claudio Gonzalez, MD; Swapnil Rajpathak, MD; and Glenn Davies, DrPH
Improving Provider Directory Accuracy: Can Machine-Readable Directories Help?
Michael Adelberg, MA, MPP; Austin Frakt, PhD; Daniel Polsky, PhD; and Michelle Kitchman Strollo, DrPH, MHS
Electronic Consults for Improving Specialty Care Access for Veterans
David E. Winchester, MD, MS; Anita Wokhlu, MD; Juan Vilaro, MD; Anthony A. Bavry, MD, MPH; Ki Park, MD; Calvin Choi, MD; Mark Panna, MD; Michael Kaufmann, MD; Matthew McKillop, MD; and Carsten Schmalfuss, MD
Potential Impact of Pharmaceutical Industry Rebates on Medication Adherence
Leah L. Zullig, PhD; Bradi B. Granger, PhD; Helene Vilme, DrPH; Megan M. Oakes, MPA; and Hayden B. Bosworth, PhD
Producing Comparable Cost and Quality Results From All-Payer Claims Databases
Maria de Jesus Diaz-Perez, PhD; Rita Hanover, PhD; Emilie Sites, MPH; Doug Rupp, BS; Jim Courtemanche, MS; and Emily Levi, MPH
Beyond Satisfaction Scores: Exploring Emotionally Adverse Patient Experiences
Laura M. Holdsworth, PhD; Dani L. Zionts, MScPH; Karen Marie De Sola-Smith, PhD; Melissa Valentine, PhD; Marcy D. Winget, PhD; and Steven M. Asch, MD
Patient-Centered Medical Homes and Preventive Service Use
Joel F. Farley, PhD; Arun Kumar, PharmD, MS; Benjamin Y. Urick, PharmD, PhD; and Marisa E. Domino, PhD
Pilot of Urgent Care Center Evaluation for Acute Coronary Syndrome
Ryan P. Radecki, MD, MS; Kevin F. Foley, PhD; Timothy S. Elzinga, MD; Cynthia P. Horak, MD; Thomas E. Gant, MS; Heather M. Papp, BA; Adam J. Morris, BS; Natalie R. Hauser, BA; and Briar L. Ertz-Berger, MD, MPH

The Presurgical Episode: An Untapped Opportunity to Improve Value

Erika D. Sears, MD, MS; Rodney A. Hayward, MD; and Eve A. Kerr, MD, MPH
Expansion of episode of care measurement models to include presurgical care is an added opportunity to improve quality, value, and efficiency in healthcare delivery.
Am J Manag Care. 2019;25(5):219-220
Takeaway Points
  • Healthcare reforms to improve value in surgical care have focused solely on inpatient and postoperative care while ignoring the value and efficiency of services provided prior to surgery.
  • Evaluation of care provided during the presurgical period cannot be ignored if we are to comprehensively tackle the problem of low-value care.
  • The expansion of episode-based measurement models of quality and efficiency, to begin with a patient’s initial visit for a surgical problem, has the potential to facilitate improved care coordination and value.
Although efforts to improve value in surgical care have focused on inpatient and postoperative care, services provided prior to surgery have largely been ignored. Given that ambulatory care accounts for the greatest utilization of healthcare expenditures as a whole,1,2 critical examination of care delivered prior to surgery, starting when a patient first seeks care for a problem, is an untapped opportunity to improve healthcare value. Clinicians typically practice in silos with no incentives to improve the coordination and efficiency of services that patients receive prior to undergoing a procedure. Therefore, we propose a new approach to assess and improve the quality and efficiency of presurgical care.

Major overuse and underuse problems can occur during presurgical care, even for a straightforward and common musculoskeletal condition such as carpal tunnel syndrome. Care coordination problems and delays can easily arise from multiple clinicians being involved, not just from primary care provider discontinuity, but also from poor coordination or inconsistent approaches among clinicians from occupational therapy, surgery, physical medicine and rehabilitation, and pain management disciplines. Patients with less severe symptoms can often benefit from nonoperative treatments, but in patients with severe disease, such treatments can waste money, delay symptom relief, and needlessly risk complications (including irreversible nerve damage). These problems can also be seen in other conditions that can lead to surgery, such as spinal disease and joint osteoarthritis, in which there are no incentives for multiple clinicians to work together to provide well-coordinated and efficient preprocedural care.

A healthcare strategy that encourages improvements in efficiency and value is “bundling” services within an episode of care. When combined with quality measurement and clinical care pathways, episode-based frameworks can, in theory, encourage clinicians to manage resources wisely and minimize low-value care.3,4 Although CMS canceled its plan for mandatory bundled payments for cardiac surgery, the leadership at CMS still believes that episode-based initiatives show promise to improve care coordination and quality while reducing healthcare spending and anticipates further expansion of voluntary bundled payment programs in the future.5

To date, however, these efforts to improve the coordination and value of surgical care have focused on just a few conditions and have only captured surgical, acute, and posthospitalization care.6,7 Although the National Quality Forum Episodes of Care Measurement Framework defines the start of a clinical episode as the time of initial evaluation and management for a condition,3 to our knowledge, no episode-based evaluation approach has included presurgical care more broadly, nor incentives to promote appropriate and efficient care in the period between a patient’s initial encounter and a procedure. The systematic evaluation of the full spectrum of preprocedural care is needed to fully address the problem of low-value surgical care.

The first step we propose is to develop measurement tools and greater practical guidance for clinicians involved in the delivery of presurgical care. We suggest first expanding episode models to assess the quality and degree of resource utilization delivered across the totality of preprocedural care. For each episode that results in a surgery or procedure, the measures would start with the initial clinical encounter within a specified time period prior to the surgery and include visits, tests, and nonoperative treatments delivered prior to surgery.

The next step is to use these measures to examine how clinical or organizational factors are associated with variation in quality and resource utilization, with the goal of developing guidelines and strategies that improve the efficiency of presurgical care and, ultimately, patient outcomes. Understanding modifiable organizational and clinical processes associated with efficient and well-coordinated presurgical care can help to inform the creation of high-value presurgical care pathways.

The proposed presurgical episode model can be applied to assess quality and utilization measures for care delivered prior to surgery for patients with carpal tunnel syndrome in our example clinical scenario. Evidence suggests that preoperative testing rarely affects treatment decisions for this condition,8,9 and current policies (and clinical practice guidelines) rarely consider symptom duration or severity in guiding the appropriate use or timing of tests and nonoperative treatments.5 Consider the case of a patient who presents with clinically severe carpal tunnel syndrome and is prescribed splints and a series of steroid injections for an inappropriately prolonged period of time before being referred for carpal tunnel release. Given the severity of symptoms, the treatments prior to surgery represent low-value presurgical care because they are unlikely to provide long-term benefit and may lead to worse patient outcomes by delaying more appropriate treatment.10

In this example, a presurgical measure of quality could assess inappropriate delay of surgery in patients with recurrent or persistent symptoms. A measure of resource utilization would include the number of presurgical encounters for treatment of the condition or total costs of care. Understanding the relationships among these proposed presurgical measures and clinical factors, such as the use and duration of nonoperative treatments or electrodiagnostic testing, can help identify best practices in presurgical care that will promote more efficient symptom relief and minimize patient inconvenience and added costs related to low-value tests and treatments.

This proposed measurement model of presurgical quality and utilization could be applied across a spectrum of surgical conditions to assess and improve the value of presurgical ambulatory care. Once these measures are developed and processes for improving preprocedural care are understood, health systems and professional societies can better promote the delivery of efficient presurgical care across providers through the development of high-value clinical care pathways. In addition, the presurgical measures could eventually be included in existing procedure-based episode-of-care models to provide incentives to promote shared accountability for the totality of surgical care that patients receive within and across health systems.

One potential challenge in developing these presurgical episode measures and high-value care pathways is the tailoring that will be required for each clinical problem and each health system. The duration, visits, and tests included in a presurgical episode will vary by condition. For low-risk surgery such as cataract care, the number and type of potentially unnecessary tests or visits prior to surgery would likely be defined by a presurgical episode of relatively short duration. For carpal tunnel syndrome or major joint arthritis, on the other hand, the duration of the episode examined would likely be much longer. In the initial phase of creating presurgical episode models, measurement evaluation could be triggered by delivery of a surgical procedure, with retrospective evaluation of care delivered during a defined period of time before surgery, as far back as the patient’s first clinical encounter. Once episode models are defined, health systems can also assess measures prospectively, triggered by the patient’s initial clinical encounter for a given problem. In this case, even patients who are successfully treated nonoperatively may be included in the measurement models and should also benefit from efforts to improve the coordination and value of presurgical care.

Despite these complexities, attention to care delivery during the presurgical period cannot be ignored if we are to comprehensively tackle the problem of low-value care. The expansion of episode-based approaches, to begin with a patient’s initial visit for a surgical problem, has the potential to facilitate improved care coordination. Creation of clinical care pathways and episode-based measures that capture and guide delivery of presurgical care will promote shared responsibility across clinicians for providing efficient and high-value care.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Jack Iwashyna, MD, PhD (Michigan Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine), for his critical review of and feedback on the manuscript.
Author Affiliations: Section of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery (EDS), and Department of Internal Medicine (RAH, EAK), Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI; Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System (EDS, RAH, EAK), Ann Arbor, MI; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan (EDS, RAH, EAK), Ann Arbor, MI.

Source of Funding: Dr Sears is supported by Career Development Award Number IK2 HX002592 from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Service.

Author Disclosures: The authors report no relationship or financial interest with any entity that would pose a conflict of interest with the subject matter of this article.

Authorship Information: Concept and design (EDS, RAH, EAK); drafting of the manuscript (EDS, RAH, EAK); critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content (EDS, RAH, EAK); obtaining funding (EDS); administrative, technical, or logistic support (EDS); and supervision (EDS, RAH, EAK).

Address Correspondence to: Erika D. Sears, MD, MS, Section of Plastic Surgery, Michigan Medicine, 2130 Taubman Center, SPC 5340, 1500 E Medical Center Dr, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5340. Email: endavis@med.umich.edu.
REFERENCES

1. Pritchard D, Petrilla A, Hallinan S, Taylor DH Jr, Schabert VF, Dubois RW. What contributes most to high health care costs? health care spending in high resource patients. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2016;22(2):102-109. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2016.22.2.102.

2. Dieleman JL, Baral R, Birger M, et al. US spending on personal health care and public health, 1996-2013. JAMA. 2016;316(24):2627-2646. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.16885.

3. National Quality Forum. Measurement Framework: Evaluating Efficiency Across Patient-Focused Episodes of Care. Washington, DC: National Quality Forum; 2009. qualityforum.org/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=25912. Accessed March 22, 2017.

4. Hussey PS, Sorbero ME, Mehrotra A, Liu H, Damberg CL. Episode-based performance measurement and payment: making it a reality. Health Aff (Millwood). 2009;28(5):1406-1417. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.28.5.1406.

5. Kuehn BM. CMS cancels mandatory hip and cardiac payment bundles. JAMA. 2018;319(4):332. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.21303.

6. Fisher ES. Medicare’s bundled payment program for joint replacement: promise and peril? JAMA. 2016;316(12):1262-1264. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.12525.

7. Ellimoottil C, Ryan AM, Hou H, Dupree JM, Hallstrom B, Miller DC. Implications of the definition of an episode of care used in the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(1):49-54. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.3098.

8. Graham B. The value added by electrodiagnostic testing in the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(12):2587-2593. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.01362.

9. Szabo RM, Slater RR Jr, Farver TB, Stanton DB, Sharman WK. The value of diagnostic testing in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Am. 1999;24(4):704-714.

10. DeStefano F, Nordstrom DL, Vierkant RA. Long-term symptom outcomes of carpal tunnel syndrome and its treatment. J Hand Surg Am. 1997;22(2):200-210. doi: 10.1016/S0363-5023(97)80152-9.
PDF
 
Copyright AJMC 2006-2019 Clinical Care Targeted Communications Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
x
Welcome the the new and improved AJMC.com, the premier managed market network. Tell us about yourself so that we can serve you better.
Sign Up