A new report by the Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute recommends a bundled payment model for breast cancer screening, with the objective of improved patient care and a more efficient use of healthcare resources.
A new report by the Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute recommends a bundled payment model for breast cancer screening, with the objective of improved patient care and a more efficient use of healthcare resources.
The authors of the paper published in the Journal of the American College of Radiology developed a bundled payment model for breast cancer screening using retrospective Medicare claims data and data from a private health system. Bundles were developed with a screening mammography event and included downstream diagnostic breast imaging services during a 364-day episode window.
The model, which includes definitions for alternative screening episodes, methods for calibrating prices, and an examination of risk, found that the utilization of breast services associated with breast cancer screening and diagnosis remained stable over time. Including high-risk patients in the bundled payment model did not significantly influence bundle prices, the researchers report. On the contrary, the choice of services included in the bundle did affect prices. The researchers believe that such a model could help build a practice framework that could reduce variation.
“As the U.S. health care delivery system transitions from [fee-for-service] to value based payments, it’s important that we [radiologists] are at the table to ensure that our patients have access to high quality imaging,” said coauthor Geraldine McGinty, MD, MBA, FACR, vice chair of the American College of Radiology Board of Chancellors and a member of the Neiman Institute’s advisory board in a statement. “Shaping payment policy to support that access is at the core of the ACR’s mission. Bundled payments are seen by policymakers as a vehicle for aligning incentives and in fact the CMS have now imposed mandatory bundling for joint replacement and cardiovascular care.”
She emphasized that their results do not recommend the price for CMS or other payers; rather, their proposal presents a framework that can be used by a clinical practice, in collaboration with payers, to develop a personalized model based on the population they serve.
Real-World Study Reveals Key Insights into DLBCL Treatment Patterns, Outcomes
April 18th 2024A recent study offers valuable insights into the characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in patients across different lines of therapy, providing a look into the landscape of DLBCL management.
Read More
Pegcetacoplan for PNH More Cost-Effective Than Anti-C5 Monoclonal Antibodies
April 18th 2024A cost-utility analysis conducted from the perspective of the Italian health system found that pegcetacoplan was more effective and less costly than 2 complement 5 (C5) inhibitors for the treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH).
Read More
Oncology Onward: A Conversation With Penn Medicine's Dr Justin Bekelman
December 19th 2023Justin Bekelman, MD, director of the Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, sat with our hosts Emeline Aviki, MD, MBA, and Stephen Schleicher, MD, MBA, for our final episode of 2023 to discuss the importance of collaboration between academic medicine and community oncology and testing innovative cancer care delivery in these settings.
Listen
Many Patients With Psoriasis in Clinical Trials Experience Nocebo Effects, Study Finds
April 18th 2024Half of patients exposed to placebo in clinical trials experienced adverse events (AEs), which may be partially explainable by nocebo effects, according to a recent review and meta-analysis.
Read More
Low-Volume Hospitals Had Higher Reoperation Rate, Postoperative Complications in CRC
April 18th 2024Patients opting for elective colorectal surgery to address colorectal cancer (CRC) could have different rates of reoperation and postoperative complications based on the size of the hospital.
Read More