Born as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010, the controversial Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) was eliminated last week as part of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 without ever having been implemented. The IPAB sought to reign in Medicare spending if targets went over certain levels, but it had almost universal opposition from the healthcare and medical communities.
Born as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010, the controversial Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) was eliminated last week as part of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 without ever having been implemented.
The IPAB sought to reign in Medicare spending if targets went over certain levels, but it had almost universal opposition from the healthcare and medical communities. And in the beginning of its 8-year lifetime, the IPAB was the subject of Republican claims that it would lead to Medicare “death panels.”
IPAB had called for CMS to calculate whether Medicare’s projected average growth rate in per capita spending falls below a specified target. If targets were exceeded, IPAB would make recommendations for mandatory cuts unless an alternate plan to achieve the same savings was approved by a three-fifths Congressional majority.
The board was supposed to have been made up of 15 health policy experts, but those experts were never appointed.
Last December, more than 650 organizations sent a joint letter to Congress asking for the board to be eliminated, saying that IPAB threatened healthcare access. The letter also pointed out that since the board was never staffed, the decisions on what to cut, if IPAB was implemented, would fall to the HHS secretary. That was too much power to place in 1 individual, as there was no process in place for a review of decisions, the letter said.
There were concerns that IPAB would make changes to the Medicare program that are typically within Congressional authority, such as modifications to the formulas used to establish payments for Medicare Advantage and Part D plans, provider payment rates, and prescription drugs. There was also concern that recommendations could indirectly affect beneficiaries, despite explicit limits on IPAB’s scope of authority with respect to benefits, premiums, cost sharing, and “rationing,” according to Kaiser Health News.
Kaiser reported that some features of the ACA explicitly prohibited this from ever happening: there was no rationing of healthcare, no raising of revenues, or increasing of Medicare beneficiary premiums or cost sharing, nor otherwise restricted benefits or modified eligibility criteria.
CMS had estimated in a report last year that Medicare spending growth will exceed the target growth rate for the first time in 2021, which would have triggered IPAB’s mechanisms to control spending.
Dr Kathy Zackowski Discusses the Importance of Rehabilitation Research and Trials in MS
April 26th 2024Kathy Zackowski, PhD, National MS Society, expresses the inherent value of quality rehabilitation trials for broadening clinical understandings of multiple sclerosis (MS) and bettering patient outcomes.
Read More
Examining Low-Value Cancer Care Trends Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic
April 25th 2024On this episode of Managed Care Cast, we're talking with the authors of a study published in the April 2024 issue of The American Journal of Managed Care® about their findings on the rates of low-value cancer care services throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
Listen
Navigating Health Policy in an Election Year: Insights From Dr Dennis Scanlon
April 2nd 2024On this episode of Managed Care Cast, we're talking with Dennis Scanlon, PhD, the editor in chief of The American Journal of Accountable Care®, about prior authorization, price transparency, the impact of health policy on the upcoming election, and more.
Listen