1 / 17

HLNDV Spring Institute 2014

HLNDV Spring Institute 2014. May 2, 2014, 1:15-2:45pm Readmission Session. New Jersey Gainsharing Project. Started with 11 hospitals in 2009 Organized by NJHA Needed to get a Stark Law exemption for the hospital to be able to share savings with physicians

wilda
Download Presentation

HLNDV Spring Institute 2014

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. HLNDV Spring Institute 2014 May 2, 2014, 1:15-2:45pmReadmission Session

  2. New Jersey Gainsharing Project • Started with 11 hospitals in 2009 • Organized by NJHA • Needed to get a Stark Law exemption for the hospital to be able to share savings with physicians • All Medicare recipients (not managed Medicare) were included

  3. The Mechanics • Payments were broken up into incentives for performance and improvement • Performance was based on the cost of care for the physician compared with the lowest 25 percentile cost of care for the State of NJ for the given APR-DRG • Improvement was based on the cost of care for that physician’s patients in the same APR-DRG’s in the 2007 base year

  4. The Mechanics (cont.) • The original mix was to reward physicians 2/3 for improvement and 1/3 for performance, so that historically poor performers would have an incentive to improve. • The expectation is that most hospitals would eventually change the percentage more to performance over time • Hospitals were also allowed to put parameters on payments

  5. The Caveats • To ensure that services were not cut unnecessarily, CMS required that all hospitals monitor quality parameters which had to include: • Hospital mortality • 7 day readmissions • 30 day readmissions

  6. Our Mortality Data

  7. Our Readmission Data--7 Days

  8. Our Readmission Data 30 Days

  9. Readmissions Interventions • Began a Readmissions Committee in July 2011 • Multi-disciplinary group including nursing, physicians, PT, Case Management, Home Health, and Hospice • Eventually, post –acute partners attended • Initial focus was on Medicare CHF patients • We improved our CHF patient education program

  10. Readmissions Committee • Eventually we expanded the scope of the Committee to include all Medicare patients (really all patients) • At the same time, many of our PCP’s were applying for and obtaining certification as Primary Care Medical Homes

  11. Interventions • Follow up calls were made by Clinical Nurse Leaders • Most focused on transmittal of information • NOA pushed out to PCP’s • Admission and Discharge Summaries pushed out to the PCP of record • Discharge Medication Reconciliation, Discharge Instructions and Universal Transfer Form are faxed to the PCP office

  12. Interventions (continued) • Other interventions looked at better communication • Inpatient Care Managers and Care Coordinators in the Family Practice offices exchanged cell numbers • Established System where Hospitalists could leave voicemails for PCP’s

  13. Interventions (continued) • Partnered with the Advisory Board Company to be a Beta site for software Crimson RealTime Readmissions • Using a proprietary algorithm, it assesses patients and assigns them to high, medium, or low risk of readmission • Recommends interventions—making appointments prior to discharge, follow up calls, pharmacy input into Med Rec, Home Health referral, giving new prescriptions prior to discharge

  14. AMI 2011-2014

  15. CHF 2011-2014

  16. Pneumonia 2011-2014

  17. Medicare 2012-2014

More Related