In about two weeks, I’m joining the team at Aledade as Chief Administrative Officer – largely because three years ago, I went through a health scare.

It wasn’t me; it was my then 86-year-old father. And what started with a short-term crisis dragged out into a long-term battle with our dysfunctional health care system.

For two years, my dad bounced between doctors, hospitalists and specialists. We never got a clear picture of his health or the care he was getting. His doctors rarely talked to one another, rarely gave him much time and I couldn’t talk to them to understand it all.

At the same time, this was happening while I worked at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, tasked with running the entire Medicare program. I couldn’t help but put our situation into a broader context: if this frustrating and frightening ordeal could happen to my dad- a brilliant lawyer who was on the Law Review at Penn — and his son who ran the world’s largest insurer, what was it like for other families who didn’t have our resources and our knowledge of how to navigate this confusing health care system?

Fortunately, we were saved by a good quarterback – someone who could take a step back and look at the entire field of my father’s health. For an entire hour, a geriatrician sat with my father just to talk with him. He got a sense of his health conditions, what was giving him the most trouble, and the serpentine path he had taken to get help.

The doctor set up a care plan with him, and took a close look at his medications. When we focused on one drug in particular, my father pointed out that studies had shown it was relatively effective. “That’s true,” the doctor said, “until about 75 years of age.” My dad was taking medication that stopped being effective – and possibly became harmful to him — about ten years ago. In the end, we cleared out about half of my father’s prescriptions. It was as if a switch had been thrown. Over the next few months, my dad returned to the person we knew.

Value-based health care, directed by empowered, independent primary care physicians, is what my father and I needed then. Today, everyone agrees it’s what we all need now.

We need primary care physicians to be the stewards of care, guiding patients through this confusing health care system like the captains of a ship – always pointed to the north star of better health. We need a health care system that doesn’t focus on how many procedures or prescriptions patients get, but on how well their doctors keep them healthy. When those priorities are misaligned, that’s when our health care system doesn’t work. I know, because that’s what my father and I saw firsthand.

I’m joining Aledade because I know the team here is working with incredible physicians best situated to chart that path to value-based care. For years at CMS, I looked at the results and dove into the data – I saw that the future of health care will be led by primary care physicians with the autonomy to act in their patients’ best interests. I saw this potential for success across commercial plans, Medicare Advantage, and traditional Medicare – and Aledade’s covering all of these.

At Medicare, my focus was on the operational integrity of a program that provides insurance for more than 55 million Americans. I worked to ensure the program was run efficiently and responsibly for the taxpayers, and that we kept focused on our strategic goals of improving care and reducing costs. That’s what I’m most excited to do here at Aledade. My focus will be making sure the trains run on time – that our hardworking teams are valued and supported, and that we’re helping our partner practices along every step of this journey.

I’m also joining Aledade because there’s a unique mix of purpose and people in this place. I came from public service, and I wanted to join an organization with a mission that’s bigger than profits or short-term returns. Aledade lives its mission every single day.

I also was lucky to work at CMS with some of the most brilliant people in health policy who were also great colleagues. And I see those same qualities here at Aledade. Thanks to the hard work of so many people, Aledade partners with more than 200 primary care practices in 17 states to actively manage the care of nearly a quarter of a million patients. I can’t wait to be a part of the team that’s building the leading model for a health system that’s good for patients, good for doctors, and good for society.

The comment period for Medicare’s proposed rule on the Quality Payment Program closed last night, so as usual we’ll take this opportunity to share our full comments on the proposed updates to how Medicare shapes the path to a value-based future.

August 21, 2017

Seema Verma, Administrator

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

7500 Security Blvd

Baltimore, MD 21244

 

Re:       CMS-5522-P: Medicare Program, CY 2018 Updates to the Quality Payment Program

 

Dear Administrator Verma:

Aledade partners with 205 primary care physician practices, FQHCs and RHCs in value-based health care. Organized into 16 accountable care organizations across 15 states, these primary care physicians are accountable for more than 190,000 Medicare beneficiaries. More than half of our primary care providers are in practices with fewer than 10 clinicians. We are committed to outcome based approaches to determine the value of health care. We are committed to using technology, data, practice transformation expertise and most importantly the relationship between a person and their primary care physician to improve the value of health care.

Creating a path for independent practices to thrive in the transition to value-driven health care

  • Whole hearted endorsement of the inclusion of “the preservation of independent practices as a guiding principle for the Quality Payment Program (QPP)”
  • Virtual groups provide a needed step on the path to transition to value-driven health care by allowing independent practices to come together for QPP even if they are not ready to take on the total cost of care
  • Virtual groups are part of the path to value-driven health care that must be carefully crafted to be attractive to independent physicians
  • The low volume threshold proposal leaves too much of the Medicare spend and therefore too many Medicare beneficiaries out of the program. We recommend that no more than 10 percent of the Medicare Part B spend should ever be excluded from QPP.

Measuring QPP performance and reducing administrative burden

  • We recommend that the cost category for total cost of care be included for 2018.
  • We recommend that the AAPM bonus move forward a year with bonuses earned in 2018 paid in early 2019 or even in 2018 itself
  • We recommend that CMS value simplicity and minimizing administrative burden above other characteristics of the all-payer determination for APMs

Below is a full explanation of those positions. Thank you for your consideration as we move together through this exciting time in health care. Please feel free to contact Travis Broome (travis@aledade.com) if you or your staff have questions or would like to explore these positions further.

Sincerely,

/s/

Farzad Mostashari, MD

CEO and Co-Founder, Aledade, Inc

Independent Physicians Thriving in Transition to Value

Principle of Independent Practice

It would be difficult to overstate the importance of CMS’s inclusion of the preservation of independent practices as a principle of the QPP. Independent physician practices have proven to be the most successful in accountable care[1] and key to maintaining competitive health care markets.[2] The same characteristics that make the independent physician practices successful also make this principle particularly challenging for CMS to deliver on. Physicians must feel the change in their practice. There is no board room in small practices where a government affairs team will explain slight tweaks in policy that increase revenue by a half a percentage point. The preservation of independent practice in QPP will be felt by CMS’s continuous effort to reduce the administrative burden of participation in QPP through technology, policy and measure design and a continuous effort to link performance with incentives as tightly as possible.

Virtual Groups

We support CMS’s proposal for virtual groups. CMS specifically asked for comment on several additional requirements for virtual groups. We do not believe that at the onset it is advisable to set additional standards on virtual groups. We recommend the following principles to guide CMS’s finalization of the virtual groups.

  • Voluntary election by physicians to be in a virtual group prior to the start of the performance year
  • Agree to work together to improve their performance in QPP
  • Must agree to be scored on quality
  • Can elect to be scored on
    • Clinical Practice Improvement Activities
    • Advancing Care Information
    • Resource Use
  • Can utilize any reporting method including Group Practice Reporting Option (GPRO)
  • Identify to CMS the officer responsible for the virtual group’s reporting
  • The virtual group is responsible for ensuring group reporting (i.e. CMS should not be responsible for aggregating the data across practices except in the area of resource use and other claims based measures)

CMS has proposed that all virtual groups would be scored on all categories as a group. We believe that this could be a limiting approach. For example, it would dissuade any virtual group from admitting members who do have 2014 Certified EHR Technology due to the effects on the advancing care information score.

Finally, we recommend that CMS allow third-party entities to organize and report for QPP on behalf of smaller practices. The practices making up the virtual group should not be required to manage this process internally.

Successful Transition to Value Based Care

We continue to work together with CMS to define a path that both transitions to value based health care and preserves independence.

It is helpful to remember what the path looked like just 5 years ago:

These are all huge leaps. First, physicians must take responsibility for total cost of care in a way they never had before. Second, they must take on a level of risk that could ruin an independent practice. Third, they must develop health insurance operations. The size of those leaps simply prevents many physicians from taking the next step.

Today, with the proposal in this rule for virtual groups the path looks more achievable:

With this proposed rule CMS has smoothed out the move from FFS to total cost of care. In prior regulations, CMS made incremental progress on the move from one-sided risk to two-sided risk. While not specifically for this regulation, we recommend a path to CMS that bases risk on the financial wherewithal of the participants in the total cost of care model and lets physicians move to Medicare Advantage to assume full risk without the burden of claims processing and network development. Our recommendations for the former can be found in the blog for the American Journal of Managed Care[3] and for the latter in the blog for Health Affairs[4].

Our recommended path is:

We believe this path is ideal for encouraging independent practices to continue to make the transition to value based care where they have proven they can succeed at all levels in various pockets of the county. We know they can succeed not just here and there, but in nearly every health care market in the country.

Low Volume Threshold

CMS has proposed to raise the low-volume threshold to exclude individual MIPS-eligible clinicians or groups who bill less than $90,000 Part B billing OR provide care for less than 200 Part B enrolled beneficiaries. We do not support raising the low-volume threshold, and recommend maintaining the current policy of excluding clinicians or groups who bill less than $30,000 to Part B or care for less than 100 Part B enrolled beneficiaries.

In the transition year final rule, CMS estimated that about 32.5 percent of providers would be exempt from MIPS because they do not meet the low-volume threshold, but the number of providers actually exempted for 2017 was higher than anticipated. The increased low-volume threshold creates an arbitrary cut-off for performance in the MIPS program without first assessing the impact of the current low-volume threshold on Part B providers. CMS should continue to transition a greater percentage of total Medicare spend away from fee-for-service to payment arrangements that account for quality, cost, and patient outcomes, rather than further reducing the number of providers eligible to participate.

Further, the modified threshold would mean that some clinicians who were eligible to participate in 2017 will be excluded from MIPS in 2018. We recommend that CMS extend the option for clinicians to voluntary participate in MIPS reporting in 2018 for a performance score and performance-based payment adjustment.  Clinicians who made investments and preparations to participate in MIPS during the transition year should not lose out on the opportunity to earn a positive payment adjustment in 2018.

QPP Measurement AAPM Determination

Resource Use Category

Aledade supports a transition to value-based payments that hold providers accountable for patient experience, quality of care, and total cost. By statute, in the QPP’s third performance year, the cost performance category must be weighted at 30 percent and the MIPS performance benchmark must be set at either the mean or the median score of all MIPS participants. Introducing cost performance into the MIPS score should be done incrementally, rather than creating a steep cliff from 0 percent weight in PY2 to 30 percent in PY3. Therefore, Aledade does not support reweighting the cost performance category to 0 percent of the final score, and recommends this category be weighted to at least 10 percent of the final score.

Measuring cost is an integral part of measuring value because clinicians play an important role in managing care so as to avoid unnecessary services. We appreciate the ongoing CMS efforts to better align the episode cost measures across programs and to better attribute beneficiaries to specialists for purposes of QPP. However, the lack of finality in these efforts should not slow the inclusion of total cost of care in QPP for 2018.

 

Aligning the AAPM 5 Percent Incentive with Action

Currently, a physician chooses to join an AAPM in the summer of 2017 (CMS’s 2018 deadline for the Medicare Shared Savings Program was July 31st), they participate during 2018, they receive their performance in the AAPM in August of 2019 and then they receive their lump sum bonus for participation in the AAPM in May of 2020. Almost three years have passed between a physician’s decision to join an AAPM and the reward for that decision.

When we talk to physicians about AAPM participation they naturally assume that since the 5 percent is contingent only on participation that they will receive the bonus in not May of 2020, but May of 2018 or even sooner. More than one physician has naturally assumed that the bonus would come January 1, 2018. Every minute explaining why this isn’t the case is a minute spent decreasing the likelihood of AAPM participation, the very thing Congress funded the 5 percent bonus to incentivize. While we understand that not all AAPM models require full year participation and therefore within-year bonuses may not be possible, CMS should explore every proxy to bring action and incentive as close together as possible. At a minimum, CMS should use the same year for the QP determination period and the claims period to pay out the bonus the year following participation. So in 2018 participation in AAPM would pay the 5 percent bonus in May 2019 based on the 2018 claims instead of May 2020 based on 2019 claims. To have the bonus for mere participation come seven months after the savings for actual performance in the AAPM strikes physicians as so backwards that it calls into question the credibility of the AAPM itself and negates the positive effects of the 5 percent bonus.

 

All-Payer AAPM Determinations

As members of the Healthcare Transformation Taskforce (www.hcttf.org), we worked closely with other health care providers, health plans, patient groups and health care payers to make recommendations on this area and we would refer you to those comments for the details.

In our comment letter, we want to emphasize the importance the health care providers place on the simplicity of this process. We do not desire to impose a high administrative burden on either health plans or on CMS in order to make the all-payer AAPM determinations. In this case, we would recommend that CMS value simplicity over every other characteristic of this program.

 

 

 

 

 

[1] http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1600142#t=article

[2] https://www.brookings.edu/research/making-health-care-markets-work-competition-policy-for-health-care/

[3] http://www.ajmc.com/contributor/travis-broome/2016/03/changing-stop-loss-formula-can-drive-interest-in-risk-based-models

[4] http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/07/06/spurring-provider-entry-into-medicare-advantage/

It was my second day at Aledade when someone told me to get out.

I thought it was a bit early to be fired, but the new colleague sounded convincing enough. I assumed they knew what they were doing.

Luckily, this wasn’t some drastic HR move. It was the first of many times that I’d hear, “You have to get out into the field. Go visit a practice.”

It’s a mantra here at Aledade. Everyone, even the current and former health care professionals on staff, seemed to have a story of the first time they visited one of Aledade’s partner practices. They all said that setting foot in a practice is the best way to find out what works, what doesn’t, and to get a sense of just how challenging and rewarding it is to work in an independent primary care practice today.

So when I first got the chance to visit Kansas, tagging along with New York Times columnist Farhad Manjoo as he worked on his new piece about Aledade’s work, I hopped on a flight to Wichita.

Before joining Aledade, I worked on the public affairs team at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. We promoted Open Enrollment for the Health Insurance Marketplace, talked about programs like Head Start, and got key messages out to the public about health threats like Ebola, Zika, and the opioid epidemic. But there was one story we kept coming back to – the future of health care.

We saw it every time we heard from doctors, and every time the Secretary visited a practice. Data had opened up new frontiers. Patients now had the tools to get engaged in their own care. And payment systems focused on value were starting to reward physicians who kept their patients healthy. There was a palpable sense that you could deliver better care and start to lower costs.

It seemed like everything was pointing down this path. Policymakers from both sides of the aisle saw the promise in this new approach. MACRA, the law that changed Medicare’s payment system into one that rewards the value of care, passed the Senate nearly unanimously and the House overwhelmingly. And down the street at HHS, the Department made a historic commitment – saying that, by 2018, half of all payments in Medicare would be payments that rewarded the value of care, not the old fee for service system.

But it wasn’t until I visited Aledade’s partner practices in Kansas that I realized how far down the path these health care professionals already were.

On Wednesday, the New York Times’ Farhad Manjoo published his piece, and he captured this well. “Thanks to Aledade,” Farhad wrote, “the [Kansas] practices’ finances had improved and their patients were healthier. On every significant measure of health care costs, the Aledade method appeared to have reduced wasteful spending.”

Here’s an example of how they were keeping patients healthy:

For example, say you’re a doctor at a small practice in rural Kansas and one of your patients, a 67-year-old man with heart disease, has just gone to the emergency room.

“In the past, we’d only find out our patients were at the hospital maybe weeks afterward,” said Dr. Bryan Dennett, who runs the Family Care Center in Winfield, Kan., with medical partner, Dr. Bryan Davis. With Aledade, Dr. Dennett is now alerted immediately, so “we can call them when they’re at the emergency room and say, ‘Hey, what are you doing there? Come back here, we can take care of you!”

The care management team at Ashley Clinic talks with Farhad.

At Ashley Clinic in Chanute, I saw a larger care team tackle an even larger patient population. As one care manager said, “before, we had the doctor and the patient; a point A and a point C. But there was no one to serve as point B. That’s changed today.”

Two of Ashley Clinic’s patients – a husband and wife – agreed. Both said the care they got now was much better than anywhere they had been before. “We don’t know what an ACO is,” they said. “But we know we hear from our doctor more. And we like that.”

Most importantly, by talking to the care teams and doctors in these practices, I learned that I had been wrong. Value-based care isn’t some new future in the distance; it’s more of a homecoming. As one doctor told me, “This is why I became a doctor in the first place.”

But getting home isn’t always easy.

It’s taking new ways of thinking – focusing on finding the highest risk patients, keeping a close eye on them through chronic care programs, following up with patients as they leave the hospital, and ensuring that patients are going to the most efficient and effective specialists.

While it asks for more time and effort on the part of doctors and care teams, who already put in countless hours caring for patients, the destination is worth the jounrey. And thanks to Aledade’s technology, dedicated support staff in the field, and some inspiring health care professionals, you can find better health care right down a long stretch of Kansas road.

There aren’t too many opportunities when you can get the present and the future of primary care in the same room. But that’s exactly what we found at the Louisiana Academy of Family Physicians’ Annual Conference.

Emma Lisec and Nadine Robin at the Aledade booth

On Wednesday afternoon, we arrived at the historic Roosevelt Hotel in downtown New Orleans – Nadine Robin, Aledade’s Southeast Executive Director, and me, Aledade’s Fellow for the Southeast. We were caffeinated, excited and ready to join a massive room full of displays from local hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, and specialty groups. We set up our booth, with Aledade’s slogan: “A New Model of Primary Care”, and we waited to see who would come through the doors.

Right on cue, as the conference’s main sessions took a break, the showcase room flooded with health care professionals from across Louisiana – independent doctors, curious hospital employees, even medical students from Louisiana State University. (Geaux Tigers!)

They dropped by a number of different booths, but kept lingering by ours, wondering what that “new model of primary care” actually meant. So Nadine explained: with MIPS, the new payment program created by the 2015 Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (or “MACRA”), quality reporting was taking center stage.

Small, independent practices are the key to that focus on quality. As our CEO Farzad Mostashari has pointed out, small, physician-owned practices offer more personalization for patients. They have lower average costs per patient, fewer preventable hospital admissions, and lower readmission rates than larger, independent- and hospital-owned practices. In other words, they’re in the best position to succeed.

Nadine explained how Aledade helps their independent partner practices report these quality measures all while maintaining their independence. I noticed that a few physicians’ ears perked up at this – the prospect of having a helpful guide through MACRA and MIPS seemed to be integral to their practices staying independent.

I remember one doctor in particular who pulled us aside. He felt like his clinic was short-staffed, and the pressure to sell his practice was only growing. Nadine and I listened to him, and explained that the whole purpose of Aledade is to help small, independent physicians like his stay independent – and thrive. But to do that, we have to start with an honest relationship. We weren’t going to pressure him into joining Aledade if it wasn’t going to be in the best interest of his practice and his patients. We agreed to pull his QRUR report and follow up to see if a partnership with Aledade would be his best step.

We also spoke with some of the physicians of tomorrow. A few medical students from LSU dropped by our booth, wondering what an ACO was. To many of them, the idea of opening their own independent practice seemed out of reach. The concept of a comprehensive approach to primary care, one where the independent practice is in the center of a high value network, sounded promising. They asked us if they could reach out to us later to get a better understanding of an ACO and value-based care.

Nadine and Matt Wheeler presenting at LAFP

That Friday morning, Nadine and Matt Wheeler, one of our inspiring Office Administrators from Bossier Family Medicine in Bossier City, gave a presentation about the new world of alternative payment models. They laid out the idea of value-based care – that physicians should be empowered to provide quality care, and rewarded for helping their patients stay healthy.

They explained what an ACO is – basically a group of health care professionals committed to the health and well-being of a specific group of patients. And they explained why this future – better health care at lower cost – was inevitable. It’s good for doctors, good for patients and good for society.

Nadine with Dr. Jose Mata, a family medicine doctor in New Iberia, LA

Nadine and Matt weren’t the only ones making the case for value-based care. A number of Aledade’s partner physicians in Louisiana were there too – each of them explaining to other doctors why value-based care works.

This whole move to a better health care system isn’t being led by any single practice or any single company, like Aledade. It’s a partnership – a network of practices who want to keep their patients healthy, and organizations working to help those practices succeed. Value-based care is the best model for today’s primary care physicians here in Louisiana, and tomorrow’s too.

Are conversations between doctors and patients the key to good health care? How well do doctors and patients actually talk to one another? In a 1984 study, Howard Beckman and Robert Frankel surveyed 74 practices and recorded how doctors listened and interacted with their patients. 77 percent of the time, physicians prevented their patients from completing an opening statement by asking questions about a specific concern. On average, it happened 18 seconds after the patient began talking.

Beckman and Frankel’s study was conducted in 1984, but the results resonated in a larger study by Lawrence Dyche and Deborah Swiderski in 2005. Physicians in that study asked a question during a patient’s opening statement in 72 percent of the visits, on average in 23 seconds. A quarter of doctors did not solicit patient questions at all.

The average doctor spends between 13 and 15 minutes with a patient. In only 15 minutes, the doctor and patient are supposed to discuss a full patient history, treatment plan and questions. The question at the root of this problem is why do doctors feel the need to rush?

The current fee-for-service system does not reward doctors for having long, detailed conversations with their patients. It incentivizes them to provide more treatments, because payment depends on quantity of care rather than quality of care. Understandably, this system is infuriating to both doctors and patients. However, the fee-for-service system is not the only healthcare model available to doctors.

At Aledade, we focus on helping doctors do their jobs the way that they want to – so that they can listen longer, ask deeper questions, and get more complete answers from patients without needing to rush through diagnoses and treatment plans. As you may have seen in some of our success stories on our blog we do this in many ways, most often by helping our partner practices effectively conduct Annual Wellness Visits (AWVs), Chronic Care Management (CCM), and Transitional Care Management (TCM). These stories highlight how value-based care and a patient-centered approach improves the patient-provider relationship and improves health outcomes.

Communication is the cornerstone of patient care. A report by the Joint Commission, an organization accredits healthcare programs and organizations,  found that  “communication failure was at the root of over 70 percent of serious adverse health outcomes in hospitals.”  Aledade partner practices have learned the value of good communication between a doctor and a patient.

In 2015, Aledade’s ACOs decreased emergency department (ED) visit rates by 6 to 7 percent. The ED visit rate for the Medicare Fee-For-Service (FFS) population increased by 2.4 percent. Hospitalization rates decreased by 5 to 7 percent, while hospitalization rates for Medicare FFS populations increased by 2.4 percent. And Aledade’s ACOs decreased readmissions by 7 to 11 percent. Across Medicare FFS, readmissions increased by 8 to 9 percent.  

What could account for the difference? For starters, AWV, TCM, and CCM all help  practices catch problems earlier, and provide more consistent care. Annual Wellness Visits help to decrease ED visit rates by helping physicians identify high-risk patients and give them the tools they need to avoid a trip to the emergency room, saving on costly hospital bills. Transitional Care Management lowers readmission rates by helping patients stay out of the hospital when they’ve been discharged from the hospital.he Chronic Care Management program provides high risk patients with intensive ongoing care management support that decreases adverse health events, decreases readmissions and improves self-management skills.

If a provider has the space and time to listen to their patients, they can lay the foundation for mutually trusting and beneficial relationships. This trusting relationship is a key component in providing value-based care as it improves patient satisfaction and health outcomes. It all starts with a conversation, and it is more important than ever to really listen.

Drew Brees, the quarterback of the NFL’s New Orleans Saints, the first quarterback to bring home a Super Bowl trophy to the Pelican State, has a pretty simple formula for success: “When you wake up,” he says, “think about winning the day. Don’t worry about a week or a month from now – just think about one day at a time. If you are worried about the mountain in the distance, you might trip over the molehill right in front of you.”

Every morning, not far from New Orleans, there are a few more Louisianans who wake up thinking about how to win the day. They’re the team at the practice run by Dr. Bryan LeBean – a primary care physician who’s been serving in the community of Lafayette for 23 years. And they have a name an NFL quarterback would appreciate – “Team LeBean.”

Just recently, Dr. LeBean’s practice joined the Aledade Louisiana Accountable Care Organization – to find new ways to provide better care to the families in Lafayette, while keeping the practice’s independence. Working closely with other practices in the area, Team LeBean shared some of the tactics and strategies that worked for them – how to properly conduct an Annual Wellness Visit, some ideas for good care management.

They also borrowed a few good ideas, one of which has paid off every morning. Before starting each day, Team LeBean sits down for a Daily Huddle. The entire care management team runs through a few standard questions, and then covers any other topics that came up.

They start by looking at how many AWVs have been scheduled for the day, and how many patients are in the hospital or recently visited the Emergency Department – information that they can find right on the Aledade app.

They then take a look at a few patients with chronic conditions – like diabetic patients, especially those in need of an eye exam, and patients enrolled in tobacco cessation. After running through a few other items, they wrap up by focusing on any particular patient complaints or concerns – always keeping an eye on how today can run even better than the day before.

That’s how you win the day. By working closely together – practices like Team LeBean, their patients, and Aledade are winning the day. And they’re well on their way to a better health care system with strong, independent primary care practices suiting up in the quarterback role they were always meant to play.

Preserving True Choice via Diversity of Organization and Universal Standards for Outcomes

Healthcare delivery is inherently local. Every community has its own history; its own needs; and its own resource base. This is especially true in Maryland, with unique communities among its beautiful coasts, soaring mountain ranges, and vibrant urban areas. Indeed, Maryland’s strength comes from this diversity, which is carefully maintained through the deliberate promotion of thoughtful policy, purposeful actions, and local solutions.
In a similar fashion, the Maryland Comprehensive Primary Care Proposal must deliberately promote strategies to strengthen and advance diversity among providers and Care Transformation Organizations (CTOs).
The proposal highlights a desire for competition among Care Transformation Organizations (CTOs); we wholeheartedly agree that competition is the best tool for improvement. However, competition can present tremendous challenges, especially in health care, and many organizations will seek to minimize the level of competition for their own benefit. Competition in health care must be deliberately supported through the selection process and model design so that various options present attractive options on their own, aside from the need to subsidize the CTO-practice relationship. Prior models have shown this to be the case; indeed, the recent trend towards consolidation is evidence enough.
The CTO selection process should not just value having two or more options for practices, but rather seek different types of CTO offerings. By example: choosing between two systems whose integration is based on common ownership is fundamentally different that choosing between a wholly-owned integrated system and a networked system whose integration is based on shared patients and shared data.
An effort to spur and maintain true competition among CTOs would enhance the strength of the state’s Proposal and greatly increase its chances of success.

Reinforcing the Primary Care Physician – Patient Relationship

Every Medicare beneficiary benefits from a strong primary care physician relationship. Primary care physicians “quarterback” their patients’ health care. Those who do so in their own practices maintain the independence that makes their practices unique and trusted.
There are certainly rare cases where the only health need a patient has in a year is a singular acute issue. There are also cases, usually towards the end of life, that a patient’s needs are so intensive they are removed from the community.
However, most health care needs—and most health care spending—are driven by patients with multiple chronic conditions or who suffer from preventable or otherwise avoidable illnesses and injuries. These patients remain in their community, and benefit most from the one-on-one relationship with their primary care physician.
Attribution should revolve around that relationship and the model CTO – practice contract should seek to preserve that relationship. Only in the rarest of cases where it is inescapably obvious that primary care is no long primary to the patient’s health care needs for a given year should specialist or facility attribution be employed.