1. PIPC and Avalere Health Hold Webinar on Alternative Payment Models (APMs), click here to view.
2. Welcome PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho to Twitter! @HonTonyCoelho
3. PCORI Blog: The Science of Dissemination & Implementation, click here to view the blog post.
4. Morning Consult: Better Health Care Value: Our Commitment to Patients, click here to view the article.
Last week, the Partnership to Improve Patient Care (PIPC) hosted a webinar featuring Avalere Health and PIPC to discuss the development, implementation and evaluation of alternative payment models (APMs). With increased authority to test new approaches to health care - and potentially expand successful models throughout federal health programs - patients must be aware and engaged to ensure that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) measures success of APMs based on value to the patient. The webinar offered an opportunity for patients and patient organizations to learn more about APMs and the implications a transition to APMs will have for patient-centered care.
Highlights of the discussion included:
- Avalere Health’s Senior Vice President, Dr. Josh Seidman, outlined the impacts payment reform would likely have on patient engagement, including increasing provider transparency on physician services, expanding telehealth and patient self-reporting, and broadening access to Medicare data.
- PIPC Executive Director, Sara van Geertruyden, discussed the importance of ensuring that value to the patient is reflected in APMs and the outcome measures that are used in payment reform.
- Both panelists also discussed PIPC’s recommendations for the upcoming implementation of APMs. Namely, this includes creating a national advisory panel on patient-centeredness, applying patient-centeredness criteria in the approval and evaluation of APMs, and ensuring that patients and providers in the development of quality improvement and measurement.
A recording of the webinar is available here. Please contact PIPC with your questions and concerns or to join us in our work to promote patient-centeredness -[email protected].
2. Welcome PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho to Twitter! @HonTonyCoelho
PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho - patient, disability rights advocate and former Member of Congress - has joined Twitter! Join us in sending him a welcome tweet! @HonTonyCoelho
3. PCORI Blog: The Science of Dissemination & Implementation
As PCORI’s Joanna Siegel, MS, ScD, Bridget Gaglio, MPH, PhD and Carly Parry, PhD, MSW, MA, comment on The PCORI Blog, “In developing plans to communicate the results of our studies, we face a number of gaps in the science and understanding of how best to disseminate research results and promote their use in practice. To help close some of these gaps, PCORI funds comparative effectiveness research examining strategies for communicating and disseminating findings to various audiences. These studies are funded through our Communication and Dissemination Research (CDR) program.” Click here to view the blog post.
In 2013, PIPC released a white paper to inform PCORI’s work on CER dissemination and implementation. “In light of PCORI’s mandate to conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, CER communication tools and materials should present patients with sound, clinical evidence to help inform their individual decision-making process. Based on the focus on patient care management found in PCORI’s research agenda, is it clear that the communication of the results of that research will have a direct impact on individual patient decision-making. Therefore, as PCORI begins to play a more active role in CER communication, PIPC believes these proposed best practices represent elements for all CER organizations to consider when communicating CER results to physicians and patients.” Click here to view the white paper.
4. Morning Consult: Better Health Care Value: Our Commitment to Patients
As Stephen Ubl, CEO of PhRMA, commented last week in Morning Consult, “While some emerging value assessment tools hold promise, we are concerned others fall short...One framework developed by the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) is particularly concerning because of flaws in its methodology, lack of inclusion of patient perspectives and vulnerability for misuse in ways that come between the health care provider and patient in deciding which care options are best (or most valuable) for an individual patient.” Click here to view the article.