Skip to main content

Why it's critical for Primary Care First participants to control and understand leakage

Patients' primary care visits outside of their attributed primary care office, also called “leaked” patient visits, can have unintended consequences for Primary Care First participants. Beginning July 2022, PCF Cohort 1 will face a reduction in population-based payments based on their leakage rate. The payment adjustment will be based on their 2021 claims data and will roll forward quarterly.

To calculate your leakage rate, divide the number of qualifying visits and services your attributed beneficiaries have made to care centers outside of your practice (for example, visits to urgent care centers) by the total number of qualifying visits and services your attributed beneficiaries have made.

Calculating primary care leakage with claims data alone comes with some unintended challenges. Unfortunately, some circumstances can unfairly and negatively impact a practice’s leakage rate:

  1. Nuances classifying care delivered by provider team members: It’s difficult to distinguish if certain types of providers are providing primary care alone based on their primary National Plan & Provider Enumeration System taxonomy code. Therefore, CMS determined that visits to a physician assistant will not count toward leakage. However, we believe additional revisions to this definition are needed to accurately exclude specialty care services from counting toward leakage when care is delivered by nurse practitioners. 
  2. Observation stays can inadvertently be captured as leakage: CMS should implement an exclusion for encounters delivered in the outpatient hospital setting to avoid observation stays from potentially counting toward a practice’s leakage rate. 
  3. Flawed definition of a practice: CMS currently defines a practice in the PCF program by Tax Identification Number and physical location. This means that if a primary care practice spans multiple floors within a building or uses coverage circles, each location is treated as a separate and distinct practice. Any visits between these locations will therefore contribute to the leakage rate. By expanding the definition of a practice, organizations would not be penalized in these circumstances.

Given the gray areas in determining leakage, PCF participants should closely monitor their leakage rates and visits that could be considered leakage. Monitoring and evaluating claims data will be critical for practices to drill down into why leaked visits occur, including identifying where patients are going and which services they receive when they go to external practices. This information will enable practices to implement changes to support patient retention.

By keeping an eye on leaked visits, providers can experience clinical benefits as well. Since leakage can cause non-coordinated fragmented care and limit provider visibility into patient history and medical records, high leakage increases risk for unnecessary utilization and misdiagnosis.

Going forward, practices and supporting stakeholders must advocate for specific methodological revisions to the leakage calculation for a fairer application of the payment adjustment so the program remains fiscally viable for participants.

Need support in accurately evaluating and monitoring performance data to assess your practice’s leakage? Contact DataGen today to learn how you can determine which patients are leaking through, which providers they're seeing and what services they are receiving. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Five key components of a strong patient safety culture

In today’s healthcare environment, ensuring patient safety is more than just a priority — it’s a fundamental component of quality care. Establishing a strong patient safety culture within hospitals and health organizations can dramatically reduce errors, increase patient satisfaction and improve overall healthcare outcomes. But what exactly is a patient safety culture, and how can institutions cultivate it effectively?  This blog post explores the five key components that make up a robust patient safety culture, along with insights from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and The Joint Commission.  What is patient safety culture?  AHRQ defines patient safety culture as how an organization's culture supports and promotes patient safety. This can extend to multiple levels, from individual units to departments to system levels. The AHRQ patient safety culture survey encompasses the shared values, beliefs and norms of healthcare practitioners and staff that...

CMS TEAM Model Q&A: Your 10 concerns addressed in partner webinar

DataGen partnered with the VBCExhibitHall and the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) to host an informational webinar on CMS’ Transforming Episode Accountability Model (TEAM), Unpacking the mandatory CMS TEAM model: Overcome new rules & challenges.   During this one-hour session, attendees received valuable TEAM insights provided by Alyssa Dahl, vice president of advanced analytics at DataGen, and Erin Hahn, lead policy analyst of value-based care and quality at the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC). However, some attendees had good questions that we wanted to elaborate on — hence, the creation of this blog post! Speakers answer your webinar Q&As    With great participant questions during the Q&A portion, Dahl and Hahn took time to expand on their answers to provide more clarity.* So, if you’re a hospital with mandatory TEAM participation status, keep reading to unpack the new rules and challenges.    Q1: What happens...