- Jesse Arnoldson
Betting on a Lame Measure
You’ve gone over the list of measures from CMS and compared it to which measures your EHR says it will report. Several of these measures are ones that you reported on during the era of PQRS and so you feel comfortable that you can do them and can do them well. There shouldn’t be much of a problem… right?
Of course not. We should know by now that it is never that easy.
There are two things that each group should take into consideration. First, there are measures that were carried over from the PQRS program that were changed enough to the point that CMS did not feel that they could use historical data to create a benchmark set to compare against. What that means is that CMS will either create a benchmark set off of 2017 data after the reporting year ends or, if that is not an option, then they will simply award the minimum three point scoring regardless of the group’s performance. If your strategy relies on measures that do not currently have benchmark data under CMS then your group should consider how the worst case scenario would impact the practice.
Second, Advancing Care Information may seem like a simple rebranding of the prior Meaningful Use program. However, performance seems to be overlooked by many under this newer EHR program. If you haven’t tracked your performance yet it is highly important to do so and then compare practice performance against the scoring model provided.
Fortunately, 2017 is a trial year and allows for learning on the go. At some point though, most likely 2018, the system will become much less forgiving and the impact on our reimbursement will not go unnoticed.