More than $20 billion a year is being misspent on incentive programs in which providers do not realize that they are getting an incentive or know how to distinguish between an incentive and regular pay, according to a survey by the consulting company ZS Associates.

“Many health care organizations — hospitals, group practices, and insurance companies — are missing a huge opportunity,” says Torsten Bernewitz, managing principal for the health care insurance and payers practice at ZS and one of the report’s authors. “They spend big dollars, but get little impact. To reform how health care is delivered and paid for, we must make incentives more meaningful and truly motivating.”

The online survey of 4,500 health care providers, taken between November 2011 and January 2012, finds that even though 85 percent of doctors and nurses earn an incentive, 74 percent are unaware of what the reward is or are unable to distinguish it from it from base pay.

In addition, communication about the incentive programs is so infrequent that meaningful guidance cannot be given.

The report suggests that the incentive payment should be spread out over a year so as keep recipients motivated.

Frequency of communication

Frequency of bonus payment

*Includes both payers and providers who hold executive/management roles and are involved in the design and administration of incentive programs for providers.

Source: “Incentives for Health Professionals,” ZS Associates, May 14, 2012

Managed Care’s Top Ten Articles of 2016

There’s a lot more going on in health care than mergers (Aetna-Humana, Anthem-Cigna) creating huge players. Hundreds of insurers operate in 50 different states. Self-insured employers, ACA public exchanges, Medicare Advantage, and Medicaid managed care plans crowd an increasingly complex market.

Major health care players are determined to make health information exchanges (HIEs) work. The push toward value-based payment alone almost guarantees that HIEs will be tweaked, poked, prodded, and overhauled until they deliver on their promise. The goal: straight talk from and among tech systems.

They bring a different mindset. They’re willing to work in teams and focus on the sort of evidence-based medicine that can guide health care’s transformation into a system based on value. One question: How well will this new generation of data-driven MDs deal with patients?

The surge of new MS treatments have been for the relapsing-remitting form of the disease. There’s hope for sufferers of a different form of MS. By homing in on CD20-positive B cells, ocrelizumab is able to knock them out and other aberrant B cells circulating in the bloodstream.

A flood of tests have insurers ramping up prior authorization and utilization review. Information overload is a problem. As doctors struggle to keep up, health plans need to get ahead of the development of the technology in order to successfully manage genetic testing appropriately.

Having the data is one thing. Knowing how to use it is another. Applying its computational power to the data, a company called RowdMap puts providers into high-, medium-, and low-value buckets compared with peers in their markets, using specific benchmarks to show why outliers differ from the norm.
Competition among manufacturers, industry consolidation, and capitalization on me-too drugs are cranking up generic and branded drug prices. This increase has compelled PBMs, health plan sponsors, and retail pharmacies to find novel ways to turn a profit, often at the expense of the consumer.
The development of recombinant DNA and other technologies has added a new dimension to care. These medications have revolutionized the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and many of the other 80 or so autoimmune diseases. But they can be budget busters and have a tricky side effect profile.

Shelley Slade
Vogel, Slade & Goldstein

Hub programs have emerged as a profitable new line of business in the sales and distribution side of the pharmaceutical industry that has got more than its fair share of wheeling and dealing. But they spell trouble if they spark collusion, threaten patients, or waste federal dollars.

More companies are self-insuring—and it’s not just large employers that are striking out on their own. The percentage of employers who fully self-insure increased by 44% in 1999 to 63% in 2015. Self-insurance may give employers more control over benefit packages, and stop-loss protects them against uncapped liability.