Peter Wehrwein

Editor

David Muhlestein

They are cousinly acronyms, ACO and the ACA.

And there’s no question that the 2010 health care reform law was a major boost to ACOs, which, in a nutshell, labor behind the scenes to put health care on a value-based footing while payment dollars are still largely claims-based and flow through fee-for-service channels.

So if the Republican Congress and the Trump administration repeal and replace the ACA, will that spell the end of ACOs?

David Muhlestein doesn’t think so.

“I think MACRA keeps them safe,” he told us the other day.

(Another acronym to the rescue.)

Muhlestein is the senior director of research and development at Leavitt Partners, the Salt Lake City health care consulting firm founded by Mike Leavitt, who served as HHS secretary under George W. Bush. Leavitt's name has showed up on some short lists for that post in the Trump administration, although recently Rep. Tom Price seems to have moved to the front of the line.

Trump is not a conventional Republican, to put it mildly. But his administration will probably wind up leaning on hundreds of Republican ideas and positions when it comes to second- and third-tier issues. Promoting ACOs would seem to fall into that category.

Republicans haven’t been adverse to ACOs, notwithstanding the association with the ACA and objections to some aspects of the CMS ACO programs. Mark McClellan, another veteran of top health jobs in the Bush II administration and now a professor at Duke, is an ACO enthusiast. And Muhlestein has researched and written extensively about ACOs. He has been a source in several Managed Care stories about ACOs that you can read here and here.

Muhlestein says MACRA will provide the CMS ACOs some cover from the ACA repeal-and-replace blowtorch because they are the main choice for providers who want to avoid the Merit-based Incentive Payment Incentive (MIPS) track of MACRA and go into the Advanced Alternative Payment Model (APM) track instead.

MACRA, he points out, was an “extremely bipartisan” piece of legislation (it passed the House 392 to 37). Junking the CMS ACOs as part of an undoing of the ACA would throw serious sand into the gears of MACRA. It’s doubtful that the new administration will want to do that.

Muhlestein also argues that the ACO trend is much larger than the ACA and the CMS ACOs it spawned. Yes, the CMS ACOs get talked and written about the most because information about them is centralized and made public by CMS, but in Muhlestein’s view they are just one plotline in the larger ACO story. Providers are also entering ACO contracts with commercial payers and with Medicaid programs, he points out. By Muhlestein’s most recent count, there are still more Medicare ACOs (526) than commercial (435) and Medicaid ACOs (77) although there is an overlap between them. In a Health Affairs blog post earlier this year that he cowrote with McClellan, Muhlestein reported that of the 28.3 million Americans covered by ACOs, more than twice as many were covered by commercial ACOS (17.2 million) as by Medicare ACOs (8.3 million).

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.