Free EMR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to EMR and EHR for FREE!

MIPS Performance Category Weightings – MACRA Monday

Posted on January 16, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

This post is part of the MACRA Monday series of blog posts where we dive into the details of the MACRA Quality Payment Program.

We’re going to keep this post short and sweet since it’s a holiday. However, we wanted to keep going with our regular MACRA Monday series. As we start to talk about the details of MIPS, the key change in the MACRA final was removal of the “Cost” category from MIPS. Ok, it wasn’t really removed. It’s still apart of MIPS, but it doesn’t influence the payment adjustment that you’ll receive. For those following along at home, the cost performance category in MIPS was a replacement of the Value Based Reimbursement Modifier.

Here’s the full breakdown of the 4 MIPS Performance Categories and how much weight each category will get in determining your MIPS Composite Score:

As a reminder, the Quality category replaces the old PQRS program. The Improvement Activities category is a new category. The Advancing Care Information category is the meaningful use replacement. We already mentioned that the Cost category is a replacement of the Value Based Reimbursement program.

Looking at the weights above, if you’re participating in PQRS, then MIPS is not going to be an issue for you. If you’ve been doing PQRS and Meaningful Use, then you’re well positioned to get access to the extra incentives available under MIPS. Although, remember that the MIPS incentives are subject to budget neutrality.

That’s the basic overview of the MIPS categories. Next week we’ll start diving into more details on each category.

Be sure to check out all of our MACRA Monday blog posts where we dive into the details of the MACRA Quality Payment Program.

Has the MD Profession Been Irreparably Harmed?

Posted on January 13, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Physician burnout has been a hot topic lately. You see it anywhere you find a physician. Doctors are tired, worn out, and feel like they’re overworked. Many feel like they’ve become data entry clerks and not doctors. Many doctors feel like all these regulation and reimbursement requirements have gotten between them and the patient. Many are pressured by their employer to hit numbers as opposed to caring for patients.

I could keep going, but you get the point. If you’re a doctor, then you’re living many of these challenges. If you’re not, I’d love to hear from you.

Lately when I’ve heard people talking about the damage the meaningful use, EHR, and now MACRA have caused, I hear those people proclaim that the medical profession has been damaged. Many go on to suggest that irreparable harm has been caused to the medical profession. Is that true?

When I ask these people what the solution is, they say that government should get out of the exam room. While that principle is interesting, it’s not very practical. Most of these doctors that want government out of the exam room still want Medicare to cut them a check for seeing Medicare patients. There’s a big disconnect there and it’s not likely to change.

All of this sidesteps the real issue we have in healthcare. Whenever we talk about lowering the cost of healthcare, that means someone is going to get paid less. Who should that be? Yes, there is the pretty rare scenario that you can lower costs while improving care. I’ve seen examples of this, but it’s an extremely challenging thing to make happen.

Going back to the main question. Is the medical profession irreparably harmed by the implementation of EHR software and other regulations? Certainly, it’s had a significant impact, but I don’t think the harm is impossible to repair. We do need to simplify the hoop jumping that we require from physicians. We do need to improve our EHR software so that it makes the physician workflow more efficient and not less. We do need to find better incentives that provide for health data sharing and deeper engagement with patients. All of these things will help repair the medical profession. Doing so will create a whole generation of doctors who can’t imagine what it was like to practice medicine without an EHR.

MACRA and CMS – A #HITsm Chat Summary and Commentary

Posted on January 12, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Note: Join us Friday at Noon ET (9 AM PT) for the latest #HITsm chat.

We had a really unique opportunity to have the Acting Administrator of CMS, Andy Slavitt, join us as host of the #HITsm Twitter chat. His participation in the Twitter chat was a good illustration of how he led things during his time at CMS. We’ll see how things play out with this new administration, but I can personally say that I’m going to miss Andy Slavitt at CMS. He’s brought a fresh engagement from CMS that I hope will continue with his replacement and will continue with the other employees at CMS.

In the #HITsm chat that Andy hosted, we had a wide ranging discussion about MACRA and CMS. The chat was extremely active, so if you missed it live, be sure to read through the whole #HITsm transcript.

Here we’ll just highlight a few of the tweets that we found interesting and add a bit of commentary as well.


I really think this isn’t lip service, but is the culture of many at CMS now. That’s a huge win. There’s still a lot of work to be done and we need more voices willing to talk with CMS so that they hear the right messages, but it’s been a huge step forward.


I think many might think this was the tweet of the chat. There are a lot of pressures in healthcare that are shocking.


I loved this tweet. Many in government aren’t open to changes, but I think many on social media just spout complaints without a plan that will be better than what’s happening today.


All about the patients!


Seriously. If you’re on Twitter and care about healthcare, then you should be following Aisling. And do it for much more than on point emoji sharing.


My feeling is the Advanced APM participants are going to be the happiest group that participates in MACRA. There are good incentives and in many cases they get them for things they were already planning to do.
Read more..

When Healthcare Faxing Goes Wrong

Posted on January 11, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I recently wrote a tongue in cheek post about The Perfect Interoperability Solution. Go and read it and you’ll see what I mean. We’ll be here when you get back.

For those of you too lazy to click over and read the post, the punchline is that I was talking about all the beautiful parts of faxes in healthcare. Faxes have a lot of really redeeming qualities. That’s why they’ve survived so long in healthcare. However, we should learn from their great qualities and take interoperability to the next level.

In the comments on that post, regular reader R Troy offered this tragic story about why we should do better than faxing in healthcare:

At best, fax should be a method of nearly last resort, voice calls being the only thing that is worse (highly prone to miscommunication). Sure, there are solutions such as Brian noted, and I’m not suggesting that it go away because it does help to make the best of a poor method of communication. It’s just that in real life fax’s are often partially or completely unreadable, can’t get through, don’t reach the right person or entity, or even something as stupid as someone forgetting to press SEND or OK. Of course, if the fax came from an EHR, quality would likely be fine – but typically, someone fills in something on a photocopied form – perhaps legibly, and then that sheet is put into a fax machine and maybe even gets both sent and received.

Real life scenario; doctor sends a patient to the ER for an emergency transfusion, to be followed up by related infusions (which were going to be done on an outpatient basis the next day until the situation worsened). The doctor writes up the orders to have someone fax to the ER, but along the way, something unknown happens and the ER never gets the fax. Patient arrives, ER has no clue what to due, figuring the orders will eventually arrive. One nurse figures that the problem is with the pharmacy. The patient’s family pushes hard and finally – 6 hours later, discovers that no orders have arrived; doctor is phoned, and 10 minutes later the ER has the instructions.

What should have happened? In very plain terms, the doctor should have logged into the EHR (albeit a different system than the hospital uses), put in orders, and those orders should have gone straight to the ER’s EHR (I gather via Direct Messaging) so that when the patient arrived the ER would know what to do. OR – the doctor should have logged into the hospital’s EHR remotely and entered the orders. But that’s not what happened, and the patient waited many hours for badly needed blood, and a valuable ER bed was occupied for those same hours with no treatment being done.

Fax does have its uses – but IMO they should be limited to situations where there is no other choice, not be ‘how we do things’.

BTW, the scenario above actually happened. Oh, and the ER in question is now being expanded, an expansion that might not be needed if 1. it had decent communications with doctors feeding it patients, 2. it’s EHR was fully connected to that used by the rest of the hospital, 3. It had a viable and efficient work flow revolving around the EHR. Instead, patients are stacked up in the hallways and waiting room waiting for treatment, for techs to come, for orders to hopefully show up. The hospital is spending 10’s of millions to expand but not addressing the root causes of their problems, the biggest of which is poor communication based primarily on phones and fax machines.

The sad part is these miscommunications happen all day, every day in healthcare. Stories like this is why we can and need to do better than fax for healthcare interoperability.

Should Physicians “Just Say No” to MACRA? – MACRA Monday

Posted on January 9, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

This post is part of the MACRA Monday series of blog posts where we dive into the details of the MACRA Quality Payment Program.

We’d planned to start diving into MIPS this week, but I couldn’t resist commenting on a post I saw on Medical Economics where a physician makes the case that physicians should just say “No” to MACRA. The opening paragraph describes the challenges of MACRA (and its meaningful use predecessor) pretty well:

I can’t recall the exact moment I crossed over from believer in today’s version of the healthcare quality movement to skeptic. Perhaps it was when the office trash would fill with clinical summaries the staff dutifully handed out to patients to satisfy a “meaningless use” measure. Or maybe it was trying to convince a 75-year-old Mrs. Davis that we would really appreciate it if she logged on to our electronic health record (EHR) using the patient portal. To do what, she asked? I stared back at her blankly.

It’s easy to make the case that some of the meaningful use requirements are meaningless. The same could be said for MACRA. That’s particularly true if you look at specialty specific instances where certain requirements made no sense to specific specialties. In other cases, the concept is good, but the execution is poor. For example, the concept of giving patients access to their health information is good, but it was poorly executed. Providing a clinical summary after a visit doesn’t really get us there and yet that’s what doctors were required to do.

Long story short, I understand why many see meaningful use and now MACRA as a distraction and they should just say no to both. In fact, that’s the advice that the author above offers:

My advice to physicians operating in this climate is simple: Don’t participate. MACRA clearly is the law of the land, and while one may hope the implementation from a Trump-Price administration will have a much lighter touch than the Obama-Burwell administration, sustained resistance in the form of non-participation is a small but important message to send to policymakers.

It is true that opting out of MACRA would send a small message to policymakers. If doctors would opt completely out of Medicare to avoid the MACRA penalties, that would send an even stronger message. I hear some doctors talking about this as an option as well. Both actions would send a message if doctors did this in mass. The problem is this isn’t happening and I don’t think it will happen.

While it is easy for a well paid cardiologist to say in a blog post that doctors should just say no to MACRA, my experience is that the MACRA math is much more difficult for general medicine and other specialties that don’t get paid as much and have large Medicare populations. The 4% MACRA penalty is a significant penalty to many doctors and “just saying no” is a very challenging decision for them financially. In fact, I’ve talked to many that just don’t see it as an option.

The same is true for people opting out of Medicare or reducing their Medicare population so the penalties aren’t as damaging. Not only is Medicare a significant source of revenue for many practices, but opting out of Medicare would hurt many patients who would have challenge finding care without them. Indeed, choosing to accept the Medicare penalties is not as easy a decision as some like to make it seem.

If you believe MACRA will fail, then opting out wouldn’t be as hard to handle for a year at a 4 percent penalty. However, I don’t see a scenario where MACRA fails so badly that it goes away. In fact, given the budget neutral nature of the legislation and the MIPS Pick Your Pace changes, it’s easy to see how MACRA is going to be proclaimed as a successful program. It would take some really serious lobbying for MACRA to disappear and I don’t see the will in Washington to make this a reality.

Assuming MACRA sticks around, your initial 4% penalty will grow to 9%. That’s a big hit to the bottom line for many practices. Given the Pick Your Pace options and the fact that most are already doing many pieces of the MIPS program (PQRS and Meaningful Use), why would a practice just take the penalty on the chin when the penalty is easily avoided? Out of honor and principle?

In fact, if you want to minimize MACRA’s impact on your practice it might send a clearer message to Washington if everyone participated at the lowest Pick Your Pace (Test Pace) option as opposed to a few people opting out of MACRA completely. If a few people opt out of MACRA and take the penalties, that will just fuel the incentives of those that participate in MACRA. If the majority of doctors do the minimum required to avoid the penalties, then they’ll avoid the penalties and it will send a message to CMS that they need to continue at a slower pace. Plus, those that participate fully will only get a small increase because there aren’t enough penalties to pay them what MACRA could pay them.

I previously suggested that the best strategy for most practices would be to go and participate as much as possible in MIPS so that a practice doesn’t get behind. I still think getting behind is an important concept to consider when you evaluate your MACRA participation. However, given the budget neutral nature of MACRA and the way it minimizes the incentives for full participants, I’m ok with a practice that chooses to take MACRA slowly. I just think most practices with a reasonably sized Medicare population are a bit crazy to not at least avoid the MACRA penalties.

Feel free to send a small message by just saying no to MACRA, but don’t expect that strategy to achieve the goals you desire. In fact, all it will likely do is damage yourself and put you in a harder position to participate in MACRA in future years. Of course, if you’re a highly paid specialist and/or you have a small Medicare population, then you’re choice doesn’t matter much to you or them anyway.

I agree that we should make an effort to get government regulation out of the EHR world as much as possible. It’s stifled innovation, burnt out doctors, and commoditized EHR software. I dream for the day when doctors love technology because it helps them be better doctors as opposed to better medical billers and government hoop jumpers. However, “just saying no” to MACRA won’t get us there.

Be sure to check out all of our MACRA Monday blog posts where we dive into the details of the MACRA Quality Payment Program.

Patient Engagement Discussion on the eCW Podcast

Posted on January 4, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I was recently asked to take part in the newly launched eCW podcast. Having done so many interviews for Healthcare Scene myself, it was fun to have the tables turned and be interviewed. The majority of our discussion was about patient engagement and they broke it up into 2 parts. If you’re interested in patient engagement, check out the 2 part interview below.

The Future of Patient Engagement: A Discussion with John Lynn from Healthcarescene.com Part 1

The Future of Patient Engagement: A Discussion with John Lynn from Healthcarescene.com Part 2

MACRA is Required by Law to Be Budget Neutral – What’s The Impact? – MACRA Monday

Posted on January 2, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

This post is part of the MACRA Monday series of blog posts where we dive into the details of the MACRA Quality Payment Program.

In my last post on MIPS benefits and the “Pick Your Pace” options, I published an old slide which highlighted the potential positive and negative payment adjustments under MIPS. Thanks to Lynn Scheps from SRSsoft (she also wrote our previous Meaningful Use Monday series of blog posts), it was pointed out to me that there’s one big caveat to how much positive payment adjustment you’d receive under MIPS. I don’t know how I missed it on page 1282-1286 of the final rule. It was such an important point, that I wanted to dive into all the details in a MACRA Monday post of its own.

This all gets pretty technical, pretty quickly, but we’ll try to make this as simple to understand as possible. The core issue at hand is that the MACRA program has to be budget neutral. This means that the MACRA penalties have to offset any MACRA benefits that are paid to participants. Since Pick Your Pace has made it so very few practices will receive the 4% MACRA penalty, that means that there won’t be as big of a pool of incentives available to those who do participate in MACRA.

The math gets pretty complicated, but this chart illustrates how the adjustments you receive could be effected by the need to make the program budget neutral:

This chart is illustrative, but I also believe that it’s a decent representation of what’s likely to happen given the lack of MIPS penalties that will be assessed. If the chart is accurate, most MIPS participants will receive less than a 1% incentive and exceptional performers will be less then 2.4%. That’s quite a big difference between the 4% that was originally discussed.

Now remember that CMS was stuck in a tough position. They had a legal requirement to make it budget neutral. They could have continued with the 4% positive payment adjustment, but that would mean that a whole bunch of practices would get a 4% negative payment adjustment. Instead, they chose to do Pick Your Pace to give people a chance to avoid the penalties. Now those people are happy, but exceptional performers pay the price because there’s no budget to reward the exceptional performers.

At least this is how I read the legalese. If anyone has any other nuances I missed, please let us know in the comments. Next week we’ll start diving into more of the MIPS Categories and changes to the MIPS Composite Score.

Be sure to check out all of our MACRA Monday blog posts where we dive into the details of the MACRA Quality Payment Program.

Is Lack of Security the Death Knell of Cloud Companies?

Posted on December 28, 2016 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

In the eternal discussion of what’s more secure: cloud or in house, it was recently pointed out to me why many people now believe that a cloud company is more secure than anything you would implement in house. Here’s the reason: If a cloud company gets breached, they’re dead.

I think this is true. At least it’s true in healthcare. I don’t know many healthcare organizations that would select a cloud healthcare IT company that had just been breached. Not many. If you’re a healthcare cloud company and you get breached, your future is basically over as a company. There might be a few that could survive if they have enough money, if there are mitigating circumstances, etc, but that’s going to be pretty rare.

With this in mind, it’s easy to understand why a cloud based healthcare company is going to invest to ensure they don’t get breached. No startup founder or health IT company CEO wants to put their blood, sweat, and tears into a company that gets blown up because they didn’t address proper security and get breached.

What happens if a healthcare organization gets breached? If you’ve ever been there, it’s not a fun experience. It’s embarrassing. This is particularly true if your breach is large enough (500 or more individuals) to end up on the HHS Wall of Shame. I mean the HHS Breach Portal. Yes, there are often even fines associated with a breach as well. It’s not pretty and it’s not fun. However, most healthcare organizations that get breached continue practicing like usual. Sure, they likely make an investment in some more security, a proper risk assessment, etc, but the company still continues providing healthcare services like usual.

Fear isn’t always the best driver in life, but it can be a good one. Cloud healthcare companies have a healthy fear of being breached because their company’s future depends on it. That’s a powerful motivator to make sure you avoid breaches. I’m sorry to say that most healthcare organizations don’t have this same fear and motivation. Most of them still employ what I call the “Just Enough” approach to security and privacy. Note that it’s “Just Enough” to sleep at night as opposed to “Just Enough” to be secure. There’s a difference.

No doubt there are exceptions to the above on both sides of the aisle. Some cloud healthcare companies don’t do a good job securing their technology. Some healthcare organizations do a really excellent job securing their organizations. However, as a rule, I think it’s fair to say that most cloud healthcare companies are more secure than hosting something in house.

The Importance of Communication in Healthcare and Thoughts on How To Do It Right

Posted on December 23, 2016 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

A while back I had the chance to sit down with 4 healthcare experts to talk about healthcare communication. The panel consisted of:

  • Mandi Bishop, Chief Evangelist and Co-Founder of Aloha Health
  • Jessica Johnson, Director of Operations, Health Transformation at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Population Health Management
  • Ethan Bechtel, CEO at OhMD
  • Nathan Larson, Chief Experience Officer at ImagineCare
  • John Lynn, Founder of HealthcareScene.com

We had a wide ranging conversation about the importance of communication in healthcare and how to do it more effectively. This is a topic that should be of interest to all of us. Watch the full video conversation below:

Happy Holidays! What more could you want this holiday weekend than some great discussion from amazing people?

MIPS Benefits and Pick Your Pace – MACRA Monday

Posted on December 19, 2016 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

This post is part of the MACRA Monday series of blog posts where we dive into the details of the MACRA Quality Payment Program.

As promised, we’re back with another MACRA Monday looking at the MIPS Pick Your Pace options. However, before we dive into Pick Your Pace, we want to take a second to look back at the details of the MIPS incentives and penalties that are available as well. This really didn’t change in the final rule, so it’s review for those who have been following MACRA Monday since the beginning.

If you remember from last week’s MACRA Monday post, what you do in 2017 will determine your MIPS payment adjustment in 2019. Assuming you perform at the top level, you can get a full 4% positive payment adjustment to your Medicare Part B reimbursement (Note: It was pointed out to me that the MACRA program has to be budget neutral, so while they can give up to a 4% positive payment adjustment, it won’t be a 4% positive payment adjustment if enough practices aren’t penalized. With Pick Your Pace, hardly anyone will be penalized. On page 1282-1286 of the final rule it highlights this and points out that with the budget neutrality scaling, the upward adjustment is estimated to be under 1% for the base and 2.4% for exceptional performers. Thanks Lynn Scheps for the clarification!). Of course, if you don’t participate in MIPS, you’ll get a 4% penalty. That scales up to 9% in 2022. There are some exceptional performance bonuses as well, but we’ll cover that in a future MACRA Monday.

In the MACRA final rule, CMS added a number of other ways for doctors to participate in MIPS. They call the various options Pick Your Pace since the provider can choose how much they want to participate in MIPS in 2017. Here are the 3 MIPS Pick Your Pace options (and the Advanced APM for completeness’ sake):

As is laid out above, you can fully participate in MIPS for the entire year and get the largest positive payment adjustment. You can report on 90 days and receive at least a small positive payment adjustment and up to the full positive payment adjustment. Or you can just submit something to MIPS and that will have you avoid the negative MIPS payment adjustment.

The “Test Pace” option as it’s listed above needs some further clarification. Basically, if you don’t want to fully participate in MIPS, but want to avoid the negative payment adjustment you can just do 1 quality measure, 1 improvement activity, or the required advancing care information measures.

Clear enough? Basically, in 2017 they’ve made it so pretty much everyone should be able to at least do the Test Pace portion of MIPS and avoid the 4% negative payment adjustment. I don’t know of any practices where this wouldn’t be a reasonable goal. However, is that the best approach for a practice? I think not.

If I were advising a practice today, I’d suggest they shoot for full MIPS participation in 2017. Assuming they do well, they’ll get the full 4% payment increase and even could qualify for bonus payments. If they fall a little short, then they should still easily qualify for the MIPS partial year option which will provide them a small positive payment adjustment. If they experience a disaster with their MIPS participation, then they will still avoid any penalties.

Why is this my suggested route? MACRA and MIPS aren’t going anywhere. Sure, they might go through various iterations and subtle changes, but the move to this kind of reporting is here to stay and even a Trump presidency isn’t likely going to change this. Plus, you don’t want to be behind the 8 ball in 2018 when the full MIPS requirements will be upon us (Remember my post about thinking about MACRA like med school). You don’t want to get so far behind that you can’t catch up. If that’s still not enough, many people believe that the commercial payers are going to follow suit. Those that have participated in MACRA will be better prepared when they do.

Those are the details on MIPS pick your pace. We may take next week off from MACRA Monday for the holidays, but the next week we’ll be diving into more of the details of MIPS and other changes to the MIPS Performance Categories.

Be sure to check out all of our MACRA Monday blog posts where we dive into the details of the MACRA Quality Payment Program.