Advertisement

Journal of Medical Systems

, 42:155 | Cite as

Medicare, Metrics and Trust in the Future

  • Julie Babyar
Systems-Level Quality Improvement
  • 214 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Systems-Level Quality Improvement

Abstract

System improvements to Medicare are critical to ensure a stable and sustainable future. Measures and outcomes in Medicare are collaborative in foundation and have the potential to become even stronger. Utilization research, comparative effectiveness research and regulatory considerations must strive for best practice for the Medicare population. Government, regulatory, industry and academia should continue to work together for cost effective approaches that yield evidence-based interventions for positive health outcomes. Recommendations for improvements to the Medicare program are abundant and show strong potential to positively impact all of healthcare. These improvements will establish and maintain an even greater trust and positive view on what many consider a popular, vital social healthcare program in the U.S.

Keywords

Medicare Utilization Medicare research 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author has no conflict of interest to declare.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

The author consents to publication of this article.

References

  1. 1.
    Levey, N. N., Medical professionalism and the future of public Trust in Physicians. JAMA 313(18):1827–1828, May 2015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    National Academies Press, “What do we know about Trust In Government,” 2016.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harding, A., “Americans Trust in Doctors is Falling,” 22-Oct-2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.livescience.com/48407-americans-trust-doctors-falling.html. [Accessed: 17-Aug-2016].
  4. 4.
    P. R. Center, “Trust In Government,” 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.people. [Accessed: 16-Aug-2016].
  5. 5.
    Blendon, R. J., and Benson, J. M., The public and the conflict over future Medicare spending. N. Engl. J. Med. 369(11):1066–1073, Sep. 2013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. F. Foundation, “Medicare Beneficiaries as a Percent of Total Population,” 2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.kff.org/medicare/state-indicator/medicare-beneficiaries-as-of-total-pop/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D. [Accessed: 16-Aug-2016].
  7. 7.
    K. F. Foundation, “Medicare Service Use: Hospital Inpatient Services,” Kaiser Family Foundation, 2016.
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, “How is Medicare Funded,” 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.medicare.gov/about-us/how- medicare-is- funded/medicare-funding.html. [Accessed: 16-Aug-2016].
  11. 11.
    K. F. Foundation, “Distribution of Medicare Beneficiaries by Eligibility Category,” 2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.kff.org/medicare/state-indicator/distribution-of-medicare-beneficiaries-by-eligibility-category-2/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D. [Accessed: 16-Aug-2016].
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    “10 FAQs: Medicare’s Role in End-of-Life Care,” Kaiser Family Foundation, 2015.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    McClellan, M., Berenson, R., Chernew, M., Kramer, W., Lansky, D., and Milstein, A., Medicare physician payment reform: securing the connection between value and payment. Brookings Instsiute, 2015.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Marmor T, A. D., “Medicare and Commercial Health Insurance: The Fundamental Difference,” Health Affairs, 2012. [Online]. Available: http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2012/02/15/medicare-and-commercial-health-insurance-the-fundamental-difference/. [Accessed: 16-Aug-2016].
  16. 16.
    “Paying a Visit to the Doctor: Current Financial Protections for Medicare 8 Patients When Receiving Physician Services,” Kaiser Family Foundation, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.kff.org/medicare/issue-brief/paying-a-visit-to-the-doctor-current-financial-protections-for-medicare-patients-when-receiving-physician-services/. [Accessed: 16-Aug-2016].
  17. 17.
    Goldman, T. R., “Eliminating fraud and abuse,” Health Aff., 2012.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Duru, O. K., Ettner, S. L., Vassar, S. D., Chodosh, J., and Vickrey, B. G., Cost evaluation of a coordinated care management intervention for dementia. Am. J. Manag. Care 15(8):521–528, Aug. 2009.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Goodwin, S. M., and Anderson, G. F., Effect of cost-sharing reductions on preventive service use among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Medicare Medicaid Res. Rev. 2(1), Feb. 2012.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jungerwirth, R., Wheeler, S. B., and Paul, J. E., Association of hospitalist presence and hospital-level outcome measures among Medicare patients. J. Hosp. Med. 9(1):1–6, Jan. 2014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schell, W., A review: Discharge navigation and its effect on heart failure readmissions. Prof. Case Manag. 19(5):224–234, Sep. 2014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Saleh, S. S., Freire, C., Morris-Dickinson, G., and Shannon, T., An effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis of a hospital-based discharge transition program for elderly Medicare recipients. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 60(6):1051–1056, Jun. 2012.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bielaszka-DuVernay, C., The ‘GRACE’ model: In-home assessments lead to better care for dual eligibles. Health Aff. 30(3):431–434, Mar. 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    McCall, N., and Cromwell, J., Results of the Medicare health support disease-management pilot program. N. Engl. J. Med. 365(18):1704–1712, Nov. 2011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Popejoy, L. L., Jaddoo, J., Sherman, J., Howk, C., Nguyen, R., and Parker, J. C., “Monitoring Resource Utilization in a Health Care Coordination Program,” Prof. Case Manag. vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 310–320, Nov. 15.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ely, E. K. et al., A National Effort to prevent type 2 diabetes: Participant-level evaluation of CDC’s national diabetes prevention program. Diabetes Care 40(10):1331–1341, Oct. 2017.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lloyd-Jones, D. M. et al., Estimating longitudinal risks and benefits from cardiovascular preventive therapies among Medicare patients: The million hearts longitudinal ASCVD risk assessment tool: A special report from the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 69(12):1617–1636, Mar. 2017.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Manchikanti, L., Helm Ii, S., Benyamin, R. M., and Hirsch, J. A., Merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS): Harsh choices for interventional pain management physicians. Pain Physician 19(7):E917–E934, Sep. 2016.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schrag, D., Reimbursing wisely? CMS’s trial of Medicare part B drug payment reform. N. Engl. J. Med. 374(22):2101–2105, Jun. 2016.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Held, K. S., New Medicare payment rule: A Trojan horse for government takeover. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons 21(3):87–90, 2016.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Manchikanti, L., Falco, F. J. E., Benyamin, R. M., Helm, 2nd, S., Parr, A. T., and Hirsch, J. A., The impact of comparative effectiveness research on interventional pain management: Evolution from Medicare modernization act to patient protection and affordable care act and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. Pain Physician 14(3):E249–E282, May 2011.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dummit, L. A. et al., Association Between Hospital Participation in a Medicare Bundled Payment Initiative and Payments and Quality Outcomes for Lower Extremity Joint Replacement Episodes. JAMA 316(12):1267–1278, Sep. 2016.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hussey, P. S., Liu, J. L., and White, C., The Medicare access and CHIP reauthorization act: Effects on Medicare payment policy and spending. Health Aff. 36(4):697–705, Apr. 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mechanic, R., Post-acute care—The next frontier for controlling Medicare spending. N. Engl. J. Med. 370(8):692–694, 2014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ackerly, D. C., and Grabowski, D. C., Post-acute care reform—Beyond the ACA. N. Engl. J. Med. 370(8):689–691, 2014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chen, H.-F., Homan, S., Carlson, E., Popoola, T., and Radhakrishnan, K., The impact of race and neighborhood racial composition on preventable readmissions for diabetic Medicare home health beneficiaries. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities 4(4):648–658, Aug. 2017.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bruce, M. L. et al., Clinical effectiveness of integrating depression care management into medicare home health: The depression CAREPATH randomized trial. JAMA Intern. Med. 175(1):55–64, Jan. 2015.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Vose, C. et al., Establishing a comprehensive networkwide pressure ulcer identification process. Jt. Comm. J. Qual. Patient Saf. 37(3):131–137, Mar. 2011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wu, S., Keeler, E. B., Rubenstein, L. Z., Maglione, M. A., and Shekelle, P. G., A cost-effectiveness analysis of a proposed national falls prevention program. Clin. Geriatr. Med. 26(4):751–766, Nov. 2010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Clemens, J., Gottlieb, J. D., Shapiro, A. H., and Others, “How much do Medicare cuts reduce inflation?,” FRBSF Economic Letter, vol. 28, 2014.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julie Babyar
    • 1
  1. 1.San FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations