The National Quality Forum’s Measure Applications Partnership recently released guidelines on measures for the new Merit-Based Incentive Payment System and on cross-cutting issues for all federal healthcare programs.
The National Quality Forum (NQF)’s Measure Applications Partnership (MAP) recently released guidelines on measures for the new Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) and on cross-cutting issues for all federal healthcare programs.
The recommendations, presented by MAP, for measures in these programs, reflect how well the measures address the identified program goals, as well as NQF’s prior work in identifying families of measures. Some of the dominating issues for clinician programs identified included: the new MIPS aligning all clinician measures into a single program; further alignment of clinician measures warranted with alternative payment model and hospital/facility measures; increased public reporting of clinician measures on Physician Compare; and measuring gaps in both MIPS and Medicare Shared Savings Program.
For the purpose of the review, MAP considered 60 performance measures for use in MIPS. MIPS is a program legislated by the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) in CMS. MIPS combines the Physician Quality Reporting System, the Value Modifier, and the Medicare Electronic Health Record incentive program into a single program. This single program is responsible for adjusting eligible providers’ Medicare payments based on performance.
“As the US healthcare system increasingly shifts to a performance-based payment system, MAP’s role as an impartial advisor bringing stakeholders together from across the healthcare spectrum is more important than ever,” said Helen Burstin, NQF’s chief scientific officer. “The recommendations MAP made for MIPS, MSSP, and other federal healthcare programs are advancing measurement to help make better healthcare a reality for all Americans.”
Exploring in detail, the following recommendations were proposed on cross-cutting issues to HHS:
This report highlights major changes in the types of measures submitted for consideration for use and notes that this year, for the first time, more outcome measures were submitted for consideration than process measures.
What's at Stake as Oral Arguments Are Presented in the Braidwood Case? Q&A With Richard Hughes IV
April 21st 2025Richard Hughes IV, JD, MPH, spoke about the upcoming oral arguments to be presented to the Supreme Court regarding the Braidwood case, which would determine how preventive services are guaranteed insurance coverage.
Read More
New Research Challenges Assumptions About Hospital-Physician Integration, Medicare Patient Mix
April 22nd 2025On this episode of Managed Care Cast, Brady Post, PhD, lead author of a study published in the April 2025 issue of The American Journal of Managed Care®, challenges the claim that hospital-employed physicians serve a more complex patient mix.
Listen
Varied Access: The Pharmacogenetic Testing Coverage Divide
February 18th 2025On this episode of Managed Care Cast, we speak with the author of a study published in the February 2025 issue of The American Journal of Managed Care® to uncover significant differences in coverage decisions for pharmacogenetic tests across major US health insurers.
Listen
Comparing Breast Cancer Treatment Outcomes Between Fee-for-Service and Medicare Advantage
April 4th 2025This study examined postdiagnosis breast cancer treatment outcomes for Medicare Advantage vs fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare in Ohio and found no significant differences overall but disparities for Black patients with FFS Medicare.
Read More