The Impact of Value-Based Payment Models for Networks of Care and Transmural Care: A Systematic Literature Review

Design, implementation and evaluation of value-based payment models: a Delphi study

BACKGROUND

This study explores the facilitating and inhibiting factors in the design/development, implementation, and applicability/evaluation of value-based payment models of integrated care. The Delphi technique was used to reach consensus among a panel of (inter)national experts on these factors.

METHODS

An expert panel of 15 members participated in a three-round Delphi study. Factors from experts and literature were used to compile a list of 40 facilitators and 40 inhibitors. Afterwards, experts were asked to rate the importance of these factors using a 5-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

Eight facilitating (e.g., transparency, communication, and trust among involved stakeholders) and seven inhibiting factors (e.g., lack of motivation and engagement among involved stakeholders) achieved full consensus. Timely availability of data and an integrated information technology system for data registration (a facilitator) were the only factors achieving full consensus through a very high agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

Adequate outcome measures, targets, benchmarks, and incentives are important in value-based payment models. The less quantifiable items, such as strong leadership, transparency, communication and trust, and motivation and engagement of the involved stakeholders, are also important for successful adoption of these models and promote high-quality care at lower or equal costs.

Bibliometric Analysis of Outpatient Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Research Evolution

Objectives

Total joint arthroplasty is an effective treatment for end stage osteoarthritis. As perioperative protocols are developed, outpatient arthroplasty has been gaining traction to facilitate earlier recovery and same day discharge. The aim of this manuscript is to analyze the trends in outpatient arthroplasty over a 17-year duration. This analysis seeks to predict emerging themes in the literature on patient optimization and outcomes in outpatient arthroplasty.

Methods

This study conducted a literature review on outpatient arthroplasty with the Web of Science Core Collection over a 17-year period between 2005 and 2022. Bibliometric data was imported and analyzed with Bibliometrix and VOSviewer.

Results

198 articles were identified demonstrating an annual growth of 19.61% with notable bursts in 2017 and 2021. United States was the top global contributor followed by Canada and European nations. There were significant contributions across 219 institutions and 758 authors, with the Journal of Arthroplasty being the most productive and influential journals. Key themes identified include the feasibility of outpatient surgery, pain management, and perioperative complications and costs.

Conclusion

This bibliometric analysis highlights the ongoing growth and development within outpatient arthroplasty since 2005. The United States remain the global leader within outpatient related arthroplasty research. Previous, current, and ongoing trends are highlighted within this field for further development as hotspots.

Is Economic Evaluation and Care Commissioning Focused on Achieving the Same Outcomes? Resource-Allocation Considerations and Challenges Using England as a Case Study

Commissioning describes the process of contracting appropriate care services to address pre-identified needs through pre-agreed payment structures. Outcomes-based commissioning (i.e., paying services for pre-agreed outcomes) shares a common goal with economic evaluation: achieving value for money for relevant outcomes (e.g., health) achieved from a finite budget. We describe considerations and challenges as to the practical role of relevant outcomes for evaluation and commissioning, seeking to bridge a gap between economic evaluation evidence and care commissioning. We describe conceptual (e.g., what are 'relevant' outcomes) alongside practical considerations (e.g., quantifying and using relevant endpoint or surrogate outcomes) and pertinent issues when linking outcomes to commissioning-based payment mechanisms, using England as a case study. Economic evaluation often focuses on a single endpoint health-focused maximand, e.g., quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), whereas commissioning often focuses on activity-based surrogate outcomes (e.g., health monitoring), as easier-to-measure key performance indicators that are more acceptable (e.g., by clinicians) and amenable to being linked with payment structures. However, payments linked to endpoint and/or surrogate outcomes can lead to market inefficiencies; for example, when surrogates do not have the intended causal effect on endpoint outcomes or when service activity focuses on only people who can achieve prespecified payment-linked outcomes. Accounting for and explaining direct links from commissioners' payment structures to surrogate and then endpoint economic outcomes is a vital step to bridging a gap between economic evaluation approaches and commissioning. Decision-analytic models could aid this but they must be designed to account for relevant surrogate and endpoint outcomes, the payments assigned to such outcomes, and their interaction with the system commissioners purport to influence.

A comprehensive value-based method for new nuclear medical service pricing: with case study of radium [223Ra] bone metastases treatment

IMPORTANCE

Innovative nuclear medicine services offer substantial clinical value to patients. However, these advancements often come with high costs. Traditional payment strategies do not incentivize medical institutes to provide new services nor determine the fair price for payers. A shift towards a value-based pricing strategy is imperative to address these challenges. Such a strategy would reconcile the cost of innovation with incentives, foster transparent allocation of healthcare resources, and expedite the accessibility of essential medical services.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to develop and present a comprehensive, value-based pricing model for new nuclear medicine services, illustrated explicitly through a case study of the radium [223Ra] treatment for bone metastases. In constructing the pricing model, we have considered three primary value determinants: the cost of the new service, associated service risk, and the difficulty of the service provision. Our research can help healthcare leaders design an evidence-based Fee-For-Service (FFS) payment reference pricing with nuclear medicine services and price adjustments.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This multi-center study was conducted from March 2021 to February 2022 (including consultation meetings) and employed both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. We organized focus group consultations with physicians from nuclear medicine departments in Beijing, Chongqing, Guangzhou, and Shanghai to standardize the treatment process for radium [223Ra] bone metastases. We used a specially designed 'Radium Nuclide [223Ra] Bone Metastasis Data Collection Form' to gather nationwide resource consumption data to extract information from local databases. Four interviews with groups of experts were conducted to determine the add-up ratio, based on service risk and difficulty. The study organized consultation meeting with key stakeholders, including policymakers, service providers, clinical researchers, and health economists, to finalize the pricing equation and the pricing result of radium [223Ra] bone metastases service.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

We developed and detailed a pricing equation tailored for innovative services in the nuclear medicine department, illustrating its application through a step-by-step guide. A standardized service process was established to ensure consistency and accuracy. Adhering to best practice guidelines for health cost data analysis, we emphasized the importance of cross-validation of data, where validated data demonstrated less variation. However, it required a more advanced health information system to manage and analyze the data inputs effectively.

RESULTS

The standardized service of radium [223Ra] bone metastases includes: pre-injection assessment, treatment plan, administration, post-administration monitoring, waste disposal and monitoring. The average duration for each stage is 104 min, 39 min, 25 min, 72 min and 56 min. A standardized monetary value for medical consumables is 54.94 yuan ($7.6), and the standardised monetary value (medical consumables cost plus human input) is 763.68 yuan ($109.9). Applying an agreed value add-up ratio of 1.065, the standardized value is 810.19 yuan ($116.9). Feedback from a consultation meeting with policymakers and health economics researchers indicates a consensus that the pricing equation developed was reasonable and well-grounded.

CONCLUSION

This research is the first study in the field of nuclear medicine department pricing methodology. We introduce a comprehensive value-based nuclear medical service pricing method and use radium[223Ra] bone metastases treatment pricing in China as a case study. This study establishes a novel pricing framework and provides practical instructions on its implementation in a real-world healthcare setting.