Codapedia is now a division of Find-A-Code

Small Practices are Affected by MIPS Increased Thresholds

June 25th, 2018 - Wyn Staheli, Director of Research
0 Votes - Sign in to vote or comment.

We recently heard about a small practice that had been faithfully submitting all the required “G” codes for the Quality Payment Program (QPP) only to discover that for 2018 they are excluded from MIPS because the low volume threshold increased from $30,000 in Part B allowed charges or 100 Part B beneficiaries to $90,000 in Part B allowed charges or 200 Part B beneficiaries. They were unsure about what they needed to do at this point and how it would impact their practice.

An increase from $30,000 to $90,000 is a significant increase for a small or solo practice. This step was taken by CMS due, in part, to feedback they received about small practices having a hard time meeting all the participation requirements. In fact, some specialties (e.g., chiropractic) have very few applicable quality measures to report.

Along with this low-volume threshold increase, they also added the following to help small practices:

So what does all that mean for small practices (groups of less than 15 clinicians)? The bottom line is that these practices are now exempt from MIPS which means that they don’t have the administrative burdens. However, it also means that they do not qualify for bonuses which could be viewed as a “small provider pay cut.”

While it may be nice to not have to worry about reporting quality measures, the downside is that CMS will now be viewing flawed quality data because small practices do not operate the same as larger organizations. Statisticians like to see a variety of organizations, as a representative sample, which means the data would better match reality. CMS estimates that only 37% of Medicare providers will now need to comply with MIPS. That means that they may be making erroneous decisions based on data from a small, more homogenous group.

Another potential problem is the physician review rankings. We discussed this in a January 2018 article about how non-participation can affect your practice. CLICK HERE to read that article.

The following are options for a small or solo practice:

Virtual Groups

Virtual Groups are something new for 2018. It’s where 2-10 eligible clinicians (ECs) join together to report their data as if they were a single group. It is limited to 10 ECs so they are still considered a “small practice,” which means that the small practice bonus points and PI exemption would still apply. The only ‘catch’ is that there must be at least one MIPS eligible clinician in the group.

You don’t have to join with another practice of the same specialty. This could be beneficial in promoting practice integration. For example, adding a psychologist or chiropractor to a family practice has shown to improve patient outcomes. There does need to be a formal written agreement that they are entering into a virtual group, however, they don’t need to be practicing in the same building or location. It just means that they are working together in reporting quality measures. They must also have a single official representative that works with CMS on behalf of the group.

On the plus side, this can help providers work together to get good scores, while still maintaining their ‘independent’ status. However, if one individual in the group performs poorly, it can negatively impact the entire group; it really becomes a team effort to keep those scores high. Providers can learn from each other and bring the quality of all practices up.

One potential problem with a virtual group is that obtaining the necessary reporting data might be a little difficult if one or more of the providers has a different reporting mechanism.

Election period: For 2018, there was only a window of October 11-December 31, 2017 to elect to participate. This means it’s too late for this year, but you could be planning and preparing for next year’s reporting period. CMS did anticipate that the number of providers to join a virtual group the first year would be low because of the time it takes (typically 3-6 months) to form groups and establish the necessary agreements. By their estimates, there would only be 16 groups.

In summary, virtual groups are currently in the ‘testing’ phase. At the time of publication, there was not any information about how they were faring. However, it is something to consider.

###

Questions, comments?

If you have questions or comments about this article please contact us.  Comments that provide additional related information may be added here by our Editors.


Latest articles:  (any category)

Small Practices are Affected by MIPS Increased Thresholds
June 25th, 2018 - Wyn Staheli, Director of Research
We recently heard about a small practice that had been faithfully submitting all the required “G” codes for the Quality Payment Program (QPP) only to discover that for 2018 they are excluded from MIPS because the low volume threshold increased from $30,000 in Part B allowed charges or 100 Part ...
How Does the Physician Compare Website Affect You?
June 25th, 2018 - Wyn Staheli, Director of Research
The physician compare website may not be working quite the way you think it is. Not all providers will have rankings showing up for them. Physician compare lists basic information, but quality measure information was not added until this year (2018) and not all quality measures are included in the ...
VA Expands Telehealth
June 14th, 2018 - Wyn Staheli, Director of Research
On May 11, 2018, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) released its final rule on the "Authority of VA Health Care Providers to Practice Telehealth." Effective June 11, 2018, VA providers will be able to provide telehealth services across state lines. This move will make it easier for veterans to obtain ...
Will Medicare's Proposed Reformations Affect Your Practice?
June 12th, 2018 - Wyn Staheli, Director of Research
Recently, Medicare's Innovation Center released an informal Request for Information (RFI) seeking input on several different system reformation proposals. As the market moves towards more value based payment systems, innovation and new models are being sought to both reduce costs and increase quality. This article outlines the ideas presented in the ...
Inappropriate Use of Units Costs Practice Over $800,000
June 11th, 2018 - Wyn Staheli, Director of Research & Aimee Wilcox, CPMA, CCS-P, CMHP, CST, MA, MT
A recent OIG enforcement action emphasizes the need to understand the proper use of units. A healthcare provider in Connecticut improperly submitted multiple units for drug screening urine tests. The proper billing of units has proven to be problematic for more than just lab tests. Is your billing of drugs & biologicals, injections and timed codes appropriate?
Coding for Strains in ICD 10
May 30th, 2018 - BC Advantage
According to the National Institutes of Health, a review was carried out on 20 patients who had a pectoralis major muscle repair between 2003 and 2011, and the results were as follows....
AMA vs Medicare rules and the use of the PT modifier
May 22nd, 2018 - Chris Woolstenhulme, QCC, CMCS, CPC, CMRS
Be sure to review the specific payer policy you are submitting claims to. Medicare’s policy requires the use of a different code when a screening colonoscopy becomes a diagnostic procedure requiring you to bill with CPT code 00811 when treating a Medicare Beneficiary. The use of the PT modifier is ...



About Codapedia & Find-A-Code Contact Us Terms of Use Privacy Policy Advertise with Us

Codapedia™/Find-A-Code™ - 62 E 300 North, Spanish Fork, UT 84660 - Phone 801-770-4203 (9-5 Mountain) - Fax (801) 770-4428

Copyright © 2009-2018 Find A Code, LLC - CPT® copyright American Medical Association