Scoping Review: Anesthesiologist Involvement in Alternative Payment Models, Value Measurement, and Nonclinical Capabilities for Success in the United States of America.

IF 4.6 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY Anesthesia and analgesia Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-07 DOI:10.1213/ANE.0000000000006763
Jay Sanghvi, Daniel Qian, Ezekiel Olumuyide, Deborah C Mokuolu, Aakash Keswani, Gordon H Morewood, Garrett Burnett, Chang H Park, Jonathan S Gal
{"title":"Scoping Review: Anesthesiologist Involvement in Alternative Payment Models, Value Measurement, and Nonclinical Capabilities for Success in the United States of America.","authors":"Jay Sanghvi, Daniel Qian, Ezekiel Olumuyide, Deborah C Mokuolu, Aakash Keswani, Gordon H Morewood, Garrett Burnett, Chang H Park, Jonathan S Gal","doi":"10.1213/ANE.0000000000006763","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The US healthcare sector is undergoing significant payment reforms, leading to the emergence of Alternative Payment Models (APMs) aimed at improving clinical outcomes and patient experiences while reducing costs. This scoping review provides an overview of the involvement of anesthesiologists in APMs as found in published literature. It specifically aims to categorize and understand the breadth and depth of their participation, revolving around 3 main axes or \"Aims\": (1) shaping APMs through design and implementation, (2) gauging the value and quality of care provided by anesthesiologists within these models, and (3) enhancing nonclinical abilities of anesthesiologists for promoting more value in care. To map out the existing literature, a comprehensive search of relevant electronic databases was conducted, yielding a total of 2173 articles, of which 24 met the inclusion criteria, comprising 21 prospective or retrospective cohort studies, 2 surveys, and 1 case-control cohort study. Eleven publications (45%) discussed value-based, bundled, or episode-based payments, whereas the rest discussed non-payment-based models, such as Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (7 articles, 29%), Perioperative Surgical Home (4 articles, 17%), or other models (3 articles, 13%).The review identified key themes related to each aim. The most prominent themes for aim 1 included protocol standardization (16 articles, 67%), design and implementation leadership (8 articles, 33%), multidisciplinary collaboration (7 articles, 29%), and role expansion (5 articles, 21%). For aim 2, the common themes were Process-Based & Patient-Centric Metrics (1 article, 4%), Shared Accountability (3 articles, 13%), and Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC) (3 articles, 13%). Furthermore, we identified a wide range of quality metrics, spanning 8 domains that were used in these studies to evaluate anesthesiologists' performance. For aim 3, the main extracted themes included Education on Healthcare Transformation and Policies (3 articles, 13%), Exploring Collaborative Leadership Skills (5 articles, 21%), and Embracing Advanced Analytics and Data Transparency (4 articles, 17%).Findings revealed the pivotal role of anesthesiologists in the design, implementation, and refinement of these emerging delivery and payment models. Our results highlight that while payment models are shifting toward value, patient-centered metrics have yet to be widely accepted for use in measuring quality and affecting payment for anesthesiologists. Gaps remain in understanding how anesthesiologists assess their direct impact and strategies for enhancing the sustainability of anesthesia practices. This review underscores the need for future research contributing to the successful adaptation of clinical practices in this new era of healthcare delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":7784,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia and analgesia","volume":" ","pages":"27-37"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia and analgesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000006763","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The US healthcare sector is undergoing significant payment reforms, leading to the emergence of Alternative Payment Models (APMs) aimed at improving clinical outcomes and patient experiences while reducing costs. This scoping review provides an overview of the involvement of anesthesiologists in APMs as found in published literature. It specifically aims to categorize and understand the breadth and depth of their participation, revolving around 3 main axes or "Aims": (1) shaping APMs through design and implementation, (2) gauging the value and quality of care provided by anesthesiologists within these models, and (3) enhancing nonclinical abilities of anesthesiologists for promoting more value in care. To map out the existing literature, a comprehensive search of relevant electronic databases was conducted, yielding a total of 2173 articles, of which 24 met the inclusion criteria, comprising 21 prospective or retrospective cohort studies, 2 surveys, and 1 case-control cohort study. Eleven publications (45%) discussed value-based, bundled, or episode-based payments, whereas the rest discussed non-payment-based models, such as Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (7 articles, 29%), Perioperative Surgical Home (4 articles, 17%), or other models (3 articles, 13%).The review identified key themes related to each aim. The most prominent themes for aim 1 included protocol standardization (16 articles, 67%), design and implementation leadership (8 articles, 33%), multidisciplinary collaboration (7 articles, 29%), and role expansion (5 articles, 21%). For aim 2, the common themes were Process-Based & Patient-Centric Metrics (1 article, 4%), Shared Accountability (3 articles, 13%), and Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC) (3 articles, 13%). Furthermore, we identified a wide range of quality metrics, spanning 8 domains that were used in these studies to evaluate anesthesiologists' performance. For aim 3, the main extracted themes included Education on Healthcare Transformation and Policies (3 articles, 13%), Exploring Collaborative Leadership Skills (5 articles, 21%), and Embracing Advanced Analytics and Data Transparency (4 articles, 17%).Findings revealed the pivotal role of anesthesiologists in the design, implementation, and refinement of these emerging delivery and payment models. Our results highlight that while payment models are shifting toward value, patient-centered metrics have yet to be widely accepted for use in measuring quality and affecting payment for anesthesiologists. Gaps remain in understanding how anesthesiologists assess their direct impact and strategies for enhancing the sustainability of anesthesia practices. This review underscores the need for future research contributing to the successful adaptation of clinical practices in this new era of healthcare delivery.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
范围审查:美国麻醉医师参与替代支付模式、价值衡量和非临床能力以取得成功。
美国医疗保健行业正在进行重大的支付改革,导致替代支付模式(APM)的出现,其目的是在降低成本的同时改善临床效果和患者体验。本范围界定综述概述了已发表文献中发现的麻醉医师参与 APMs 的情况。其具体目的是围绕 3 个主轴或 "目标",对麻醉医师参与的广度和深度进行分类和了解:(1) 通过设计和实施形成 APM,(2) 衡量麻醉医师在这些模式中提供的护理的价值和质量,以及 (3) 提高麻醉医师的非临床能力,以促进更多的护理价值。为了解现有文献,我们对相关电子数据库进行了全面检索,共检索到 2173 篇文章,其中 24 篇符合纳入标准,包括 21 项前瞻性或回顾性队列研究、2 项调查和 1 项病例对照队列研究。有 11 篇文章(45%)讨论了基于价值、捆绑或基于情节的支付,其余文章讨论了非基于支付的模式,如术后强化恢复(7 篇文章,29%)、围手术期外科之家(4 篇文章,17%)或其他模式(3 篇文章,13%)。目标 1 最突出的主题包括方案标准化(16 篇文章,占 67%)、设计和实施领导力(8 篇文章,占 33%)、多学科协作(7 篇文章,占 29%)和角色扩展(5 篇文章,占 21%)。对于目标 2,常见的主题是基于流程和以患者为中心的指标(1 篇文章,4%)、共同责任(3 篇文章,13%)和基于时间驱动活动的成本计算(TDABC)(3 篇文章,13%)。此外,我们还发现了这些研究中用于评估麻醉医师绩效的 8 个领域的各种质量指标。研究结果表明,麻醉医师在设计、实施和完善这些新兴的交付和支付模式中发挥着关键作用。我们的研究结果突出表明,虽然支付模式正在向价值转变,但以患者为中心的指标尚未被广泛接受用于衡量质量和影响麻醉医生的支付。在了解麻醉医师如何评估其直接影响以及加强麻醉实践可持续性的策略方面仍存在差距。本综述强调了未来研究的必要性,有助于临床实践在这一医疗保健服务新时代的成功适应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Anesthesia and analgesia
Anesthesia and analgesia 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
9.90
自引率
7.00%
发文量
817
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Anesthesia & Analgesia exists for the benefit of patients under the care of health care professionals engaged in the disciplines broadly related to anesthesiology, perioperative medicine, critical care medicine, and pain medicine. The Journal furthers the care of these patients by reporting the fundamental advances in the science of these clinical disciplines and by documenting the clinical, laboratory, and administrative advances that guide therapy. Anesthesia & Analgesia seeks a balance between definitive clinical and management investigations and outstanding basic scientific reports. The Journal welcomes original manuscripts containing rigorous design and analysis, even if unusual in their approach.
期刊最新文献
The Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine, Ketamine, and Lidocaine-Ketamine Combination in Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Scoping Review: Anesthesiologist Involvement in Alternative Payment Models, Value Measurement, and Nonclinical Capabilities for Success in the United States of America. Permutation Entropy Does Not Track the Electroencephalogram-Related Manifestations of Paradoxical Excitation During Propofol-Induced Loss of Responsiveness: Results From a Prospective Observational Cohort Study. Association of Intravenous Neostigmine and Anticholinergics or Sugammadex with Postoperative Delirium: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Silent Night: A Story of Surgery on Christmas Eve.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1