» Articles » PMID: 38042334

Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Performance Measures in Alternative Payment Models: Current Use, Implementation Barriers, and Principles to Succeed

Overview
Journal Value Health
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2023 Dec 2
PMID 38042334
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: Patient-reported outcome (PRO)-based performance measures (PRO-PMs) offer opportunities to aggregate survey data into a reliable and valid assessment of performance at the entity-level (eg, clinician, hospital, and accountable care organization). Our objective was to address the existing literature gap regarding the implementation barriers, current use, and principles for PRO-PMs to succeed.

Methods: As quality measurement experts, we first highlighted key principles of PRO-PMs and how alternative payment models (APMs) may be integral in promoting more widespread use. In May 2023, we reviewed the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Measures Inventory Tool for active PRO-PM usage within CMS programs. We finally present principles to prioritize as part PRO-PMs succeeding within APMs.

Results: We identified 5 implementation barriers to PRO-PM use: original development of instrument, response rate sufficiency, provider burden, hesitancy regarding fairness, and attribution of desired outcomes. There existed 54 instances of active PRO-PM usage across CMS programs, including 46 unique PRO-PMs within 14 CMS programs. Five principles to prioritize as part of greater PRO-PM development and incorporation within APMs include the following: (1) clinical salience, (2) adequate sample size, (3) meaningful range of performance among measured entities and the ability to detect performance change in a reasonable time frame, (4) equity focus, and (5) appropriate risk adjustment.

Conclusions: Identified barriers and principles to prioritize should be considered during PRO-PM development and implementation phases to link available and novel measures to payment programs while ensuring provider and stakeholder engagement.

Citing Articles

Improving Health-Related Quality of Life in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients: Key Methodologies for Assessing Patient Reported Outcomes and Intervention Targets.

Moon A, Kappelman M, Barritt Iv A, Evon D, Sanoff H, Wagner L J Hepatocell Carcinoma. 2025; 12:497-511.

PMID: 40065839 PMC: 11891488. DOI: 10.2147/JHC.S347929.


Mapping health-related quality of life of children and families receiving pediatric invasive home mechanical ventilation: a scoping review protocol.

Makinde K, Mitchell M, Merz A, Youssef M Syst Rev. 2024; 13(1):236.

PMID: 39289722 PMC: 11409733. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-024-02658-2.

References
1.
Safran D . Feasibility and Value of Patient-reported Outcome Measures for Value-based Payment. Med Care. 2019; 57(3):177-179. DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001069. View

2.
Basch E, Spertus J, Dudley R, Wu A, Chuahan C, Cohen P . Methods for Developing Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Performance Measures (PRO-PMs). Value Health. 2015; 18(4):493-504. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.02.018. View

3.
Rose A, Bayliss E, Baseman L, Butcher E, Huang W, Edelen M . Feasibility of Distinguishing Performance Among Provider Groups Using Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions. Med Care. 2018; 57(3):180-186. PMC: 6375799. DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001013. View

4.
Field J, Holmes M, Newell D . PROMs data: can it be used to make decisions for individual patients? A narrative review. Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2019; 10:233-241. PMC: 6681163. DOI: 10.2147/PROM.S156291. View

5.
Katzan I, Fan Y, Griffith S, Crane P, Thompson N, Cella D . Scale Linking to Enable Patient-Reported Outcome Performance Measures Assessed with Different Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Value Health. 2017; 20(8):1143-1149. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.05.012. View