New Marketplace
New Risk, New Business Models

Developing Bundled Reimbursement for Cancer Care

Case Study · October 24, 2016

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, in conjunction with UnitedHealthcare, implemented prospective bundled payments for patients with head and neck cancer. We successfully developed a method to identify and enroll patients and track performance. The biggest challenges were in claims management and in addressing new technologies.

Key Takeaways

  1. Cancer conditions are good candidates for bundled reimbursement.

  2. Within the provider organization, close collaboration among clinical, financial, and operational teams is essential for success.

  3. The provider/payer relationship must have a foundation of trust and transparency.

  4. Strong project management is necessary to ensure that deadlines are met and barriers addressed in a timely manner.

The Challenge

As health care moves from a fee-for-service system to alternative payment plans, there are few well-tested models. Cancer care, optimally delivered in a multidisciplinary setting, lends itself to a bundled reimbursement approach. However, bundled payments for cancer treatment are in the early stages of development with efforts to-date focused on targeted aspects of care. There is no evidence that bundles control costs or improve outcomes of cancer care — questions we will try to address.

The Execution

MD Anderson partnered with UnitedHealthcare to test the feasibility of bundled reimbursement for multidisciplinary cancer care. We designed a single payment for one year of care for patients with newly diagnosed head and neck cancer. This group was chosen for the pilot due to efficient processes, strong care coordination, participation in prior cost studies, and the insurer’s preference.

First, we modeled the costs of care for a cohort of patients. We found that costs—the biggest being surgery, radiation, hospitalization, intensive care, and imaging — varied based on treatment plan and patient comorbidities, not cancer diagnosis and staging. We proposed four treatment-related payment bundles, with a payment modifier for patients with two or more comorbidities. During weekly meetings with the payer, we negotiated included services for each of the four bundles, patient eligibility criteria, and bundle prices.

We also agreed upon a stop-loss provision, lessening MD Anderson’s financial risk for the few patients (about 1%) incurring significantly higher costs (which could be 4 or 5 times the bundled price) for unanticipated complications.

We worked closely with the clinical team to develop a protocol to verify patient eligibility and define pilot operations. Clinical leaders emphasized the importance of implementing the pilot without impacting patient care.

The Team

The provider and payer teams included clinical, financial, and operational leaders, along with project managers. Lawyers and contracting experts were engaged as needed.

The Metrics

We developed measures to allow us to assess the value of care for enrolled patients — the outcomes and costs. We developed dashboards to track financial and clinical outcomes, including survival and recurrence; complications, such as reoperation and readmission; timeliness of care; time to return to normal activities; and functional status, such as the ability to speak and swallow. We developed systems to collect many of these outcomes via patient-reported outcome tools. Enrollment is under way.

The Timeline

Initial deliberations began in late 2013, with pilot development in 2014. The three-year pilot started in November 2014, with patient enrollment during the first two years.

The Hurdles

The most unexpected hurdle was in claims management. Fee-for-service claims systems are not well configured to test alternative payment models. Bundled payments required manual workarounds by MD Anderson and UnitedHealthcare. Claims and payment processing improved with experience but still lagged behind the automated fee-for-service process. Additionally, proton therapy, a newer technology, was excluded from the bundle (and paid for separately) because it is not a covered service for the pilot population. Barriers to including emerging technologies and innovative therapies are one problem we are working to address in this bundle, and will similarly be a challenge in other bundled reimbursement programs as they evolve.

Next Steps

We will track our performance carefully, comparing the outcomes and costs (including time-driven activity-based costing) of enrolled patients with previously treated patients, to determine whether we are controlling costs and optimizing outcomes. We are also evaluating other cancer conditions that can be paid in this manner.

Where to Start

Within your own organization, identify health conditions that have well-coordinated, integrated care delivery. Engage clinicians in defining which services should be included in a bundled payment. Work with finance leaders to understand your costs of delivering care before establishing a bundle price. Key questions to ask are: Do the clinical, finance, and administrative teams have a good relationship? Can you build the systems to assess your performance in a bundle? How will you measure outcomes and costs, and set performance targets?

Case Study Chart: Developing Bundled Reimbursement for Cancer Care

  Click To Enlarge.

 

The authors thank Ron Walters, MD; Randy Weber, MD; and James Incalcaterra, PhD of MD Anderson Cancer Center and Lee Newcomer, MD, of UnitedHealthcare for their contributions to the development of the pilot.

 

This case study originally appeared in NEJM Catalyst on November 25, 2015.

New Call for Submissions ­to NEJM Catalyst

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

More From New Marketplace
New Risk, New Business Models

Opportunities for Private-Sector Entrepreneurship in Health Care Transformation

Two veterans of public service say that government can do only so much — which creates attractive business opportunities for entrepreneurs.

New Risk, New Business Models

Moving Past the EHR Interoperability Blame Game

Why can't EHRs talk to one another? We never created the right incentives, but we pretend that we did.

New Risk, New Business Models

Emerging from EHR Purgatory — Moving from Process to Outcomes

What's the effect of the mode of physician payment when it comes to EHRs?

New Risk, New Business Models

Reframing Analytics: Transforming Insights into Action

Centralizing clinical data for an integrated delivery system revealed a surprising lesson: sometimes predictive analytics are not enough.

New Risk, New Business Models

Infographic: The Effects of Health Insurance on Health and Survival

There is strong evidence that expansions in health coverage have increased people’s use of health care across multiple domains of well-being and reduced deaths overall.

New Risk, New Business Models

Provider Rating Systems Can and Should Be Better

Which is better: to pretend we know little when in fact we know much, or to pretend we know much when in fact we know little?

New Risk, New Business Models

The Committed Perspective — Policy Principles for Regional Health Plans

When we say “committed,” we mean “in it for the long haul.”

New Risk, New Business Models

What U.S. Hospitals Can Still Learn from India’s Private Heart Hospitals

Cost-cutting lessons are clear, so what stands in our way?

New Risk, New Business Models

Good Riddance to Big Insurance Mergers

If there is any silver lining, it’s that other insurers might learn from blocked mergers and devote more energy to growing by offering superior value, rather than by swallowing rivals.

New Risk, New Business Models

Massachusetts Hospitals Seek to Get Larger to Shrink Costs

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Lahey Health, and New England Baptist Hospital propose to merge to gain market heft. What will be the impact on costs in one of the nation’s most expensive health care markets?

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

Topics

Value Based Care

115 Articles

Survey Snapshot: “Culture Is What You…

Commentary from NEJM Catalyst Insights Council members on the leadership skills needed for next-generation health…

Opportunities for Private-Sector Entrepreneurship in Health…

Two veterans of public service say that government can do only so much — which…

Rules of Business = Rules of…

The same rules of business apply for health care when it comes to new market…

Insights Council

Have a voice. Join other health care leaders effecting change, shaping tomorrow.

Apply Now