FOTO (Focus on Therapeutic Outcomes) groups in the State of Colorado and other regions of the United States are now paying close attention to the pay-for-performance payment model currently being examined by professionals – especially those in the rehabilitative healthcare field. In fact, a project was performed on the payment model.
The purpose of the project was to implement a simulation that would highlight how the financial incentives of the pay-for-performance payment model would align with more productive clinical-based outcomes. In this brief guide, you will learn about the study and the outcomes associated with the study.
Feasibility
The pay-for-performance payment model was designed to test if financial outcomes would align with performance outcomes, as previously mentioned. Several other points were taken into account, too.
For example, does the pay-for-performance model offer a high level of feasibility to those in outpatient physical therapy and occupational therapy?
Does the payment model provide the appropriate amount of information to health insurance companies and Medicare in regard to the payment policies associated with such services?
What are the implications associated with an alternative means of payment as it relates to the Balanced Budget Act?
The feasibility of the study led to many conclusions.
Conclusive Findings
Many interesting findings were discovered about the pay-for-performance payment model in the study. The following outlines the main points obtained from the research:
- It was determined that a pay-for-performance model in FOTO was highly beneficial in modifying the behavior of healthcare providers.
- Healthcare providers actually pushed to achieve better outcomes with a high level of efficiency.
- The Medicare Part B coverage of physical therapy and occupational therapy could be moved closer to implementation.
- The pay-for-performance payment model is not a system that is provider-centered; instead, it is a patient-centered model that is considered to be effective and highly efficient.
- This payment model resulted in patients having to undergo fewer treatments for optimal health-related benefits. When payments are given to practitioners for performance instead of volume, patients experience more benefits in a quicker fashion.
- The functional-based status of patients that were receiving their health benefits through the Medicare Advantage Plan was considered to be exceptionally better than those who were receiving fee-for-service healthcare services, as provided by the Medicare Part B plan.
- Value-based services or pay-for-performance services only added a small amount of financial burden to the patient and the individuals that provided the healthcare services that they required.
- Patients were found to experience faster and better recoveries in this payment model than they did with the volume-driven healthcare service model.
- Overall, it took less time for a patient to heal than with the volume services.
- As a result of the study, it was possible to create guidelines that aided in the physical therapy and occupational therapy services offered by pay-for-performance providers.
Ultimately, the patients and the practitioners benefited in numerous ways, based on the results of the study. In short, we should all opt for value-driven healthcare as FOTO groups than volume-driven healthcare. Even if this was just a simple, ordinary study, it presented extraordinary results for both patients and practitioners.
