Aims

There is concern that aggressive target pricing in the new Bundled Payment for Care Improvement Advanced (BPCI-A) penalizes high-performing groups that had achieved low costs through prior experience in bundled payments. We hypothesize that this methodology incorporates unsustainable downward trends on Target Prices and will lead to groups opting out of BPCI Advanced in favour of a traditional fee for service.

Introduction

Bundled Payments (BP) were a revolutionary new experiment for CMS that tested whether risk sharing for an episode of care would improve quality and reduce costs. The initial success of BP accelerated their growth as evidence by the launch of both mandatory and commercial bundles. Success in BP is dependent on the target price and the opportunity to reduce avoidable costs during the episode of care. There is concern that the aggressive target pricing methodology in the new model (BPCI-Advanced) penalizes high performing groups that already achieved low episode costs through prior experience and investment in BP. We hypothesize that this methodology incorporates unsustainable downward trends on target prices to a point beyond reasonableness for efficient groups to reduce additional costs and will lead to a large percentage of groups opting out of BPCI-A in favor of a return to fee for service (FFS) reimbursement.

A powered, randomised control trial was instigated to evaluate the advantages of subacromial injection of Methylprednisolone over conservative treatment in the management of partial rotator cuff injuries of the shoulder.

Consecutive patients with possible partial rotator cuff tears were reviewed at 1 week. Inclusion criteria for a diagnosis of partial rotator cuff tear included; traumatic mechanism, greater tuberosity tenderness, painful arc, and complete resolution of disability post-Bupivicaine block. Exclusion criteria included; age < 16 years, chronic shoulder disease, acromioclavicular tenderness, and abnormal shoulder radiograph. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either 1 immediate subacromial injection of 40mg Methylprednisolone (group S) or no injection (group N). Initial outcomes measured were; visual analogue pain score (0–10) and active abduction (nearest 5°), repeated at 3, 6, and 12 weeks. All patients were instructed in analgesia usage and given identical shoulder exercises.

Of 279 patients reviewed over 3 years, 90 met the inclusion criteria (6/90 patients were lost to follow-up). 50 patients were randomised to group S, 40 to group N. Mean pain score improvement at 12 weeks was comparable (S=4.95, N=4.44) (p> 0.1, CI=0.16–0.86). In patients aged > 40 years group S had significantly higher mean improvement in abduction at completion (64.28°) compared to group N (34.63°) (p< 0.02, CI 1.29–58.01). Conversely in patients aged < 40 years group S had lower mean improvements in abduction (40.55°) compared to group N (77.73°), though this was not statistically significant (p=0.1, CI 2.06–72.29)

Methylprednisolone injection is more efficacious than conservative treatment alone in some patients. This benefit appears age-dependent and consequently such treatment should be reserved for patients aged > 40 years.