Home › Forums › MISCELLANEOUS POSTS › MISCELLANEOUS POSTS › The Pay for Performance Reimbursement Model and Dentistry
Welcome Dear Guest
To create a new topic please register on the forums. For help contact : discussdentistry@hotmail.com
- This topic has 2 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 05/07/2012 at 3:26 pm by
drmithila.
-
AuthorPosts
-
07/04/2012 at 5:36 pm #10429
drmithila
OfflineRegistered On: 14/05/2011Topics: 242Replies: 578Has thanked: 0 timesBeen thanked: 0 timesRecently, more American insurers have turned to a new reimbursement model for hospitals and physicians called Pay for Performance (P4P). It links the amount of the provider’s reimbursement to the quality of care provided to treat a patient. In essence, if providers meet the insurer’s measurable standards for quality of care, they will be fully rewarded. If they fail to meet the quality measures, their payout will be reduced.
While insurers and providers continue to debate the merits of P4P in the healthcare arena, many foresee a day when the model will be extended to reimbursement for dental services. But is the current state of the P4P science compatible with dentistry? In the Journal for Healthcare Quality, National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR) grantees take a fresh look at this question based on past experience with P4P in primary and dental care. They conclude that large-scale implementation of P4P in dentistry may not be a realistic option right now.
The researchers noted that public insurance for dental services in the United States is limited, with insurance payments representing just 61.4% of dentists’ revenues compared to 86% of physicians’ income. They also found that existing government healthcare reimbursement programs tend to be oriented to hospitals and large provider groups. Dentists tend to operate their own individual practices and thus provide their services in outpatient settings. “Dental providers might accept P4P if they contribute to program design and see a link between P4P and quality,” the researchers added. At the present time, quality in dental care is not clearly defined and is difficult to measure. With the absence of this, along with the lack of clinical practice guidelines and evidence-based quality indicators, dentistry will continue to trail behind medicine in the adoption of P4P.
22/05/2012 at 4:49 am #15518
drmithila
OfflineRegistered On: 14/05/2011Topics: 242Replies: 578Has thanked: 0 timesBeen thanked: 0 timesChildren and adolescents from states that had higher Medicaid payment levels to dentists between 2000 and 2008 were more likely to receive dental care, although children covered by Medicaid received dental care less often than children with private insurance, according to a study in the July 13 issue of JAMA.
According to background information in the article, more than one-third of children are covered by public health insurance, primarily Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Coverage of dental care for children and adolescents covered by Medicaid and CHIP is required, although states have wide latitude in setting payment rates for providers including dentists, with these rates varying greatly by state. Medicaid recipients may not be able to access dental care if dentists decline to participate in Medicaid because of low payment levels or other reasons. Little is known about the effect of state dental fees on participation of dentists in the Medicaid program.
Sandra L. Decker, Ph.D., of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, Md., conducted a study to examine the association of state Medicaid payment rates for dental care with the receipt of dental care among children covered by Medicaid. The study included data on Medicaid dental fees in 2000 and 2008 for 42 states plus the District of Columbia, and these data were merged with data from 33,657 children and adolescents (ages 2-17 years) in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) for the years 2000-2001 and 2008-2009.
Of the 42 states plus the District of Columbia considered in the analyses, the 2008 Medicaid dental fees were lower than the (inflation-adjusted) 2000 fees in 23 states. Payment levels to dentists in 2008 were higher than in 2000 in 19 states plus the District of Columbia. In five states (Connecticut, Indiana, Montana, New York, and Texas) plus the District of Columbia, payments increased by at least 50 percent between 2000 and 2008.
The researchers found that the probability that a child or adolescent had seen a dentist in the past 6 months varied by insurance source. In 2008-2009, children and adolescents covered by Medicaid were less likely (55 percent) than children with private insurance (68 percent) to have seen a dentist in the past 6 months, but were more likely to have seen a dentist than children or adolescents without insurance (27 percent). According to the author’s, "children were about 6 percentage points more likely to have seen a dentist in 2008-2009 than in 2000-2001. … Those covered by Medicaid or CHIP were about 13 percentage points and uninsured children were about 40 percentage points less likely than children with private insurance to have seen a dentist."
"Changes in state Medicaid dental payment fees between 2000 and 2008 were positively associated with use of dental care among children and adolescents covered by Medicaid. For example, a $10 increase in the Medicaid prophylaxis payment level (from $20 to $30) was associated with a 3.92 percentage point increase in the chance that a child or adolescent covered by Medicaid had seen a dentist," the authors write.
"As future expansions in Medicaid eligibility and insurance coverage more generally are contemplated and possibly implemented, more attention to the effects of provider payment policies on access to care, quality of care, and health outcomes may be warranted."05/07/2012 at 3:26 pm #15694
drmithila
OfflineRegistered On: 14/05/2011Topics: 242Replies: 578Has thanked: 0 timesBeen thanked: 0 timesthe state government has decided to give a big thrust to dental care services at its hospitals and spread to more rural areas. The state cabinet at its meeting on Wednesday approved a plan to strengthen dental care under public health facilities at district and sub-district government hospitals. For this, 1063 posts will be created. The cabinet has sanctioned Rs87.33 crore for the plan.
Admitting that dental care has been a neglected area leading to rise in oral cancer, gum diseases and related ailments in urban as well as rural areas, a note of the medical education department said a survey in schools had revealed alarming findings. As many as 92% school going students had cavities while 67% suffered from gum diseases. This dismal picture was a direct consequence of consumption of tobacco products by students. It was found that around 60% students either consumed ‘gutkha’ or are hooked to smoking.
There are 16,000 registered dental surgeons practicing in the state. Through its three government dental colleges and 29 private ones, around 1500 dental doctors graduate every year. But 75% of them prefer to work in cities leaving dental facilities non-existent or in abysmal condition in rural areas. To correct this imbalance, it is necessary to create infrastructure in the three general hospitals, 23 district and 24 sub-district hospitals in the state. Only through strengthened services and better manpower and equipment can oral hygiene reach villages, the government has realized.
The new dental care plan envisages providing at district hospitals modern equipment and personnel to carry out root canal treatment, fixing caps on teeth, cosmetic dentistry and surgeries to cure jaw diseases and to diagnose oral cancer and other dental problems. X-ray machines, surgical kits and modern dental units are to be set up and old machinery replaced in some places. An oral health cell headed by a deputy director will be created. Every district hospital will have a qualified dental surgeon assisted by technicians and other staff. Some of them will be appointed on contract basis and if necessary services of private labs will be taken for procuring implants. The cabinet also stressed on the fact that of 48% of cancer cases in the country are of oral or mouth cancers.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.