Medicare VBC vs MA: A Debate on Value-Based Care

This title was summarized by AI from the post below.
View profile for Dion Trahan, Esq., LL.M.

PEOPLE ORIENTED 🔥 GROWTH OBSESSED 🔥 POLICY WONK 🔥 ENJOYS KNOWING THE WAY, GOING THE WAY, & SHOWING THE WAY 🔥

🔦 Though published back in March 1, 2024, the article "Enabling Better Integration For Dually Eligible Participants In Medicare Value-Based Care Models" by Mike Monson and Sarah Barth is still relevant today as it was back in March of 2024. 🧲 There are significant differences between the CMS VBC models and MA. For example, MA plans leverage a variety of tools to manage cost that are not available to Medicare VBC models, such as utilization management, selective networks, and benefit design. Medicare VBCs, on the other hand, have a variety of advantages over MA, such as auto enrollment of beneficiaries, physician alignment, and flexibility in use of funds. And there is a substantial debate about the relative value of each model. (See "Born On Third Base: Medicare Advantage Thrives On Subsidies, Not Better Care" by Richard Gilfillan and Donald W. Berwick) 🪃 VBC programs are designed to meet the triple aim of improving the experience of care, improving the health of populations, and reducing per capita costs of health care. In some ways, these programs are similar to Medicare Advantage (MA), the managed care version of Medicare, in their focus on population health, managing chronic conditions, reducing overuse, and alignment of incentives. In fact, many MA plans employ VBC models with their providers. 🧠 Dual eligible beneficiaries are unique because of their status. Integration of the Medi/Medi programs have long been the "holy grail" of service anticipated to unlock high-quality outcomes. Why aren't we there yet? Curious to hear your thoughts?

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories