Can the Medicare Quality Payment Program Incentivize Evidence-Based Treatment of Depression and Anxiety Disorders by Primary Care Providers?

Information

  • Research Project
  • 10366446
  • ApplicationId
    10366446
  • Core Project Number
    R01MH125820
  • Full Project Number
    1R01MH125820-01A1
  • Serial Number
    125820
  • FOA Number
    PA-20-185
  • Sub Project Id
  • Project Start Date
    9/7/2021 - 3 years ago
  • Project End Date
    6/30/2025 - 5 months from now
  • Program Officer Name
    HUMENSKY, JENNIFER
  • Budget Start Date
    9/7/2021 - 3 years ago
  • Budget End Date
    6/30/2022 - 2 years ago
  • Fiscal Year
    2021
  • Support Year
    01
  • Suffix
    A1
  • Award Notice Date
    9/7/2021 - 3 years ago
Organizations

Can the Medicare Quality Payment Program Incentivize Evidence-Based Treatment of Depression and Anxiety Disorders by Primary Care Providers?

Project Summary Depression and anxiety disorders are common in patients in the primary care setting and have clear evidence- based guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and treatment. However, rates of screening and treatment among Medicare beneficiaries remain low. Without proper treatment, these patients may experience persistent depression and anxiety symptoms, difficulty co-managing other conditions, worsening functional status, and avoidable and expensive acute medical events. In 2017, Medicare launched the Quality Payment Program (QPP) to incentivize delivery of high quality, low cost, evidence-based care in the outpatient setting. Primary care providers (PCPs) are required to participate in the QPP via one of two tracks: 1) the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), the default track; or 2) alternative payment models (APMs) such as accountable care organizations (ACOs) and patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs). In the both the APMs and MIPS, PCPs are paid for their performance based on the quality and cost of care they deliver to patients. However, the effects of these QPP models on treatment of depression and anxiety disorders by PCPs are unknown. There is a critical need for research on the effects of the APMs and MIPS on access to care and delivery of evidence- based treatment for depression and anxiety disorders in the primary care setting, as well as subsequent outcomes for patients. Our scientific premise is that the QPP, which is a program targeted at the general patient population, has conflicting incentives for primary care delivery to patients with depression and anxiety disorders. On one hand, the QPP incentivizes PCPs in ACOs and PCMHs to adopt innovative care models that may increase rates of evidence-based treatment. However, on the other hand, the QPP does not risk adjust for the most prevalent types of depression and anxiety disorders, which creates a financial disincentive to PCPs in ACOs and PCMHs for caring for patients with these conditions, potentially threatening their access to care. This negative consequence may be further magnified among patients who are poor, belong to racial and/or ethnic minority groups, or live in rural areas. The objective of this R01 application is to conduct a longitudinal study linking rich national datasets of Medicare claims, patient surveys, and PCP data from 2017-2022 to evaluate: 1) patient and PCP risk selection into the APMs vs. MIPS (Aim #1); 2) whether financial incentives to PCPs in the QPP contribute to this risk selection and how they may be remedied (Aim #2); and 3) the effect of patient care from PCPs in the APMs vs. MIPS on delivery of evidence-based treatment for depression and anxiety disorders and subsequent patient outcomes (Aim #3). We hypothesize that although patients with depression and anxiety disorders will receive higher rates of evidence-based treatment and have better outcomes when treated by PCPs participating in the APMs vs. MIPS, these patients will nonetheless be less likely to be cared for by PCPs in the APMs vs. MIPS than patients without these conditions due to negative financial consequences to their PCPs caused by inadequate risk adjustment in the QPP for these conditions.

IC Name
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH
  • Activity
    R01
  • Administering IC
    MH
  • Application Type
    1
  • Direct Cost Amount
    211980
  • Indirect Cost Amount
    109170
  • Total Cost
    321150
  • Sub Project Total Cost
  • ARRA Funded
    False
  • CFDA Code
    242
  • Ed Inst. Type
    SCHOOLS OF PUBLIC HEALTH
  • Funding ICs
    NIMH:321150\
  • Funding Mechanism
    Non-SBIR/STTR RPGs
  • Study Section
    SERV
  • Study Section Name
    Mental Health Services Study Section
  • Organization Name
    SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY
  • Organization Department
    ADMINISTRATION
  • Organization DUNS
    050220722
  • Organization City
    SAINT LOUIS
  • Organization State
    MO
  • Organization Country
    UNITED STATES
  • Organization Zip Code
    631032006
  • Organization District
    UNITED STATES