Cited by 61Healthcare Policy and ManagementHealthcare Quality and ManagementHealthcare cost, quality, practices

Bundled Payments for Care Improvement: Lessons Learned in the First Year

Althausen, Peter L., Mead, Lisa·2016·Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

Abstract

Summary: The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative is the latest cost-saving program developed by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation. This model is intended to create a system for higher quality and more coordinated care at a lower cost to Medicare. It is currently an optional program for physician groups, hospitals and post-acute care providers to benefit financially from improved care models and cost containment measures. Under the initiative, organizations enter into payment arrangements that include financial and performance accountability for episodes of care. Under this initiative, there are certain fraud and abuse waivers in place that allow gainsharing among BPCI organizations and approved providers so long as certain requirements are met. Our practice entered this initiative for total joint arthroplasty episodes of care as well as the hip and femur fracture episode of care. The first year experience demonstrated that a significant learning curve is required. Keys for success include appropriate patient selection for elective surgery, implant pricing control, adherence to preoperative and postoperative protocols, diligent postcare care management, and appropriate choice of metrics to maximize gainsharing potential. Ultimately, the BPCI program has been a successful venture, saving our hospitals over $1.6 million in 2015. In the process, this provided an additional revenue stream for our physicians while decreasing the overall cost of care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/bot.0000000000000715

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Althausen, P. L., & Mead, L.
Venue
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Published
2016-12
Volume
30
Issue
5
Pages
S50-S53
ISSN
0890-5339 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2554206765
Cited by
61
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 5
FWCI
24.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
Keywords
Bundled Payments for Care Improvement, Medicare payment reform, cost containment, total joint arthroplasty, hip fracture, femoral fracture, gainsharing, episode of care, performance indicators, learning curve, hospital cost savings
MeSH terms
Cost Control, Medicare, Insurance, Health, Reimbursement, Nevada, United States, Models, Economic, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Quality Improvement, Patient Care Bundles

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review