Advertisement

Current and Emerging Payment Models for Spine Pain Care: Evidence-Based, Outcomes-Based, or Both?

  • Kayode WilliamsEmail author
  • Daniel B. Carr
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter describes two major payment models relevant to the diagnosis and treatment of spine pain. The first is the assessment of the actual outcomes of care delivered, with emphasis on patient-reported outcomes such as pain and functional capacity (“outcomes-based”). The second comprises aggregated past observations in patient groups comparable to the current patient scheduled to receive a treatment (“evidence-based”). Payment decisions are then based upon whether differences were observed in the outcomes of treatment and control groups in the prior studies, preferably conducted as prospective randomized controlled trials. In practice, these two approaches are linked: evidence is typically gathered to assess specific outcomes, and findings of effects upon outcomes contribute to selecting one among many possible treatments and strategies to monitor that treatment’s effectiveness. We further describe a widely used computerized adaptive testing instrument (the Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System, “PROMIS”). We note actions underway by the US Federal insurance system to apply financial, merit-based performance incentives (“MIPS”) to encourage systematic collection and comparisons of treatment outcomes in a range of patient care settings. We conclude by touching on blockchain technology, an innovation that may grow in importance in health care by virtue of its facilitation of collection and pooling of individual patients’ detailed characteristics, care received, and outcomes achieved while maintaining their anonymity.

Keywords

Spine pain Back pain Outcomes assessment Evidence-based medicine Health insurance Payer ACA (2010 Affordable Care Act) CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) MIPS (Merit-Based Incentive Payment System) MACRA (Medicare Access and Children’s Health Insurance Plan Reauthorization and Access Act of 2015) Value-based care 

References

  1. 1.
    Charlton E, editor. Core curriculum for professional education. 3rd ed. Seattle: IASP Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Merskey H, Loeser JD, Dubner R, editors. The paths of pain. 1975–2005. Seattle: IASP Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Datz G, Bruns D. Billing psychological services for patients with chronic pain. In: Deer TR, editor. Comprehensive treatment of chronic pain by medical, interventional, and behavioral approaches. [The American Academy of Pain Medicine textbook of pain medicine]. Berlin: Springer; 2013. p. 845–7.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nussbaum S, McClellan M, Metlay G. Principles for a framework for alternative payment models. JAMA. 2018;319(7):653–4.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.20226.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wittink HM, Carr DB. Health outcomes and treatment effectiveness in pain medicine. In: Wittink HM, Carr DB, editors. Pain management: evidence, outcomes and quality of life. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2008. p. 1–20.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cook KF, Jensen SE, Schalet BD, Beaumont JL, Amtmann D, Czajkowski S, et al. PROMIS measures of pain, fatigue, negative affect, physical function, and social function demonstrated clinical validity across a range of chronic conditions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;73:89–102.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.038. Epub 2016 Mar 4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McQuay HJ, Moore RA. An evidence-based resource for pain relief. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1998.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rey R. The history of pain. (Wallace LE, Cadden JA, Cadden SW, translators). Cambridge (Massachusetts): Harvard University Press; 1993.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Osler W. Physic and physicians as depicted in Plato. In: Aequanimitas. With other addresses to medical students, nurses and practitioners of medicine. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Blackiston’s; 1910. p. 47–76.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hajar R. The air of history early medicine to Galen (Part I). Heart Views. 2012;13:120–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cope DK. Intellectual milestones in our understanding and treatment of pain. In: Fishman SM, Ballantyne JC, Rathmell JP, editors. Bonica’s management of pain. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams &Wilkins; 2010. p. 1–13.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wittink H, Goudas LC, Strassels SA, Carr DB. Outcome measurements in pain medicine. In: Warfield CA, Bajwa ZH, Wootton RJ, editors. Principles and practice of pain medicine. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2017. p. 945–58.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Frazier HS, Mosteller F, editors. Medicine worth paying for: assessing medical innovations. Boston: Harvard University Press; 1995: 5, 11, 21–3.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    King James Bible. Book of Daniel 3:10.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rittenhouse BE, O’Brien BJ. Threats to the validity of pharmacoeconomic analyses based on clinical trial data. In: Spilker B, editor. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1996. p. 1215–23.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Carr DB. The development of national guidelines for pain control: synopsis and commentary. Eur J Pain. 2001;5(Suppl. A):91–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Turk DC, Dworkin RH, Allen RR, Bellamy N, Brandenburg N, Carr DB, et al. Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain. 2003;106:337–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Taylor AM, Phillips K, Patel KV, Turk DC, Dworkin RH, Beaton D, et al. Assessment of physical functioning and participation in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT/OMERACT recommendations. Pain. 2016;157(9):1836–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Edwards RR, Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Angst M, Dionne R, Freeman R, et al. Patient phenotyping in analgesic clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain. 2016;157(9):1851–71.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rogers WH, Wittink HM, Wagner A, Cynn D, Carr DB. Assessing individual outcomes during outpatient, multidisciplinary chronic pain treatment by means of an augmented SF-36. Pain Med. 2000;1:44–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wittink H, Turk DC, Carr D, Sukiennik A, Rogers W. Comparison of the redundancy, reliability, and responsiveness to change among SF-36, Oswestry disability index, and multidimensional pain inventory. Clin J Pain. 2004;20:133–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Malhotra A, Mackey S. Outcomes in pain medicine: a brief review. Pain Ther. 2012;1:1.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rogers WH, Wittink HM, Ashburn MA, Cynn D, Carr DB. Using the “TOPS”, an outcomes instrument for multidisciplinary outpatient pain treatment. Pain Med. 2000;1:55–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Peirce-Sandner S, Burke LB, Farrar JT, Gilron I, et al. Considerations for improving assay sensitivity in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain. 2012;153(6):1148–58.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2012.03.003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dworkin RH, Turk DC, McDermott MP, Peirce-Sandner S, Burke LB, Cowan P, et al. Interpreting the clinical importance of group differences in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain. 2009;146(3):238–44.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2009.08.019.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Wyrwich KW, Beaton D, Cleeland CS, Farrar JT, et al. Interpreting the clinical importance of treatment outcomes in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. J Pain. 2008;9(2):105–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Turk DC, Dworkin RH, Allen RR, Bellamy N, Brandenburg N, Carr DB, et al. Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. (Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials). Pain. 2003;106:337–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Deyo RA, Dworkin SF, Amtmann D, Andersson G, Borenstein D, Carragee E, et al. Report of the NIH task force on research standards for chronic low back pain. Pain Med. 2014;15:1249–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stone AA, Broderick JE, Junghaenel DU, Schneider S, Schwartz JE. PROMIS fatigue, pain intensity, pain interference, pain behavior, physical function, depression, anxiety, and anger scales demonstrate ecological validity. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;74:194–206.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pearn J. Hammurabi’s Code: a primary datum in the conjoined professions of medicine and law. Med Leg J. 2016;84(3):125–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mehta L. Ethical basis for charging medical fees. Issues Med Ethics. 2000;8(2):49–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dowell D, Haegerich TM, Chou R. CDC guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain--United States, 2016. JAMA. 2016;315(15):1624–45.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ. 1996;312:71–2.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gordon DB, Dahl JL, Miaskowski C, McCarberg B, Todd KH, Paice JA, et al. American Pain Society recommendations for improving the quality of acute and cancer pain management. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165:1574–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Feinstein AR. Meta-analysis: statistical alchemy for the 21st century. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;48:71–9.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jadad AR. Meta-analysis: a valuable but easily misused tool. Curr Opin Anesthesiol. 1996;9:426–9.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Carr DB. Evidence-based pain medicine: inconvenient truths. Pain Med. 2017;18:2049–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cochrane AL. Effectiveness and efficiency: random reflections on health services. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1989.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Frieden TR. Evidence for health decision making — beyond randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:465–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fazekas G, Antunes F, Negrini S, Barotsis N, Schwarzkopf SR, Winkelmann A, et al. Evidence based position paper on Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) professional practice for persons with acute and chronic pain. The European PRM position (UEMS PRM Section). Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2018;54:952–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Horlocker TT, Vandermeuelen E, Kopp SL, Gogarten W, Leffert LR, Benzon HT. Regional anesthesia in the patient receiving antithrombotic or thrombolytic therapy: American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine evidence-based guidelines (Fourth Edition). Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2018;43(3):263–309.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cohen SP, Bhatia A, Buvanendran A, Schwenk ES, Wasan AD, Hurley RW, et al. Consensus guidelines on the use of intravenous ketamine infusions for chronic pain from the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, the American Academy of Pain Medicine, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2018;43(5):521–46.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Schwenk ES, Viscusi ER, Buvanendran A, Hurley RW, Wasan AD, Narouze S, et al. Consensus guidelines on the use of intravenous ketamine infusions for acute pain management from the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, the American Academy of Pain Medicine, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2018;43(5):456–66.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Deer TR, Mekhail N, Provenzano D, Pope J, Krames E, Leong M, Levy RM, et al. The appropriate use of neurostimulation of the spinal cord and peripheral nervous system for the treatment of chronic pain and ischemic diseases: the Neuromodulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee. Neuromodulation. 2014;17(6):515–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Deer TR, Pope JE, Hayek SM, Bux A, Buchser E, Eldabe S, et al. The Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC): recommendations on intrathecal drug infusion systems best practices and guidelines. Neuromodulation. 2017;20(2):96–132.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Rees J, Abrahams M, Doble A, Cooper A, Prostatitis Expert Reference Group (PERG). Diagnosis and treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a consensus guideline. BJU Int. 2015;116(4):509–25.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Moulin D, Boulanger A, Clark AJ, Clarke H, Dao T, Finley GA, Canadian Pain Society, et al. Pharmacological management of chronic neuropathic pain: revised consensus statement from the Canadian Pain Society. Pain Res Manag. 2014;19(6):328–35.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gilron I, Carr DB, Desjardins PJ, Kehlet H. Current methods and challenges for acute pain clinical trials. PAIN Rep. 2019;4:e647.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zaslansky R, Rothaug J, Chapman RC, Backström R, Brill S, Engel C, et al. PAIN OUT: an international acute pain registry supporting clinicians in decision making and in quality improvement activities. J Eval Clin Pract. 2014;20(6):1090–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zaslansky R, Rothaug J, Chapman CR, Bäckström R, Brill S, Fletcher D, et al. PAIN OUT: the making of an international acute pain registry. Eur J Pain. 2015;19(4):490–502.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kirkness CS, McAdam-Marx C, Unni S, Young J, Ye X, Chandran A, et al. Characterization of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty in a real-world setting and pain-related medication prescriptions for management of postoperative pain. J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2012;26(4):326–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Benditz A, Greimel F, Auer P, Zeman F, Göttermann A, Grifka J, et al. Can consistent benchmarking within a standardized pain management concept decrease postoperative pain after total hip arthroplasty? A prospective cohort study including 367 patients. J Pain Res. 2016;19(9):1205–13.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Cook KF, Kallen MA, Buckenmaier C 3rd, Flynn DM, Hanling SR, Collins TS, et al. Evaluation of the validity and response burden of patient self-report measures of the Pain Assessment Screening Tool and Outcomes Registry (PASTOR). Mil Med. 2017;182(7):e1851–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ginsburg PB, Patel KK. Physician payment reform – progress to date. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(3):285–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Clough JD, McClellan M. Implementing MACRA: implications for physicians and for physician leadership. JAMA. 2016;315(22):2397–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    The Final Rule on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Quality Payment Program. https://qpp.cms.gov/docs/CMS-5517-FC.pdf.
  57. 57.
    Tanenbaum AS, Van Steen M. Distributed systems: principles and paradigms. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2007.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Satoshi N. Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system. 2008. https://bitcoin.pdf.
  59. 59.
    World Economic Forum. The future of financial services – how disruptive innovations are reshaping the way financial services are structured, provisioned and consumed. An industry project of the financial services community; 2015.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Division of Pain Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Johns Hopkins Carey Business SchoolBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.Tufts University School of Medicine, Public Health and Community MedicineBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations