• MIPS Manual 2017—Quality: The Performance Period for Quality

    Written By: Rebecca Hancock, Flora Lum, MD, Chris McDonagh, Cherie McNett, Jessica Peterson, MD, MPH, and Sue Vicchrilli, COT, OCS

    This content was excerpted from EyeNet’s MIPS Manual 2017.


    In 2017, if you want to score more than 3 points for a quality measure, there is a minimum performance period of 90 consecutive days.

    Why you should consider reporting for more than 90 days:

    • Get ready for 2018. Next year, there is likely to be a 12-month performance period for quality.
    • With IRIS Registry/EHR integration, the reporting burden is low. Since this reporting mechanism uses an automated process to extract the relevant data, submitting 12 months of data might involve the same effort as submitting 90 days.
    • Improve your quality score. You are likely to get a better quality score with a longer performance period—ideally, a full calendar year. For instance, you will boost your chances of meeting a measure’s case minimum threshold of 20 cases. And with some quality measures, a longer performance period may boost your performance rate.

    Why a longer performance period may boost your performance rate. If you use the minimum 90-day performance period for quality, you may be putting yourself at a disadvantage for some quality measures. This is because the benchmarks are based on how clinicians performed over 12 months.

    Example. Suppose you report measure 191: Cataracts: 20/40 or Better Visual Acuity Within 90 Days Following Cataract Surgery. If your performance period is 90 days, patients who undergo surgery at the start of those 90 days will have plenty of time for visual recovery, but those at the end will have very limited time—some might not even get to see you for next-day follow-up. With a longer performance period, a larger proportion of your patients would have ample time for visual recovery.

    ___________________________

    Next: Quality: How You’ll Be Scored

    Note: Meeting regulatory requirements is a complicated process involving continually changing rules and the application of judgment to factual situations. The Academy does not guarantee or warrant that regulators and public or private payers will agree with the Academy’s information or recommendations. The Academy shall not be liable to you or any other party to any extent whatsoever for errors in, or omissions from, any such information provided by the Academy, its employees, agents, or representatives.

    COPYRIGHT© 2017, American Academy of Ophthalmology, Inc.® All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written permission from the publisher. American Academy of Ophthalmic Executives® and IRIS® Registry are trademarks of the American Academy of Ophthalmology®.