For all the activity surrounding value-based care over the past decade, health care is much further behind on value-based contracting than many would think. There are many different types of payment models which lead to inconsistent approaches, numerous metrics, frustration between the health insurance providers and care providers, and hesitancy to adopt value-based models.
When COVID hit, care providers who adopted value-based care more aggressively before the pandemic were more prepared and fared better financially. For example, they were not as impacted by cancelled doctors’ appointments as compared to fee-for-service. The pandemic created a sense of urgency for health insurance providers and care providers to embrace value-based contracts, but there’s still a big barrier to adoption: understanding contract performance. Contracts are limited by inflexible, rudimentary tools that stifle transparency between the two groups.
We can start by addressing contracting processes to make value-based contracting as seamless and organized as it should be. To move forward, we need to improve the relationship between health insurance providers and care providers. One way to do that is by making it easier for health insurance providers to engage their provider networks to collaborate on risk-based reimbursement models.
Attendees will learn about:
- The types of value-based contracts holding the greatest potential for transforming payments and quality, such as two-sided risk alternative payment models
- Why care providers who moved to value-based contracts fared better than those with fee-for service models during the pandemic and will do so moving forward
- How to simplify the complexities of contract performance and improve the payer-provider relationship