CAHPS for MIPS Clinician/Group Survey
Getting timely care, appointments, and information; How well providers communicate; Patient’s rating of provider; Access to specialists; Health promotion & education; Shared decision making; Health status/functional status; Courteous and helpful office staff; Care coordination; Between visit communication; Helping to take medications as directed; and Stewardship of patient resources.
ACP does not support QPP measure 321: “CAHPS Clinician & Group Surveys (CG-CAHPS)-Adult, Child.” Survey results provide important feedback and enhance the provider selection process for consumers. However, implementation could promote overuse of unnecessary treatments where the potential benefits do not outweigh the risk of harms (e.g., opiate prescriptions, imaging studies). While evidence does not support this claim, we base this assumption on our clinical judgement and personal experiences in clinical practice. In addition, developers do not present any evidence to form the basis of the measure. Improving patient experience is an admirable clinical goal; however, we question the validity of the survey process and the impact of survey results on improving patient outcomes. Also, survey results are likely a poor gauge of clinician performance unless a majority of patients participate in the survey. Finally, individual clinicians should not be held accountable to organizational factors beyond their control (e.g., appointment wait times, friendliness of staff).