You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

You are using an outdated browser.

To ensure optimal security, this website will soon be unavailable on this browser. Please upgrade your browser to allow continued use of ACP websites.

Cardiac Rehabilitation: Patient Referral from an Outpatient Setting

Percentage of patients evaluated in an outpatient setting who within the previous 12 months have experienced an acute myocardial infarction (MI), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), cardiac valve surgery, or cardiac transplantation, or who have chronic stable angina (CSA) and have not already participated in an early outpatient cardiac rehabilitation/secondary prevention (CR) program for the qualifying event/diagnosis who were referred to a CR program.

Date Reviewed: November 19, 2017

Measure Info

MIPS 243NQF 0643CMS 243NQF Endorsed
Measure Type: 
Process
Measure Steward: 
American Heart Association
Clinical Topic Area: 
Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery
Interventional Cardiology
Myocardial Infarction

Care Setting: 
Outpatient
Data Source: 
Electronic Health Records
Registry

ACP supports QPP measure 243: "Cardiac Rehabilitation: Patient Referral from an Outpatient Setting" because it is clinically important to refer patients who are likely to benefit from rehabilitative services to outpatient therapy centers. While we support this measure, we advise developers to address the following concerns during the update process to improve the measure quality. First, the measure is nearly capped out. Developers cite a 97% performance rate based on data collected from the PINNACLE registry during the 2011 reporting year. However, this data may inaccurately represent national performance rates because it only represents clinicians who chose to participate in the cardiology registry. Second, implementation of this measure could unfairly penalize clinicians who practice in rural areas and who care for medically complex patient populations. Developers should consider revising the specifications to include a risk-adjustment model for patients with multiple co-morbidities, lower socioeconomic status, and limited access to rehabilitative services. Third, while this measure appropriately assesses performance of clinicians participating in the cardiology registry, it is an inappropriate accountability measure for general internists who do not report data in the PINNACLE registry. Lastly, while this measure is appropriately specified to assess the performance quality of clinicians practicing in metropolitan areas, it may not apply well to clinicians practicing in rural settings where patients have limited access to rehabilitative services. Specifications include exclusion criteria for “no rehabilitation program available within 60 minutes from patient home”, but 60 minutes is an unfair expectation. Patients who are faced with significant travel burdens are less likely to adhere to prescribed services.

As part of an ongoing effort to improve user experience, we have made some updates to the Performance Measures section of ACP. Tell us what you think!