The annual pacprocess show in New Delhi, India, has attracted leading global and local companies to showcase their latest innovations, products and services. The exhibition covers the whole value chain from raw materials to finished products and will highlight the latest technologies and trends that are shaping the future of the food, pharmaceutical and cosmetic industries. The event is attended by senior executives from various industries, including the food and beverage, cosmetics, and industrial goods industries. Aside from showcasing the latest technology and innovations, it also provides an opportunity for the industry to create profitable partnerships.
Stakeholders have different expectations and roles in a collaborative PAC process. Different roles require different approaches. For example, involving patients in the selection of their PAC sites at the end of their stay has been a common practice in the past. Traditionally, case managers would hand over a list of potential PAC providers to patients before leaving the room. Patients may be disappointed or unhappy by unexpected recommendations. This can be addressed by a patient-centered approach.
The report recommends that COPs be restructured with two-tiered regulatory requirements. The basic criteria would apply for PAC providers in all four settings and would be based upon five areas of Medicare Conditions of Participation: services, staffing, quality, safety, and patients’ rights. The report also details major requirements for each of the PAC settings, and acknowledges that they are largely similar. The COPs will assist PAC providers in achieving optimal quality and safety.
The unified post-acute care payment system has been discussed by MedPAC. The panel reviewed a stay-based design of the PAC PPS in its last report. The group concluded that a unified system would establish more accurate payments and increase the equity of payment among beneficiaries’ conditions. The 2019 report also examines the “episode-based” PAC PPS model. This model is more efficient and aligned with provider and patient-centric care, and has fewer drawbacks than the stay-based model.
Another problem was inconsistent data reporting. The report suggests that PAC providers report higher functional status at discharge to show improved quality measures. However, the report acknowledges the difficulty of collecting data from severely impaired PAC patients. To resolve any disagreements between providers, the report recommends that providers use a third party review process. The report also recommends capturing patient-reported outcomes for each PAC setting.