All right. I think we are ready to get started. Welcome, everybody, to Using MedAccess Big Picture Trends to Program-Specific Data. My name is Lori Walsh. I'm the Executive Vice President of Member Services and Operations. I will kick us off this afternoon, and then Karen Wilson, who is our Vice President of Member Services, will close us out. Just a couple of quick technical issues related to the webinar. Julie, if you'll go to the next slide for us, the chat will have the link to these slides. If you joined late, Julie will be adding them a couple of times throughout the webinar. In the Q&A, as you can see down there at the bottom, all questions related to technical help or questions related to the data that Karen and I present today, please add those to the Q&A section at the bottom of your screen. I will let you know that we're having a little bit of technical difficulty today. Karen is on the phone and also on her computer. Julie is running the slides for us because Karen's internet has gone out a couple of times. If it does, her face will go off the screen, but she's going to keep talking because she is on her phone. Fingers crossed over the next 57 minutes that we won't have any issues. All right. Why don't we go ahead and get started. Next slide, please, Julie. All right. Our goals for today are to really highlight the key data trends from 2022. Let's talk a little bit about MedAccess is more than just a PDF report and the interactive tool for care transformation, as well as some fantastic changes that we have made to MedAccess over the last several months. Several of you that are on the webinar today joined us in Orlando for the MedOx in spring conference. Karen and I did go through some of this information. Then we have some updated data to go through today, as well as a couple of additional new features. We are very excited about that. If you have the slides from Orlando, this will be a good compare and contrast as we move on to the next slide. All right. One more, Julie. All right. This first slide we're looking at here is typical data for MedAxium, the program designated physician FTE per 1,000 active patients. Again, you can see that trend over five years. One of the things that Karen is going to show later is the ability for you to change that date range whenever you're doing the data review with your teams. This is the static PDF. As I said at the beginning, the interactive database is really the tool that's most beneficial to our members. Just to orient you to this slide, again, you can see the program count from 2018 to 2022. We are currently at 122 programs that have submitted data to us with panel size. As we go from measure to measure, again, we'll talk about this later on, but the denominator can be changed from 1,000 active patients to program designated physician to program designated clinician. There's a couple of different denominators. You're going to see that program count change when we look at these different measures for a number of reasons. Number one is not every program does everything. If you don't have any EP physicians in your program and we're looking at ablations for FTE physician, that number's going to be, the program count's going to be a little lower. For new patients, return visits, those kind of things, echoes, most of our members are doing those traditional E&M and traditional bread and butter work. Again, you're going to see that number change. This particular number at the spring conference was about 114. Since then, we've added eight additional programs to the MedAccess database. Again, the interactive database is your best bet because we are continuing to add data throughout the year. As you can see, we closed out 2021 with 161 programs for this measure. Obviously, our goal would be to be above that for 2022. Next slide, Julie. The next one here is advanced practice providers per 1,000 active patients. Same thing oriented from the same orientation as a previous slide. That was physicians. This is APPs. You can see here the average and median are fairly close together, but the median there is 0.34 FTE APPs per 1,000 active patients. That has not changed from 20. Really, you can see we're at 0.32, 0.31, 0.34, not a major change over the last couple years. Next slide. This is program designated providers. This is combining your FTE physician and your FTE APP into a single number there. We're at 0.9, 0.86, nearly one FTE provider per 1,000 active patients. Next slide. Panel size. Again, we talked a lot about the panel size being a denominator within the MedAccess database. For MedAxiom, we use the traditional primary care definition for panel, which is a unique E&M encounter per 18 months. If you were an EKG only or an echo only, something like that, that would not be included in this panel count. This says inpatient, outpatient, E&M encounters. Regardless of how many times the patient was seen, we're only counting once per program. That's really important because a lot of you guys track panel size per physician, which is perfectly fine. Just as a reminder, Ms. Smith could have been seen by your general cardiologist, then referred to EP, and then referred to a heart failure physician within your practice. For this measure, we are only counting Ms. Smith one time. In your practice, each of those physicians may be counting her in their panel. As we look at trends there, we've seen that slight uptick over the last couple years. Nothing major, but again, as most of our members tell us day in and day out, the N is full. It's pretty hard for them to see any additional patients within their current schedule. Not surprised to see that the panels are staying pretty stable over the last couple years. Next slide. This one is total new patient visits, office, HOPD, inpatient, telehealth, so all comers for new patients to your practice per 1,000 active patients. Again, slight uptick there in the median. The average is pretty similar to last year, maybe a slight decrease. Again, we would like to see that mean and median right on top of each other. As that panel grows for more and more of our folks submitting data, and we get closer to that 160 mark like we were in 2021, I venture to guess that that average and that median will be right on top of each other. Next slide. This is outpatient and new patient. Again, same concept. You can see there a slight decrease both in the mean and median from 21 to 22, pretty close together there. Again, that's just telling us that everyone is struggling to see more new patients in their practice. That doesn't surprise me at all. Now, one thing that you can do I think that's important is take the same measure and change the denominator from 1,000 active patients to per FTE physician or per FTE provider and see if you're looking at an increase or decrease in your practice per FTE physician. Karen's going to show you later, but you can also look at that by physician, not just by the practice, which I think is an important measure as well. Next slide. Here, this is just return office visits. Again, a slight uptick from 21 to 22 there. I would encourage you to do the same thing here. This is telling us how often are we seeing 1,000 patients. For the average practice, they're seeing them at 1,100 visits per 1,000 active patients in that 18-month period. They're seeing them a little bit more than one time in that 18-month period. This is another one that you can look at per physician or per provider as well to give you a different perspective. Next slide. This is our question that we get asked all the time, the percent of new patients to total encounters, total E&M encounters in the practice. Total new to total new in return. Right now, on average, we're at about 17.5. The median is 16 there. Again, I think as that number goes up, we're going to see those come closer and closer together. As a reminder, the last couple of slides, the program count was at 122 because we were looking at panel size. Panel is not involved here. This is just an E&M ratio, and we're up to 139. That tells us currently we have 17 programs that have submitted data to MedEx that did not submit panel size. Once again, look at the data differently. It's going to tell you something different every time you change that denominator. Again, I think it's important for you to see here, this is the percent of new patients in your practice. Our 75th and 90th percentile practices are going to be over 20%, some closer to 25%. I think it's important, again, for you to look at your practice and see where you are. If your goal is to increase the new patient encounters because of growth in your market, then I think it's important for you to compare yourself here to what your peers are doing. Next slide. This is a percent of outpatient E&M to total E&M. On average, our programs are about 71.5%, 72%, 73% outpatient E&M to total E&M, which for the most part, I would say is not a surprise. The only time we see that number much lower is for our practices and our programs that have a large inpatient service. They may have a cardiac hospitalist program or something similar. That number would be a lot lower for them. For the most part, many of our practices, E&M are majority outpatient. Next slide. This is total CAHPS for 1,000 active patients. As you guys can see, this number really is declining year over year. From 19, it jumped up from a median. Sorry, it stayed the same from 19 really to 20 and 21, and then it's started to decline. Then the median there is from 71 in 19 down to 63 in 22. Again, these are the number of CAHPS that you're performing per 1,000 active patients. As we know, we have a lot of different modalities now and clinical pathways for diagnosing patients that it's not cardiac CAHPS. I think over time, we're going to continue to see this slowly decline. No major shift, but a slow decline over the next couple of years. We may see a leveling out over time. Next slide. All right. This is a total CAHPS of total new patients. Again, a little bit of a gap there in our mean and median, but we're looking at 19 to 21 percent of total CAHPS of total new patients in the practice. Next slide. All right. This is total ECHOs. This number had grew a little bit from, again, when we were in Orlando to where we are today. We're at 115 practices that are doing ECHOs and submitted their panel size to us. Again, on average, we're doing ECHOs on about half of our active panel size per 1,000. Next slide. Then here, total PCIs per 1,000. Again, you can see there that program count on every single one of these slides is changing. This is a perfect example. Not every program does PCI. Obviously, we only had 105 programs that submitted PCI data in 2022. Again, we're seeing a slight decline over time. That mean and median are getting closer together as well. Next slide. I pulled this one out because I thought it was important for our members to see the event and Holter monitors. We know we've got a lot of different options now for monitoring our patients outside of the practice, a lot of new technology and solutions that we are bringing to our members. You can see here we've really had an uptick from 20 to 21 and 22 in the number of event and Holter monitors per 1,000 active patients. In 2018, we were at about 87, 81 depending on average and the median. Now, we're up to almost 120 per 1,000 patients. We predicted that number is going to continue to rise over the next several years as new technology arises. Next slide. This is ICD checks per 1,000. Again, this number is lower because not every practice that's a member of MedAxium that submits data does ICD checks in their practice. We're at 100 members that submitted data and about 88 to 77, again, looking at that average and the median. Hopefully, those numbers will get closer together as we see more data. Stay, we had a little bit of an uptick in the average last year, but for the most part, those numbers are staying pretty steady. Next slide. Pacemaker checks, again, a pretty significant increase from 21 to 22 for our members. Next slide. All right. We've got a couple more of these. I'm going to turn it over to Karen, but this is one that total ablations per 1,000 active patients. We continue for the last three years to see a continued slight growth and the ablations per new patient are showing an even more significant growth. Again, I think that's just changes in medical management versus procedure on our AFib patients. Again, this is one where I'd like to see the mean and median closer together as we get more data throughout the year. All right. Next slide. This is one that we're always looking at and Karen's going to show some additional detail related to provider worker reviews later in the presentation. Again, on average here, you're seeing an increase, a slight increase, but an increase in the average from 21 to 22. Again, that mean and median are very close together. From 20 to 21, we saw a pretty significant jump. If you look at on the left-hand there, the graph itself, we actually went from about 6,320 to almost 7,200 in 2022. Continuing to see additional worker reviews per active patient. All right. Next slide. Then finally, this will just be my plug before I turn it over to Karen for total clinical FTE. MedAxium collects data on all staffing levels related to the practice. This measure just happens to be clinical FTE. So what clinical staff does it take per 1,000 active patients? Again, we get asked this question a lot. How many MAs, LPNs, RNs, APPs? How many clinical staff members do I need cardiac techs to take care of my patients? Another measure we have is non-clinical staff. So my front desk staff, my billing staff, my medical records folks, answering the phone. How many of those do I need per active patient or per FTE physician? Those are all data points that we have in Med Access. And you can see the number is low. We're only at 33 programs that have submitted so far this year. And we'd love to get that closer to 50, 75 so we can share that data with our members because that information is very important to all of our members. So, all right. I think that is my last data slide, Julie. Yes. All right. So I'm going to go off camera and turn it over to Karen to talk about some new things we've got. Thank you. And I'm going to start on camera. As Lori said, I'm having some internet issues. So if I freeze up, I may just stay off camera to help save some of my internet speed capacity issues. So as Lori shared, obviously those big picture tips are great and the trends are great, but really the true secret sauce of Med Access is when you enter your own data and you go in and you explore that data and you dive even deeper. So I'm going to go ahead and show you some tips, some new tools that we have. Lori mentioned some new denominators and measures that we have. And then I'm going to use all of those kind of together and dive down and give you some examples of how you might look in at your own data. Next slide. So starting with some tips, we get asked a lot about what the definitions are for the measures that are within Med Access. So we went under a huge project and we have updated all of the definitions for all of those measures. If you're in the benchmarking tab, which is the one I'm showing you here, and you go to that question mark and click on that, you'll see the box pop up as it is here on the screen. So you'll see the sum here of the CPT codes that are included for the particular measure. We also put the definition for the denominator. So we're going to talk a lot about changing denominators. And as you change that denominator, you're able to see the definition for that denominator as well. In addition, one of the things that we added is underneath the graph there, you'll see the year over year change. So below this benchmarking view, you're able to see the trending years that are similar to what Lori was just showing in the previous slide. But here, what we've added is a year over year change. So without even scrolling down and looking at those trending graphs, you can see how the measure has changed from last year. So here you'll see for new patient office visits and consults, the average went up by four per physician. The median actually went up 33. So just a quick visual with those areas so you can see what the change was. The other tip that I love, one of my favorites to use on this screen is that color by over there on the left. This used to be kind of hidden so that you couldn't really see it as easily. We pulled it out so that you could use it for multiple ways so you can compare some of the different filters by color. So on the next slide, we show I have now changed from that program level to the provider level. This is actually my favorite way to look at the color by. I'm showing the my provider. So if I've submitted data, I'm now looking at a sample practice, but I'm looking at my providers. I've turned on that color by feature and now I can see within my program how my physicians of various subspecialties compare. So I can see my invasive physician versus my EP versus my interventionalist and I can see if there's any trends or some similarities within those subspecialties. The other really helpful thing with this feature is that you when you first get your data, it's a great way to go in and make sure that we have your physicians classified correctly by subspecialty, which is obviously very important. Next slide. So another feature, this one isn't necessarily new, but I want to make sure that everybody knows it's available. This is a game changer for me as a person who spent hours cutting and pasting slides for presentations to leadership and physicians and board meetings. We now give you the ability right within the tool of Med Access to build your own PowerPoint slides. So if you click on that cog wheel and then you click on PowerPoint, you will see all of the measures that you have selected that you've been viewing and you can choose whether or not you want to put them into PowerPoint by checking that box. You can choose whether or not you want to see just the benchmarking graphs or if you want to see the benchmarking and the trending graphs. And then you also, what is new, you now have the ability to change the denominator. So previously it defaulted to the same denominator for all of the measures that you were looking at. Now you have the ability within that tool when you're building your PowerPoint presentation to select the denominator that you want to use. So a lot of times you don't want to look at the same denominator. In fact, I think we would argue that you shouldn't look at the same denominator all the time. So this gives you the ability to choose that denominator and then put it into that PowerPoint presentation. Next. So Lori mentioned the PDF reports. We've gone through various ways of getting these to you, but now we're going to stress that you get those reports from Med Access itself. You'll see there on that page where the report tab is circled, that's where you will find them. The benefit of going into Med Access and pulling your own PDF reports is that these reports are refreshed every week. So every time we add new programs and get new data and those benchmarks are tweaked to reflect that larger sample size, those reports are going to be updated as well. So if you go into that tab, you select standard reports, you'll see they're the ones that are available. At the time of CBT, we only had the key indicators up. We provide them now to you by panel and by physician and definitely encourage you to look at both. But we've been adding books to these as well. So now you can go in and you could look at your access book, which is going to give you all of the measures related to E&M codes, both inpatient and outpatient and all the related ratios as well. There's one for electrophysiology. So all of your measures related to EP and devices and all of the related procedures are going to be in that EP book. And then the staffing, revenue and expenses book is available now as well. So we will continue to add books there. So you can look for those and we'll make announcements about those as they become available. But just wanted you to know where you could find those. So another question we get asked a lot, or at least when I was presenting data, I would get asked, how did they get that? What is the math? What are the CPT codes included? So just so you know, we don't keep any secrets. We keep all of the data and the formulas available for you within Med Access. So going back to that cogwheel and selecting formula, that formula box that I've highlighted on the screen pops up. And once you've submitted data, not only can you see all of the CPT codes as well as what goes into the denominator, you can also see the raw data that we have for your program that was submitted. So you can see the numbers there as well. So this is incredibly helpful to see how we got to where you were benchmarking on those graphs. And then what we added this year, if you go to the next slide, we now also have a custom formula. We did have this for just a couple of measures before. We've now made it available for all of the measures. So if you go into custom formula, underneath formula, you now have the ability to select specific CPT codes or portions of that measure that you want to benchmark. So in this example, this is I'm still on new patient office visits and consults. I know we have some members that internally track new patients without those consult codes. So if you wanted the Med Aspiam benchmark to reflect what you're tracking internally, you could go into this custom formula. You could select just those 99215, 201 to 205. Make sure you select your denominator. You also have to enable it. So check that enable box. And once you apply that math and take note here, the median is 394 without that math applied. And as we go to the next slide, you'll see the math is now applied. So the median now drops to 362 because we have taken out those consultation codes. You'll see below the graph, we tell you that a custom formula is in place and which CPT codes are actually included. The other thing to note is if you go to another measure, say you go to total new patients, this custom formula is still going to apply. So it's still going to keep just those new patient codes that you selected previously and it's going to apply those to other measures that have those same codes. So it will stay that way until you go back into the custom formula and turn that off. So on the next slide, I drilled down just even further. This came up during CBT when we were talking about some of the revenue cycle, things that we could look at, and then also making those available within MedAccess and just the different levels of coding. So if you wanted to go in and see how your program compared to others, just with certain levels, a level four, a level five for new patient or even return visits and just see how that compares, you can use that custom formula tool and go in and just, I selected for this one, just your level five new patient code. And you can see now how your program would compare to all of the others. The other thing that we do have available is a percent. So one of the measures is a percent. So you could see what the percent of level five is for all of yours. You also, at the top there, their riskometer is over toward the right-hand side of that slide. That's another great way to look at some of your revenue cycle opportunities as far as levels of coding and how your patient levels compare to others. So just a few things to keep in mind if that's something you're particularly interested in drilling down into. Next one. So the filter comparison, this is brand new. So never before have we had a way within MedAccess to show different filter categories on the same graph over time. So now you can. When you look at these graphs and you use these tools, this will look similar to how we sometimes will show graphs in our annual comp and production survey, where we are showing trends over time for certain filtered categories. So just to then give an example of how you might use this, this is at the program level. And I'll give you a provider level example in a minute. So at the program level, you'll see the different filters that you can turn on to use the tool. So for this particular example, I use the program ownership model. So looking on the same graph at how our integrated and our private members compare for this measure. And then you need to pick a statistic. So a lot of times when we're doing reports or webinars, we'll pick the 50th percentile or the median. So I have that selected there, but you could choose another one that you were interested in. And then once you hit apply, the graph is what you see. So you can see over time how those two categories compared to each other. It was interesting in 2022, our private groups actually saw 65 more new patient visits per physician FTE than our integrated groups. But if you look at it, the number actually went up for our integrated groups. So in 21, they were at 352 that went up to 375. And the number for our private groups actually went down slightly. So depending on which you are, that's something that you might want to look at and see how your program compared to that. Next slide. So this is going to give an example of that same tool, that filter comparison tool, but looking at the provider level. So you'll see I've highlighted there with the arrow, I switched to all providers. Once you're at the provider level, that's where you have the ability to compare data by subspecialty. And this is one that we get asked about a lot. It's one that we typically will put in that annual production survey where we're comparing some specialties. So I've picked subspecialty as my filter, and then I'm still at the 50th percentile for my statistics. And the graph that comes from that is showing each of the subspecialties, showing for this one, I picked WRVUs. That's the common one we look at by subspecialty. And you can see how those compare to each other over time. You could also turn this on and look at it by your private and your integrated differences as well. What struck me on this is that all subspecialties increased between 2021 and 2022, but it also appears they all increased pretty much at about the same rate, which was interesting. Next slide. So another new thing, if you completed your FTE worksheet and submitting data this year, that you noticed, we had a new category that you could pick when you were filling it in for your providers, and that was new and ramping physicians. We get asked a lot of questions about new and ramping physicians. What's their comparable comp? What should I expect their production to be? What should I expect their visit volume to be? And so we added that this year to provide that information. So I used that same filter comparison tool. I picked WRVUs for the subspecialties, but I filtered by new or ramping physicians. So we don't have the pretty graph on this one because we've only done it for 2022. But here you can see the differences in WRVUs for the various subspecialties. And you could apply and use this tool and choose that filter for any of those things I mentioned, comp or volume or procedures or anything like that. So a new addition to MedAccess this year. Next. So I'm going to go into now some of those new measures and denominators that we mentioned and show you how you might use them. So looking at subspecialty per 1,000 active patients, looking at the clinic-based and hospital-based APPs, because we're collecting that information now, and then showing you how you might want to use the clinical calculated versus the designated FTE numbers and how you can look at the denominators differently for those. So we'll look at a couple of examples now. So Lori, I already mentioned patient panel and the importance of patient panel and using patient panel to benchmark your program in addition to looking at that physician by physician number. So a couple of years ago, we typically always looked at the number of patients per physician. But a couple of years ago, we flipped that because we get asked a lot, how many physicians should we have? And there's no right answer. But with the thousands of physicians that we have represented in MedAccess and literally millions of patients, what we can provide are some benchmarks over time of what that might look like. The number of physicians per 1,000 active patients. So this is something that we put into place and started using a couple of years ago. So in 2022, the median was a 0.55 physician FTE per 1,000 active patients. You'll see there that year-over-year change. So it did go down slightly from last year, which makes sense to other things we've said already as far as the physicians taking care of more patients. So on the next slide, what we added this year was the ability to look at that same measure but drill down by subspecialty. Because in addition to how many physicians, we also get asked, well, what mix of physicians do I need? How many EPs do I need? How many eventualists do I need? So we've added that capability to benchmark subspecialty by patient panel. So this is a little busy, but I know you're all going to want to do this for your own program. So I've mapped it out for you. This is how you select measures within MedAccess. So you go over on the left side. You want to select your measure set. You want to go then to your book and section, which is where we have all of the measures categorized there. So hopefully you can find the ones that you're looking for by category. From there, I've selected program denominators. That's where everything related to our physicians and APPs and panel are going to live. From there, you select providers, and there in step five, you'll see those subspecialties pop up. So once you select those, they show up over there on the right side on your measure list. You click on apply measure set, and now we'll be able to see these measures in the tool. And if we go to the next slide, we're going to see an example for EP. So I picked EP because this is one that we get asked for a lot. So, and you'll see, we have options here as well. So the denominator is per 1,000 active patients. So the median EP number per 1,000 active patients is almost a 0.1. So if you had as a program, a patient panel of 10,000 patients, that would be about one EP per 10,000 patients. So you can use that if you have a projection of what your patient panel is, or is going to grow to, that's where you can apply some of these benchmarks. And then if you go to the next slide, we're going to show that same number, but now it's a percent. So if you're a program that has a mix of subspecialties, the median is about 16% EP in your mix of various subspecialties. You'll see there, we do have member programs that are all EP. So that's why those seven on the left side are a hundred percent, they're all EP programs. So I'm going to use this as an opportunity to show you how to use the outlier tool. So we go to the next slide. So this is the outlier tool. Use this with caution, but it does give you the ability to take out some of those outliers. So here I've removed those seven all, all EP groups. And so you'll see that the actual, the average changes, the median change, all those benchmarks are going to change because I've removed the all EP groups from the subset. So that's just a way that you can use that outlier tool if that would be helpful. All right, let's go to the next slide. So clinic and hospital-based APPs, you get to it the same way that you got to those subspecialties for a physician. So going into the book and section and the provider and then clicking on the APPs, you'll see there that I've selected to show you the clinic-based APP per physician. And then I pulled out the other ones so you could see how they compare. So in the graph that Lori shared previously, it was about a 0.64 APP per physician, which has increased slightly over the years. If you drill down now, and we do ask when you submit your FTE worksheet that you submit a percent time for the time that your APPs spend in the clinic and then the hospital. And it might be a mix, it might be all or one or the other. So for clinic-based APPs, it's a 0.37 per physician. For hospital-based, it's a 0.25 per physician. And then on the next slide, you can also use those now as denominators for some of the measures. Obviously it doesn't make sense for all of them, but in this particular example, this is return visits. And so for return visits, we have that clinic-based APP FTE denominator as an option. Obviously they don't see all of the return visits in your practice, but it's gonna give you a measure and a way to say, well, we have this many clinic-based APPs in our practice and this is how they are supporting those return visits as an example. If you wanted to look at some of your inpatient E&M codes, we would have the hospital-based APP denominator as an option there. Next slide. All right, so now clinical calculated formula and how we would use that in measures. We have had a lot of academics members join MedAxiom over the last few years, which we are thrilled about. With that, they obviously have a lot of physicians that are doing things other than seeing patients. So on the FTE worksheets now, we ask you to provide the percent time that your physicians and your APPs, well, APPs are clinic versus hospital-based. For your physicians, we ask you to estimate the percent time that they are clinical, admin, research, and education. And so with that information, we are now able to benchmark and use that clinical calculated FTE number in the measure. So for this particular example, I'm at the program level. I've selected clinical calculated physician FTE as my denominator. Going back to that question mark, you'll see that that definition now is included. So we know what that definition is for this particular denominator. And then I've also turned on the formula so that you can see how we're calculating that. So for this particular example, the practice had almost 58 FTEs designated, but 87% of that time was clinical. So we applied that percentage to that initial FTE number and get the new clinical calculated designation. So now when you turn and you use this as your denominator, your volume is being divided by that clinical calculated number and not just the designated FTE. So that's just one example. That's how it works at the program level. You can also use this at an individual physician level. So on the next slide, you'll see that those blue bars that we've been showing have become very skinny. And that's because these now all represent a physician. For my sample practice, my physicians are in the red. I've selected that per clinical calculated physician FTE. And what that does, you'll see highlighted in red and circled there on the left. We are adjusting that FTE for the percent clinical time. So this is kind of a more apples to apples comparison. If you have physicians that are not purely clinical, it allows you to turn this on and look at them with that as your denominator. So if you kind of visually keep track of where those red bars are falling, and we're going to switch to the next slide. This is a program adjusted at, it's taking that FTE designated number, but it's reflecting a 1.0 FTE. So if you were a 0.75 FTE in this particular view, it's going to adjust that volume. So you're similar to other physicians that were at a 1.0. And then there's a third way that we can look at this. I know this is a lot, but if we switch to the next slide, there's no denominator. This is the historical way. This is the way that we have traditionally shown the data. So you can go back to this as you like. We just wanted you to see the options. This would be no denominator. So this would be the actual volume per physician that you submit. What I would caution here though, is that you go in and personally, I like to just compare full-time if I know I'm looking at full-time physicians, and you'll see that in the filters below, selecting full-time so that you kind of get a more apples to apples comparison that way. So really there's three options. There's the no denominator where we're not adjusting anything. We're just giving you the data that was submitted. There's the per program designated at the provider level that's gonna adjust to that 1.0 FTE. And then there's the clinical calculated FTE that's going to adjust for the percent clinical. So a lot of options, always encourage you to look at multiple and compare. And it really depends on the question that you're asking, what the most appropriate denominator might be. All right, next one. So kind of putting all of this together, looking at the same measure with different denominators, this is using the comparison tab that's within MedAccess. A lot of times we would use this to compare different measures and see if there was any correlation with those measures. But what I've started doing is looking at the same measure and then looking at the different denominators and seeing what some of the differences or similarities might be. So this is going back to our total number, So this is going back to our total new patient visits. In that first graph, I'm looking at per program designated physician, and you'll see this particular group is at 445 per physician which put them at the 13th percentile. But this is that group that had that 87% clinical time. So once you turn on that clinical calculated physician at the program level, they bump up. So now they're at the 20th percentile with 509 per physician. But then look at the patient panel. So when we turn on the patient panel denominator, we see a pretty big difference in benchmarking between their percentile per physician, either way you look at it, and then at the patient panel. And when you see a difference like that, that warrants diving a little bit deeper. So this is what we taught you to go into the tool and dive a little into the data. So going to the next slide, that's that same panel. So it made me think of panel sizes. And so I pulled in panel size and you'll see compared to ReadyAlts, they have a relatively lower number of... And together. So looking at your per physician, looking at per panel, what other questions might that bring in? And then kind of going from there, and I'm gonna give you an example of that. So next slide. So this is specifically looking at EP and ablations. This is one we get asked for a lot. And so I thought I would use it as an example. So the first one is looking at the number of ablations per physician FTE. And this particular group, they did 34 per physician, which put them at the 79th percentile. I went and checked, they have 13 FTE physicians. So then I looked at the total ablations per 1,000 active patients. And again, saw a little bit of a discrepancy in the benchmarking percentile. So patient panel, they're at 11 per 1,000 active patients, which put them at the 45th percentile. So then I thought, well, let's look at patient panel. Let's see how many patients this program is caring for. And so when we pull in patient panel, they're a high patient panel per physician on average group. So 3,000 patients per physician puts them at the 88th percentile. So here I have a fairly high number per physician. I have not such a high percentile when I'm looking at patient panel. Is there some opportunity there given that they're taking care of a larger number of patients per physician? So we go to the next slide. This is where you can dive a little bit deeper. This is going in now at the provider level, because I thought, well, let's look at their EPs. Let's see how many ablations individually their EPs are doing. And so we have two EPs in this group of 13. One's at the 95th percentile, one's at the 42nd percentile. Obviously, if this was your program, you would understand those differences much better than I would just looking at numbers, but it gives you something at benchmark. I would also pull new patient and return patients for these physicians just to see what their work is in other areas and in the clinic as well. And so we go to the next slide. I wanted to pull in that new measure. I wanted to see what their EPs were per 1,000 active patients and here you'll see there on the right-hand of that scale. So 17th percentile for the number of EPs per 1,000 active patients. So this is where you start to look and think, is this a program we want to grow? Are we happy with how it is? What do we need to look at further? The other thing I decided to pull in was APPs. So the next slide, I was curious if they had any APP support for their EPs because we collect that now as well. And so I used my color by, I looked at their APPs and noticed that they're all general cardiology. So maybe they don't designate them or they don't have that as a subspecialty, but again, more questions, something that you might want to look at. So this is just an example of kind of how you can put all of those things that we've talked about, the different denominators, using the different tools, using the filters, using the color by, putting all of those together to help you ask and answer questions and maybe make some changes. So next slide. So we would encourage you to take advantage of MedAccess. Hopefully this has helped convince you to do that. If you have submitted data, we would encourage you to schedule a session with member services, myself or Willa or Julie to go over your data with you. Lori as well, if you don't know who your member services representative is for your program, just email us at membership at MedAxium.com and we will definitely get you to the right person and we will definitely get you to the right person and take care of you. Hopefully we've encouraged you to use the tool and dive in and ask questions. But if maybe we've convinced you that you want to submit data and you haven't done that, it is never too late. And if you have moved into our tiered pricing for 2023, we do give a discount for participating in MedAccess. So you want to make sure you take advantage of that as well. And then finally, if you have been wanting to submit data and you haven't done it yet, this is where you go. So MedAccess homepage there, you'll see that green button, submit annual survey data. You can click on that and it shows you step-by-step all of the processes and gives you the worksheets that you need to do that. And then we also added a video this year that you can watch and that walks you through the process as well. And we are always happy to jump on a call with you and answer questions with member services or in conjunction with our IT team, anything we can do to help you, we are happy to do. So with that, any questions? I haven't been watching the box. So if anything has been popping up. Yeah, a couple of questions came up and I'm not sure, it looks like the filter comparison has not shown up for some people. So I've shot an email off while we're talking over to tech support to help us with that. And we'll do a reply back to everybody that registered for this webinar. So we can let you know if that issue was resolved. I also put in a chat that, sorry for the technical difficulties today. If something got lost in translation or you just kind of got lost somewhere in the middle of us talking about it, that is totally okay. As Karen said, we're always happy to answer questions. We are happy to do one-on-one training for anybody. This is a tool that the interactive database as Karen has shown is so much more powerful than the static PDF files. So the PDFs are fine as a first step, right? But when you really wanna answer additional questions, the interactive database is there for you. So anyway, I'm gonna pause Karen, any other final comments before we see if anyone has any questions? I don't think so. I know it's a lot. It's a lot to look at and kind of have all in front of you at one time. So that's why we're here to help. Well, and I will just say, I think most of you know that Karen and I both were in member organizations before we came to work for MedAxium. And we use this data all the time. I have been using MedAxius data for almost 20 years. I don't wanna say that out loud, it makes me feel really old. But so we want you to understand the data so you can use it in your operations. It's very important and it's very powerful. So again, if you're new to MedAxium or new to MedAccess and have questions, and even our members have been around a long time, a lot of these new features are new to you. So please reach out to us, we wanna help. We love, this is the best part of our job is to help our members and help you take your data and answer questions about your program. So that's very important to us. All right, I don't see any questions. So everybody, you've got our contact information here. Karen, thank you. Julie, thank you for being our tech support on the backside of this webinar. This was recorded, it will be posted in the Academy On Demand in a couple of days. So you will have the ability to go back and watch this again if you didn't get to jump on at the beginning of the hour. So if no other questions, I think we'll let everybody have three minutes back. Great, thank you. Thank you, everybody.

MedAccess

data management tool

overview

interpret data

benchmark program performance

new measures

denominators

clinical calculated formula

program performance