There Is No Substitute for Experience
There has been a lot of discussion of late from both inside and outside the chemical dependency treatment industry about the need for scientifically collected outcome data. People from outside the industry have begun to question treatment’s claims of effectiveness, and many are starting to demand meaningful data on the efficacy of in-patient treatment. Inside the industry, outcome data has quickly become the hot topic as payers begin to look at ways of evaluating treatment quality as it relates to reimbursement. At conferences and online, everyone is beginning to talk about the need for outcome data.
MAP couldn’t agree more. When MAP was founded in 2011, one of the primary goals was to address this issue. MAP was created to independently collect and examine outcome data from multiple treatment facilities as an unbiased third party. MAP has no vested interest in the outcomes the data shows, which allows for improved transparency and validity in the data collection process. That is what payers are looking for, that is what patients are looking for, and ultimately that is what is best for the industry.
Four years’ worth of data collection on several thousand clients makes MAP the single most experienced voice in the outcomes data conversation. MAP has collected millions of data points on thousands of clients from a growing number of treatment providers and, just as important, MAP has developed a system that maintains frequent contact with clients and their families for a full 12 months after treatment.
MAP has developed proprietary software designed specifically for the collection of outcomes data in the chemical dependency treatment space. Integral to the software is a powerful algorithm which provides real-time risk assessments for each client. Researchers at the Center for the Study of Addiction and Recovery (CSAR) at Texas Tech University have worked with MAP to independently verify the data instruments MAP uses to measure risk and collect outcomes. Under the scrutiny of multiple regression analyses and clinical expertise, MAP has been able to identify exactly which data elements are directly correlated with incidence of relapse.
Everyone in this field wants to improve patient outcomes, and the payers are no exception. MAP is in ongoing discussions with several major commercial payers, critical stakeholders in this process. Understanding the payer perspective on quality measures, reporting and performance based-reimbursement is critical to the data collection process. Providing treatment centers with outcome data components of value to the payer will be of significant advantage as payers are evaluating quality providers both in and out of network.
MAP is glad that the industry is finally embracing the concept of measuring outcomes. Everyone seems to have ideas and opinions on what needs to be collected and just how to do it, but it is important to note that ideas and opinions are no substitute for experience. MAP has the experience.
