6. Care Redesign Case: MD Anderson (TDABC)

MODULE 3 | Section 6 of 8

Care Redesign Case: MD Anderson (TDABC)

CASE STUDY: TIME-DRIVEN ACTIVITY-BASED COSTING (TDABC)

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center is a nationally recognized leader in cancer care located in Houston, Texas. Patients travel from across the US to seek specialized evaluation and care at MD Anderson. According to a 2011 article in the Harvard Business Review, MD Anderson sees more than 30,000 new patients every year, accounting for approximately 20% of cancer care within the Houston region and 1% of cancer care nationally.1

In 2010, MD Anderson introduced time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) to help measure the true cost of cancer-care delivery. Like most major medical centers, MD Anderson had traditionally used a charge-based costs accounting system, which was not felt to accurately reflect true costs of care.

“With impending health care reform set to shift the industry away from fee-for-service reimbursement to bundled or global payments, we needed a cost system that could provide more accurate patient-level costs by condition,” wrote MD Anderson’s Heidi Albright and Tom Feeley.1

The multidisciplinary team of clinicians and internal financial staff members worked to pilot TDABC in the Head and Neck Cancer Center, starting with developing a care delivery value chain. A care delivery value chain charts each of the activities involved in a patient’s care for a medical condition.

Next, the team created process maps that included all resources involved for each segment or location of care.1 For example, each process and resource utilized in the outpatient clinic, radiation therapy, and in chemotherapy administration needed to be mapped. This is a very time-consuming process. The team estimated that each segment of the process map took approximately 40 hours to complete and required multiple team members across disciplines.

ANESTHESIA ASSESSMENT CENTER

Baseline Process | January 2009

They then had to estimate how much time it would take to perform each task and the capacity cost of each health care provider. This work was validated at each step by the frontline personnel who actually perform the tasks.

 

The team then estimated per-patient costs for each process step.

 

To study how this method would work, the group examined the costs in a preoperative assessment center that had implemented two phases of performance improvement initiatives. Using TDABC principles, they showed an overall reduction in time spent by patient and personnel of 33%, which resulted in a 46% reduction in the costs of providing care in the center. The details of these results are presented below.

PROCESS COST

PROCESS TIME (min)

NUMBER OF PREOPERATIVE ASSESMENTS

After the Phase Two implementation period, process cost, process time, and the number of preoperative assessments were measured and compared to the Phase One and Baseline periods. Both cost and process time decreased after both intervention phases, while the number of preoperative assessments increased. This represents a more efficient process for both patients and providers.

ANESTHESIA ASSESSMENT CENTER

Post Phase II Process | March 2012

 
“TDABC, which we have found straightforward to implement, requires a significant time investment to develop process maps for all care areas,” wrote Albright and Feeley. “But this investment has yielded additional benefits by supporting process improvement opportunities and facilitating the standardization of care. Perhaps most important, the new costing approach helps us set priorities for process improvements and measure their cost impact… Through this work, we hope to provide convincing evidence of the health care value that MD Anderson’s integrative cancer treatment strategy actually delivers.”2

REFERENCES

  1. 1- French KE, Albright HW, Frenzel JC, Incalcaterra JR, Rubio AC, Jones JF, Feeley TW. Measuring the value of process improvement initiatives in a preoperative assessment center using time-driven activity-based costing. Healthcare. 2013; 1(3): 136-142.doi: 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2013.07.007

 

  1. 2- Albright HW, Feeley TW. A cancer center puts the new approach to work: pilot. Harvard Business Review. Sept 2011; 89(9): 61-62. http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=47719 

 

  1. 3- Dobson A, DaVanzo J, Doherty J, Tanamor M . A study of hospital charge setting practices. The Lewin Group. December 2005; No. 05-4. http://67.59.137.244/documents/Dec05_Charge_setting.pdf Accessed March 24, 2017.

Leave a Comment