Logo

Log In Sign Up |  An official publication of: American College of Emergency Physicians
Navigation
  • Home
  • Multimedia
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
  • Clinical
    • Airway Managment
    • Case Reports
    • Critical Care
    • Guidelines
    • Imaging & Ultrasound
    • Pain & Palliative Care
    • Pediatrics
    • Resuscitation
    • Trauma & Injury
  • Resource Centers
    • mTBI Resource Center
  • Career
    • Practice Management
      • Benchmarking
      • Reimbursement & Coding
      • Care Team
      • Legal
      • Operations
      • Quality & Safety
    • Awards
    • Certification
    • Compensation
    • Early Career
    • Education
    • Leadership
    • Profiles
    • Retirement
    • Work-Life Balance
  • Columns
    • ACEP4U
    • Airway
    • Benchmarking
    • Brief19
    • By the Numbers
    • Coding Wizard
    • EM Cases
    • End of the Rainbow
    • Equity Equation
    • FACEPs in the Crowd
    • Forensic Facts
    • From the College
    • Images in EM
    • Kids Korner
    • Medicolegal Mind
    • Opinion
      • Break Room
      • New Spin
      • Pro-Con
    • Pearls From EM Literature
    • Policy Rx
    • Practice Changers
    • Problem Solvers
    • Residency Spotlight
    • Resident Voice
    • Skeptics’ Guide to Emergency Medicine
    • Sound Advice
    • Special OPs
    • Toxicology Q&A
    • WorldTravelERs
  • Resources
    • ACEP.org
    • ACEP Knowledge Quiz
    • Issue Archives
    • CME Now
    • Annual Scientific Assembly
      • ACEP14
      • ACEP15
      • ACEP16
      • ACEP17
      • ACEP18
      • ACEP19
    • Annals of Emergency Medicine
    • JACEP Open
    • Emergency Medicine Foundation
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • Medical Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Awards
    • Authors
    • Article Submission
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
    • Copyright Information

Meet PQRS Goals with the Measure Applicability Validation Process

By Stacie Schilling Jones, MPH | on April 30, 2015 | 0 Comment
Uncategorized
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) requires all eligible professionals (EPs) to successfully report on at least nine measures covering at least three National Quality Strategy (NQS) domains during 2015 to avoid Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) penalties. CMS also recognizes that many clinicians may not have nine measures available to report, so they have devised the Measure Applicability Validation (MAV) program that will allow clinicians to avoid the PQRS penalties while reporting fewer than nine measures or fewer than three quality domains.

You Might Also Like
  • ACEP’s Qualified Clinical Data Registry Helps Physicians Meet PQRS Goals
  • Medicare Final Rule Changes 2015 PQRS Requirements
  • Sign Up Now for 2012 PQRS MOC Incentive Program

NQS Domains

  • Patient and Family Engagement
  • Patient Safety
  • Communication and Care Coordination
  • Population and Community Health
  • Efficiency and Cost Reduction
  • Clinical Effectiveness

How Does the MAV Work?

If an eligible professional reports fewer than nine measures (or three domains), CMS will evaluate the EP’s claims to see if there were any other measures that the EP had at least 15 opportunities to report on during the year, yet they did not report the measure(s). CMS will only look for other reportable measures that belong to the same MAV clusters as the measures already being reported by that clinician. MAV clusters are defined differently depending on the method of reporting/PQRS data submission: claims-based or registry-based.

What Are Cross-Cutting Measures?

In addition to reporting at least nine measures across three NQS domains, if the clinician has at least one face-to-face patient encounter during the year, at least one of their reported measures must come from a short list of “cross-cutting” measures defined by CMS. Successfully reporting nine measures, across three domains, including one cross-cutting measure, satisfies the 2015 PQRS reporting requirements.

Potential Measures for Emergency Care

PQRS Number NQS Domain Quality Measure Title Reporting Mechanism MAV Cluster
PQRS 54 Clinical effectiveness Emergency medicine: 12-lead electrocardiogram
performed for nontraumatic chest pain
Claims, registry Claims: Cluster 4
Registry: none
PQRS 76 Patient safety Prevention of CRBSI: central venous catheter
insertion protocol
Claims, registry Claims: Cluster 12-anesthesiology
Registry: Cluster 24-anesthesiology
Can report 76 alone, not subject to MAV
PQRS 91 Clinical effectiveness Acute otitis externa: topical therapy Claims, registry Claims: Cluster 7
Registry: Cluster 12
PQRS 93 Efficiency Acute otitis externa: systemic antimicrobial therapy—avoidance of inappropriate use Claims, registry Claims: Cluster 7
Registry: Cluster 12
PQRS 187 Clinical effectiveness Stroke and stroke rehabilitation: thrombolytic
therapy (tPA); also known as hospital STK-4
Registry only Registry Cluster: 21
Registry only
PQRS 254 Clinical effectiveness Ultrasound Determination of pregnancy location for pregnant patients with abdominal pain Claims, registry Claims: Cluster 4
Registry: none
PQRS 255 Clinical effectiveness Rh immunoglobulin (Rhogam) for Rh-negative
pregnant women at risk of fetal blood exposure
Claims, registry Claims: Cluster 4
Registry: none
PQRS 317
*cross cutting*
Population and community health Preventive care and screening: screening for high blood pressure and follow-up documented Claims, registry Cross-Cutting
Claims and registry
PQRS 326 Clinical effectiveness Atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter: chronic
anticoagulation therapy; aka hospital STK-3
Claims, registry Claims: none
Registry: none

 

Additional Resources

  • CMS MAV training course
  • List of CMS cross-cutting measures
  • MAV clusters for registry submission
  • MAV clusters for claims-based submission
  • ACEP PQRS website

Emergency Medicine and the MAV Process

  • Eligible providers can still satisfy PQRS and avoid the penalty by reporting on less than nine measures, but would be subject to the MAV process to determine whether they reported on as many measures as are applicable; this will also determine if they could have reported on any cross cutting measures.
  • About 99 percent of emergency providers will not have any Medicare patients that fall into measures 91, 93, 254, and 255 above, so it is highly unlikely that those measures would be counted toward the nine-measure goal for most providers.
  • Emergency physicians should also beware of reporting on any measures outside of their cluster (with the exception of 76 and 317), as reporting additional measures may trigger additional clusters as noted in the table above.
  • On January 19, 2015, CMS released the 2015 MAV process: Claims-based MAV for emergency care = Cluster 4 + 1 Cross-Cutting Measure

Claims-based MAV for Emergency Care

MAV cluster PQRS Number Reporting Mechanism Quality Measure Title
Cluster 4 Emergency care 54 Clinical effectiveness Emergency medicine: 12-lead electrocardiogram performed for nontraumatic chest pain
254 Clinical effectiveness Ultrasound determination of pregnancy location for pregnant patients with abdominal pain
255 Clinical effectiveness Rh immunoglobulin (Rhogam) for Rh-negative pregnant women at risk of fetal blood exposure
+ Cross-cutting 317 Population and community health Preventive care and screening: screening for high blood pressure and follow-up documented

Pages: 1 2 | Multi-Page

Topics: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid ServicesCMSPhysician Quality Reporting SystemPQRSQuality

Related

  • How Emergency Physicians Can Thrive in Value-Based Care Landscapes

    June 24, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • 2025 Physician Reimbursement Update

    October 9, 2024 - 1 Comment
  • October 2024 News from the College

    October 7, 2024 - 0 Comment

Current Issue

ACEP Now: November 2025

Download PDF

Read More

About the Author

Stacie Schilling Jones, MPH

Stacie Schilling Jones is director of quality and health information technology in the public affairs division of ACEP in Washington, D.C.

View this author's posts »

No Responses to “Meet PQRS Goals with the Measure Applicability Validation Process”

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*
*


Current Issue

ACEP Now: November 2025

Download PDF

Read More

Polls

Which topic would you like to see ACEP Now tackle?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive
Wiley
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Use
  • Advertise
  • Cookie Preferences
Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 2333-2603