Archive for November, 2017

Centreville Physician Receives National Recognition

Centreville Physician Receives National Recognition

john waitsCentreville physician John Waits was the only Alabama physician to be recognized by the National Organization of State Offices of Rural Health’s 2017 Community Stars Program. Dr. Waits was one of 31 honorees during the 2017 National Rural Health Day working tirelessly to improve, protect and advance health and wellness in our rural communities.

Dr. Waits is Chief Executive Officer and faculty physician at Cahaba Medical Care in Centreville and was nominated as a 2017 Community Star by Charles Lail of the Alabama Department of Public Health. Below is an excerpt of the information from the awards program:

“From the time we opened in 2004, we decided to never turn away a patient due to an inability to pay. We’ve held to our promise even when unemployment in the area went from 3 percent to 15 percent, and more patients found themselves without insurance.” The words of Dr. John Waits speak to the heart of why he is most deserving of recognition of an outstanding 2017 Community Star!

Dr. Waits is a practicing, board-certified Family Medicine/Obstetrician and leader in the field of innovative, rural health care. He serves as CEO of Cahaba Medical Care and is the Director of the Cahaba Family Medicine Residency Program. He also created Alabama’s only Teaching Health Center, which has a dually accredited family residency program within Cahaba Medical Care. He currently serves as the co-founder and CEO of Cahaba Medical Care Foundation, a Federally Qualified Health Center in rural Bibb County, Alabama.

Dr. Waits is particularly interested in healthcare policy as it relates to women and children (maternal and infant care), the rural poor, health care access, and the care of the uninsured and underinsured. Under his leadership, CMC’s mission to treat people in underserved communities regardless of insurance or financial status is steadfast. He believes that it is critically important to offer patients the highest quality care the team can provide, while also providing the most extensive scope of services possible.

Dr. Waits and the care CMC provides extend beyond the walls of their practice locations. CMC is very active in community service, giving weekend backpack meals to children in three of Bibb County’s schools, with plans underway to expand the program into neighboring Jefferson County. CMC is a ‘no restrictions’ community service organization in that they also provide support to a local food bank and a clothes closet for all those in need, patient or not.

Another notable area of his reach and community benefit results – CMC has expanded into mental health and nutrition, offering counselors and dietitians to community members in need. He and his loyal, equally dedicated team are motivated by the idea of investing in communities, working and partnering with others to try to make people healthier and places better.

Posted in: Members

Leave a Comment (0) →

Capturing Memories with Joseph Wu, M.D.

Capturing Memories with Joseph Wu, M.D.

BIRMINGHAM – Famed American photographer Ansel Adams once said, “A good photograph is knowing where to stand.” Birmingham physician Joseph Wu has found some truly breathtaking places to stand after he discovered his love of photography in medical school.

What began as a hobby in medical school, just playing around with a camera as the unofficial class photographer, as Dr. Wu joked, soon turned into a sense of true adventure when he realized the places his camera could take him…and what memories his photographs would conjure later.

“With each trip I take, I update my website and Facebook page to keep people coming back to see where I’ve been. It’s not to sell my photos. That certainly would not make enough money for me to quit my day job!” Dr. Wu laughed. “It really feels as if I’m bringing memories of these adventures back for others to enjoy as well.”

Dr. Wu is quick to admit that he wasn’t all that interested in learning the mechanics of photography when he first began taking photos. The technical aspects of shutter speed, exposure and aperture were not that interesting to him. After he and his wife married and began traveling to some unexpected places, he realized the stunning landscapes they were seeing together would translate to gorgeous photographs, and it was time he learned how to operate the bells and whistles on his camera.

“We don’t go to your typical, run-of-the-mill vacation places most people do. For our honeymoon, we went to Portugal and since then we’ve been to Patagonia and Norway. We see pictures of places and we think, ‘Oh we HAVE to go there! This is absolutely amazing!’ We’ve been to places that 10 years ago people never traveled to and now have become real tourist destinations. We love to go to the outlying areas people don’t normally go to, so that’s where I like to take my pictures,” Dr. Wu explained.

He honed his photography skills in one of the most unlikely places on the planet. Iceland may not sound like a living postcard, but you’d be surprised. With dramatic landscapes of volcanoes, geysers, hot springs and lava fields, Iceland’s massive glaciers served as the backdrop for Dr. Wu’s first photography workshop.

“I started thinking that if I was going to spend this much time taking pictures, I wanted them to be presentable. This may be a hobby I’d like to improve, even though this can be a very expensive hobby!” he laughed. “After you get into it, with all the cameras and other equipment, it gets pretty expensive because there’s always new and better gear.”

Iceland proved to be an artistic awakening, and he was definitely bitten by the photo bug.

“My first trip to Iceland was way before everyone was deciding to go to Iceland, and now it’s become a vacation destination. I chose a workshop group in Iceland because their photos looked amazing, and their leaders were all pros, but everyone was very approachable. They gave everyone a lot of time and good feedback. Of course, they criticize you, but you’re there to learn. They really want you to get better as a photographer and your work to get better. Once you get there it’s the perfect learning environment. You’re in this beautiful place, and you want to bring this beauty home with you…somehow. It’s not to wow people looking at your social media pages but just to say ‘Hey, this is what I’m seeing, and I want to share it with you.’ Every photograph is a beautiful memory, and I want to share that moment,” he said.

Since then, Dr. Wu and his family have taken many family vacations to some unusual destinations from Canyonlands National Park in Utah and The Palouse in Washington State to more exotic places such as Patagonia, New Zealand, China and the Yukon Territory. Still, he has a bucket list of destinations such as Namibia, Myanmar, Japan and Tasmania. Later this year he has an excursion planned for Antarctica.

To the delight of his patients, the exam rooms in his office at the Simon-Williamson Clinic are filled with some of his favorite photographs from his travels, and they are more and conversation pieces.

“The patients love them! My patients know I love to travel, and they strike up a conversation about where I took the photos and how. So, it gives us something to talk about to break the ice other than why they’re here. It helps build that relationship with my patients. There are some pictures that really resonate with my patients. I have one picture in one of the exam rooms that’s of some old farm equipment. My patients love that picture. They love it! I thought it was cool, but it’s farm equipment!” he laughed. “I have another that’s an old locomotive wheel I took when I was in Minnesota. I took it because I liked the wheel and the stuff coming out of it. I turned it into a black and white picture, and the patients LOVE it! I enjoy sharing these memories with my patients, and they put them at ease when they’re here.”

If you’d like to see more of Dr. Wu’s photos, check out his gallery online at josephwu.smugmug.com, but he’s given us permission to display a few of his favorites below.

Posted in: Physicians Giving Back

Leave a Comment (0) →

Study: Range of Opioid Prescribers Play Important Role in Epidemic

Study: Range of Opioid Prescribers Play Important Role in Epidemic

A cross-section of opioid prescribers that typically do not prescribe large volumes of opioids, including primary care physicians, surgeons and non-physician health care providers, frequently prescribe opioids to high-risk patients, according to a new study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. The findings suggest high-volume prescribers, including “pill mill” doctors, should not be the sole focus of public health efforts to curb the opioid abuse epidemic. The study also found “opioid shoppers,” patients who obtain prescriptions from multiple doctors and pharmacies, are much less common than other high-risk patient groups, suggesting why policy solutions focused on these patients have not yielded larger reductions in opioid overdoses.

“This crisis has been misconstrued as one involving just a small subset of doctors and patients,” said senior author G. Caleb Alexander, M.D., associate professor in the Department of Epidemiology at the Bloomberg School and founding co-Director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness. “Our results underscore the need for targeted interventions aimed at all opioid prescribers, not just high-volume prescribers alone.”

The study, which published on Nov. 29 in Addiction, comes as America’s opioid crisis continues to worsen. Opioids include not only the recreational, poppy-derived drug heroin but also many newer and much more potent synthetic painkillers available by prescription, such as fentanyl and oxycodone. Opioids tend to be highly addictive and when overdosed can stop a user from breathing. Drug overdose deaths in the U.S., which now mostly involve opioids, surged from about 52,000 in 2015 to more than 64,000 in 2016.

Alexander and colleagues have found in previous, smaller-scale studies that a small minority of doctors can account for an inordinately high proportion of opioid prescriptions: just 4 percent of opioid prescribers in Florida, for example, accounted for 40 percent of all opioid prescriptions in that state in 2010.

For this study, he and his team, including first author Hsien-Yen Chang, PhD, an assistant scientist in the Bloomberg School’s Department of Health Policy and Management, examined the relationship between high-volume prescribers and high-risk patients more closely. “While we and others have demonstrated that opioid prescribing tends to be concentrated among a relatively small group of providers, in the current study, we wanted to examine how commonly high-risk patients are prescribed opioids by low-volume prescribers,” Chang said. “We were also interested in whether we could identify systematic differences in the doses and durations prescribed by different groups of doctors caring for the same patients.”

The study covered more than 24 million opioid prescriptions in 2015 by more than 4 million residents of California, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, or Washington, as recorded in a nationwide pharmacy database, QuintilesIMS’ LifeLink LRx.

A key finding was that the high-volume prescribers – those who stayed in the top 5 percent, in terms of total opioid volume, during every quarter of 2015 – were far from being the only prescribers for high-risk patients. Across the five states studied, the remaining, low-volume prescribers accounted for 18 to 56 percent of all opioid prescriptions to high-risk patients, depending on how such patients were defined.

“The point here is that ordinary, low-volume prescribers are routinely coming into contact with high-risk patients, which should be a wake-up call for these prescribers,” Alexander said. “We need to build systems to help prescribers better identify these patients, screen them for opioid use disorders, and improve the quality of their pain management.”

The analysis also revealed “opioid shoppers,” the patient group most commonly thought of as being at high-risk for non-medical use, represent only a small fraction of all opioid users. The researchers defined opioid-shoppers in the study as those receiving prescriptions from more than three prescribers and three pharmacies during any 90-day period. They found this group made up just 0.1 percent of the 4 million patients covered in the study.

“The public health impact of ‘opioid-shoppers’ pales in comparison to that of other high-risk groups we examined,” Alexander said.

The first of these groups, “concomitant users,” were defined as people filling prescriptions for more than 30 days of opioids plus benzodiazepines, a class of tranquilizing drugs that includes Valium and Xanax. Like opioids, benzodiazepines can suppress the nerve signals that sustain breathing. “These two classes of drug interact and enhance each other–they make a dangerous combination,” Alexander said. Nearly one in 10 (9.3 percent) of the opioid prescription users covered in the study were concomitant users.

Chronic high-dose opioid users, comprising 3.7 percent of the total, were another high-risk group that dwarfed the opioid-shopper group. Chronic high-dose users were defined as those filling prescriptions for three months or more for opioids with daily doses equivalent in potency to more than 100 mg of morphine.

The researchers also analyzed prescribers’ prescription patterns and found that, for a group of patients seeing both high- and low-volume prescribers, high-volume prescribers on average prescribed larger doses compared to low-volume prescribers (61 vs. 53 mg morphine equivalents per prescription). Prescriptions from high-volume prescribers also provided about 40 percent more days of supply (22.1 vs. 15.6 days). “Even when the same patients were receiving prescriptions from both low-volume and high-volume prescribers, there was a clear tendency for the high-volume prescribers to provide higher doses for more days of use,” Chang said.

“Our study suggests systematic differences among prescribers. How many opioids you are prescribed, and for how long, appears to depend not only on who you are, but who you see,” Alexander said.

In late October of this year, the Bloomberg School of Public Health and the Clinton Foundation released a comprehensive report, “The Opioid Epidemic: From Evidence to Impact,” that provides evidence-based recommendations to reverse the rising tide of injuries and deaths from prescription opioids. Among its recommendations, the report emphasizes the important role that prescribing guidelines play in improving the safe use of prescription opioids by reducing high-risk use. It also underscores the role of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs in helping to improve the ability for clinicians to deliver high-quality care for those with pain while reducing the risks associated with unsafe opioid use.

Posted in: Opioid

Leave a Comment (0) →

Three Simple Steps for Increasing Medicine’s Influence

Three Simple Steps for Increasing Medicine’s Influence

From the outside looking in, the political process likely seems as inviting as a shark tank, as navigable as a corn maze, as predictable as the Kentucky Derby. Intimidating, confusing and frustrating are often used by citizens to describe advocacy-related interactions with government and frankly, this isn’t surprising given most citizens’ level of understanding of the political process.

In his Gettysburg Address, President Abraham Lincoln famously opined our nation’s form of government — “of the people, by the people, for the people” — would long endure. Unlike the direct democracy of 5th century Athens, Americans live in a representative democracy, electing individuals from city councilmen to the President to make decisions for them.

Representative democracy eliminates the need for the citizenry to be involved in the minutiae of modern governance. The downside, however, can be a culture of complacency on the part of the electorate. Outcomes are typically directed by those choosing to engage government on issues important to them, and so government becomes “of the people, by the people, for the people [who choose to participate].” The citizenry is ultimately still responsible for holding government accountable, through either direct engagement with lawmakers or the electoral process (or both), though few understand how to do so.

By following the three simple steps below, physicians can increase their influence on issues important to them and the patients they serve.

Step 1: Join, join, join.

A significant portion of success is simply showing up, but most physicians don’t have the time to spend flying back and forth to Washington or driving to Montgomery for Congressional or legislative meetings, hearings and sessions. Laws and or regulations are constantly under consideration in either the nation’s or state’s capitol directly affecting medical care. A practicing physician can’t possibly make all the scheduled meetings and still see patients, much less attend to the necessary continual monitoring of legislative and regulatory bodies required of successful modern-day advocacy operations.

But when like-minded people pool their resources good things can happen. Advocacy organizations concerned with ensuring delivery of quality care and a positive practice and liability environment — from individual state and national specialty societies to the Medical Association of the State of Alabama — all deserve your support and membership.

They are all working for you and joining them gives these organizations the resources to hire qualified personnel to represent physicians and their patients before legislative and regulatory bodies.

Step 2: Get to know a few key people.

Physicians are responsible for a lot, and in today’s world especially, it’s easy to get into a routine and leave the job of representing the profession to someone else. After all, isn’t that what membership dues are for? Yes and no. While membership in organizations advocating for physicians helps fund advocacy operations, paying membership dues alone is not enough, not in the era of social media, 24-hour news and increased engagement by those on the other side of issues from organized medicine.

Perhaps surprisingly, getting to know a few key people is not difficult, even if only by phone or email. While those paid to represent physicians will know the members of the Legislature and Congress and try to convince them of medicine’s position, in lawmakers’ minds, there is no contact more important than one from a constituent.

Physicians should start locally, getting to know their State Representative and State Senator first, gradually working up to establishing relationships with their member of Congress and U.S. Senators. If they are doing their job well as an elected representative, these legislators and their staff will be glad to hear from a constituent and get his/her perspective. At the same time, don’t overlook the importance of encouraging fellow physicians to engage their local elected officials in meaningful dialogue as well so overall efforts will be amplified.

For more information on how to interact and communicate with lawmakers, check out the Medical Association’s ABCs of VIP.

Step 3: Put your money where your mouth is.

Medical and specialty society membership dollars cannot be legally used for elections purposes, and so separate political action committees or PACs must be established and funds raised each year to help elect candidates physicians can work with on important issues. Not surprisingly, numerous entities whose objectives are at odds with medical liability reform, meaningful health system reform and with ensuring the highest standards for medical care are eager to get their allies elected to office.

Just like their parent organizations, the PACs of specialty societies and the official political committee of the Medical Association of the State of Alabama (ALAPAC) are all worthy of your support. When it comes to PAC contributions, never underestimate the impact of even a small donation.

Choosing not to participate in the political process — when it’s known the decisions of lawmakers directly affect medicine — is akin to getting sued, consciously sitting out voir dire and letting the plaintiff’s lawyer pick the jury.

Summary

The future of medical care, in Alabama and the nation, rests not with elected lawmakers and appointed bureaucrats but with the men and women actually caring for patients every day. A representative democracy functions best when the electorate holds those elected to office accountable. Increasing medicine’s ability to successfully advocate for physicians and the patients they serve will require increased participation in the political process. It is incumbent upon physicians to join the organizations fighting for them, to get to know their elected officials and to contribute to PACs whose goals align with their own.

By Niko Corley
Director, Legislative Affairs
Deputy Director, Alabama Medical PAC (ALAPAC)

Posted in: Advocacy

Leave a Comment (0) →

Office of Civil Rights Issues Guidance on HIPAA in Light of Opioid Crisis

Office of Civil Rights Issues Guidance on HIPAA in Light of Opioid Crisis

With an increased focus on opioid use and addiction, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Civil Rights has issued guidance related to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 due to misunderstandings over when a health care provider can share an individual’s protected health information in situations of overdose or need for emergency medical treatment related to opioid use. Generally speaking, HIPAA restricts a health care provider’s ability to share PHI, but there are instances when a health care provider may disclose PHI even if the patient has not authorized the disclosure.

Many health care providers mistakenly think they must have an authorization or the patient’s permission to release PHI. However, there are circumstances in which the patient’s permission is not required. HIPAA allows a health care provider to share information with a patient’s family or caregivers in certain emergency or dangerous situations. As outlined in the guidance, a provider may share information with family and close friends who are involved in the care of the patient if the provider determines that doing so in the best interest of an incapacitated or unconscious patient and the information shared is directly related to the family or friends involved in the patient’s health care or payment of care. OCR’s guidance states that a provider may use his/her professional judgment to talk to the parents of someone incapacitated by an opioid overdose about the overdose and related medical information, but the provider could not share general information not related to the overdose without the patient’s permission.

Another situation in which information may be shared without the patient’s permission is if the provider informs a person who is in a position to prevent or lessen a serious or imminent threat to the patient’s health or safety. OCR states “a doctor whose patient has overdosed on opioids is presumed to have complied with HIPAA if the doctor informs family, friends or caregivers of the opioid abuse after determining that the patient poses a serious and imminent threat to his or her health through continued abuse upon discharge.”

If a patient is not incapacitated and has decision-making capacity, a health care provider must give the patient an opportunity to agree or object to disclosure of health information with family, friends or others even if they are involved in that individual’s care or payment for care. The health care provider is not permitted to disclose health information about a patient who has the capacity to make his/her own health care decisions unless, as mentioned above, there is a serious or imminent threat of harm to the health of the individual.

The difference between capacity or incapacity can be a difficult determination for providers and may change during the course of treatment. OCR points out that decision-making incapacity may be temporary or situational and does not have to rise to the level where someone has been or must be appointed to act by law, i.e. power of attorney or guardianship. If during the course of treatment, the patient regains the ability to make decisions, the provider must give the patient the opportunity to object or agree to providing or sharing health information.

As has always been the case, HIPAA allows a health care provider to release or disclose information to a patient’s “Personal Representative.” HIPAA defines personal representative as a person who has health care decision-making authority under state law. In Alabama, a person holding general Durable Power of Attorney executed after 2012 is presumed to be the Personal Representative for purposes of HIPAA. Additionally, a parent of an unemancipated minor or someone holding a guardianship or conservatorship would also qualify.

To read OCR’s guidance, visit https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/hipaa-opioid-crisis.pdf

Article contributed by Angie Cameron Smith, a partner at Burr & Forman LLP. Burr & Forman LLP is a partner with the Medical Association.

Posted in: HIPAA

Leave a Comment (0) →

Alabama’s Infant Mortality Rate Increased in 2016

Alabama’s Infant Mortality Rate Increased in 2016

According to the Alabama Department of Public Health the state’s infant mortality rate of 9.1 infant deaths per 1,000 live births in 2016 is the highest since 2008. This represents the deaths of 537 infants who did not reach 1 year of age. There were 59,090 live births in 2016.

“Our infant mortality rate is troubling and disheartening and trending in the wrong direction. Challenges include ensuring mothers have access to healthcare before, during, and after pregnancy, reducing premature births, the opioid epidemic, and addressing persistent racial disparities,” said Acting State Health Officer Dr. Scott Harris.

For reasons not fully understood, disparities in infant mortality by race continue to persist. One major predictor of a woman’s likelihood of delivering a baby preterm is her race. The infant mortality rate for black infants was more than twice that of white infants. The 2016 black infant mortality rate was 15.1 per 1,000, a slight decrease from the 2015 infant mortality rate of 15.3.

According to Dr. Paul Jarris, chief medical officer of the March of Dimes, race or ethnicity does not cause preterm birth, but some racial and ethnic groups face challenges related to racism that have a profoundly negative impact on birth outcomes:  inequities in health care, housing, jobs, neighborhood safety, food security and income. For white mothers, infant mortality increased from a record low rate of 5.2 in 2015 to 6.5 in 2016. Of note, the top three leading causes of infant death remain the same:  congenital malformation, premature births, and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.

The percent of preterm births increased in 2016 from 11.7 percent to 12.0 percent. Infants born preterm, before 37 weeks gestation, are more likely to die before their first birthday or face life-long disabilities or chronic health conditions. Low birth weight infants, defined as those weighing less than 5 pounds, 8 ounces, are more than 20 times more likely to die than infants of normal weight. The percent of low weight births in 2016 declined slightly from 10.4 in 2015 to 10.3 in 2016.

Approximately 75 percent of births in 2016 were to women who had adequate prenatal care; 2.1 percent of births were to mothers with no prenatal care. In many states, including Alabama, women whose incomes are not low enough for Medicaid but cannot afford health insurance can qualify for Medicaid once they become pregnant and coverage lasts throughout pregnancy and a few weeks after.

On a positive note, as seen nationally, the percent of birth to teenagers in Alabama continues to trend downward to its lowest ever recorded of 7.7 percent in 2016.

Maternal smoking decreased to 10.1 percent of all live births, the lowest ever recorded. Of the mothers who smoked during pregnancy, 8.1 percent of births were to teen mothers and 10.3 percent of births were to adults.

Strategies to reduce infant mortality in Alabama:

  • Increase the use of progesterone to women with a history of prior preterm birth.
  • Reduce tobacco use among women of childbearing age.
  • Encourage women to wait at least 18 months between giving birth and becoming pregnant again.
  • Expand the Well Woman Preventive visit to provide pre-conception and inter-conception care.
  • Continue safe sleep education efforts.
  • Continue collaborative efforts to address the opioid epidemic.
  • Expand the Fetal and Infant Mortality Review activities at the community level.

Initiatives:

  • Identifying, studying, and learning the factors that play a role in infant survival; implementing initiatives at the community level to improve infant health and vitality statewide.
  • Establishing a Maternal Mortality Review Committee to analyze the maternal deaths that occur within the state so as to improve maternal health outcomes.

Graphs and detailed charts are available at alabamapublichealth.gov.

Posted in: Health

Leave a Comment (0) →

CMS Issues Final Rule on 2018 Medicare Reimbursement

CMS Issues Final Rule on 2018 Medicare Reimbursement

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has issued a final rule that includes updates to payment policies, payment rates, and quality provisions for services furnished under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) on or after Jan. 1, 2018.

Background on the Physician Fee Schedule

Payment is made under the PFS for services furnished by physicians and other practitioners in all sites of service. These services include but are not limited to, visits, surgical procedures, diagnostic tests, therapy services and specified preventive services.

In addition to physicians, payment is made under the PFS to a variety of practitioners and entities, including nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and physical therapists, as well as radiation therapy centers and independent diagnostic testing facilities.

Payments are based on the relative resources typically used to furnish the service. Relative Value Units (RVUs) are applied to each service for work, practice expense, and malpractice. These RVUs become payment rates through the application of a conversion factor. Payment rates are calculated to include an overall payment update specified by statute.

Patients Over Paperwork

CMS recently launched the “Patients Over Paperwork” Initiative, a cross-cutting, collaborative process that evaluates and streamlines regulations with a goal to reduce unnecessary burden, increase efficiencies, and improve the beneficiary experience. This effort emphasizes a commitment to removing regulatory obstacles that get in the way of providers spending time with patients. The Medicare Physician Fee Schedule final rule includes the following as part of this initiative:

  • reducing reporting requirements
  • removing downward payment adjustments based on performance for practices that meet minimum quality reporting requirements 

Payment Provisions 

Changes in Valuation for Specific Services

CMS reviews the resource inputs for several hundred codes under the annual process referred to as the potentially misvalued code initiative. Recommendations from the American Medical Association-Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC) are critically important to this work. For CY 2018, CMS is finalizing the values for individual services that generally reflect the expert recommendations from the RUC without as many refinements as CMS made in recent years.

Overall Payment Update and Misvalued Code Target

The overall update to payments under the PFS based on the finalized CY 2018 rates will be +0.41 percent. This update reflects the +0.50 percent update established under the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) of 2015, reduced by 0.09 percent, due to the misvalued code target recapture amount, required under the Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act of 2014.

After applying these adjustments, and the budget neutrality adjustment to account for changes in RVUs, all required by law, the final 2018 PFS conversion factor is $35.99, an increase to the 2017 PFS conversion factor of $35.89.

Payment Rates for Nonexcepted Off-campus Provider-Based Hospital Departments Paid Under the PFS

Section 603 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 requires that certain items and services furnished by certain off-campus hospital outpatient provider-based departments are no longer paid under the OPPS beginning Jan. 1, 2017. For CY 2017, CMS finalized the PFS as the applicable payment system for most of these items and services.

For CY 2018, CMS is finalizing a reduction to the current PFS payment rates for these items and services by 20 percent. CMS currently pays for these services under the PFS based on a percentage of the OPPS payment rate. Specifically, the final policy will change the PFS payment rates for these services from 50 percent of the OPPS payment rate to 40 percent of the OPPS rate. CMS believes this adjustment will provide a more level playing field for competition between hospitals and physician practices by promoting greater payment alignment.

Medicare Telehealth Services

For CY 2018, CMS is finalizing the addition of several codes to the list of telehealth services, including:

  • HCPCS code G0296 (visit to determine low dose computed tomography (LDCT) eligibility);
  • CPT code 90785 (Interactive Complexity);
  • CPT codes 96160 and 96161 (Health Risk Assessment);
  • HCPCS code G0506 (Care Planning for Chronic Care Management); and
  • CPT codes 90839 and 90840 (Psychotherapy for Crisis).

CMS is finalizing its proposal to eliminate the required reporting of the telehealth modifier GT for professional claims in an effort to reduce administrative burden for practitioners and finalizing separate payment for CPT code 99091, which describes certain remote patient monitoring, for CY 2018.

In the proposed rule, CMS sought comment on whether to make separate payment for CPT codes that describe remote patient monitoring or other existing codes that describe extensive use of communications technology. Some commenters raised concerns with our proposal, citing concerns that existing CPT codes were overly broad and not always reflective of current technology. Other commenters were supportive of the proposal generally but noted that CPT is currently working on codes that more accurately describe remote patient monitoring. In the final rule, CMS is finalizing separate payment for CPT code 99091 (Collection and interpretation of physiologic data (e.g., ECG, blood pressure, glucose monitoring) digitally stored and/or transmitted by the patient and/or caregiver to the physician or other qualified health care professional, qualified by education, training, licensure/regulation (when applicable) requiring a minimum of 30 minutes of time, for 2018 pending anticipated changes in CPT coding.

Malpractice Relative Value Units (RVUs)

For CY 2017, CMS collected updated professional liability insurance data for the purposes of updating the malpractice geographic practice cost indices but did not propose to use the data to update the specialty risk factors used in the calculation of malpractice RVUs at that time. Rather, CMS solicited comment on whether it should consider updating the malpractice RVUs based on the updated professional liability insurance data prior to the next expected 5-year update (CY 2020).

After consideration of public comments received, for CY 2018, CMS is not finalizing its proposal to develop malpractice RVUs using the most recent data available. Implementation not finalizing the proposal to use premium data collected for the would occur by CY 2017 malpractice geographic practice cost indices to update the specialty risk factors for CY 2018-2020. Additionally, CMS is not finalizing the proposal to align the update of malpractice premium data with the malpractice geographic practice cost index updates, which has been done once every three years, at this time.

Care Management Services

CMS is continuing efforts to improve payment within traditional fee-for-service Medicare for chronic care management and similar care management services to accommodate the changing needs of the Medicare patient population. CMS is finalizing its proposals to adopt CPT codes for CY 2018 for reporting several care management services currently reported using Medicare G-codes and clarifying a few policies regarding chronic care management in this final rule.

Improvement of Payment Rates for Office-based Behavioral Health Services

CMS is finalizing an improvement in the way physician fee schedule rates are set that will positively impact office-based behavioral health services with a patient. The final policy will increase payment for these important services by better recognizing overhead expenses for office-based face-to-face services with a patient.

Evaluation and Management Comment Solicitation

Most physicians and other practitioners bill patient visits to the PFS under a relatively generic set of codes that distinguish level of complexity, site of care, and in some cases whether or not the patient is new or established, or Evaluation and Management (E/M) visit codes. Billing practitioners must maintain information in the medical record that documents they have reported the appropriate level of E/M visit code. CMS maintains guidelines that specify the kind of information that is required to support Medicare payment for each level.

CMS agreed with continued feedback from stakeholders that these guidelines are potentially outdated and need to be revised.

CMS thanks the public for the comments received in response to the proposed rule’s comment solicitation on the E/M guidelines and summarizes these comments in the final rule. Commenters suggested additional avenues for collaboration with stakeholders prior to implementing any changes, and CMS will consider the best approaches for such collaboration and will take the public comments into account for future rulemaking.

Emergency Department Visits Comment Solicitation

CMS sought comment from stakeholders on whether emergency department visits are undervalued due to increasing heterogeneity of the settings under which emergency department visits are furnished and changes to the patient population. A number of comments were received suggesting these services are potentially misvalued and will be reviewing emergency department visits (CPT codes 99281-99385) as potentially misvalued for future rulemaking.

Solicitation of Public Comments on Initial Data Collection and Reporting Periods for Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule

The Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule (CLFS) final rule entitled “Medicare Program: Medicare Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory Tests Payment System” implements Section 1834A of the Social Security Act (the Act), which requires extensive revisions to the Medicare payment, coding, and coverage for Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory Tests (CDLTs) paid under the CLFS. Under the final rule, the payment amount for a test on the CLFS furnished on or after Jan. 1, 2018, generally will be equal to the weighted median of private payer rates determined for the test, based on the data of applicable laboratories that is collected during a specified data collection period and reported to CMS during a specified data reporting period. The first data collection period was from Jan. 1 through June 30, 2016, and the first data reporting period was from Jan. 1, 2017, through March 31, 2017.

Laboratory industry feedback suggested that many reporting entities would not be able to submit a complete set of applicable information to CMS by the March 31, 2017, deadline. As a result, on March 30, 2017, CMS announced a 60-day period of enforcement discretion until May 30, 2017, with respect to the data reporting period for reporting applicable information under the Medicare CLFS and the application of the Secretary’s potential assessment of civil monetary penalties (CMPs) for failure to report applicable information.

In the proposed rule, CMS solicited public comments from applicable laboratories and reporting entities to better understand applicable laboratories’ experiences with the data reporting, data collection, and other compliance requirements for the first data collection and reporting periods under the new private payor rate-based CLFS.

Part B Drugs: Payment for Biosimilar Biological Products

In the CY 2016 PFS final rule with comment period, CMS finalized a proposal to make clear that biosimilar products that rely on a common reference product’s biologics license application are grouped into the same payment calculation for determining a single average sales price payment limit, and that a single Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) code is used for such biosimilar products.

In the CY 2018 PFS proposed rule, CMS asked for comments on the effects of its payment policy based on experience with the United States’ biosimilar product marketplace.

CMS received numerous comments on this issue. In response to concerns raised in the comments, CMS is changing the policy to separately code and pay for biological biosimilar products under Medicare Part B. Effective Jan. 1, 2018, newly approved biosimilar biological products with a common reference product will no longer be grouped into the same billing code.

CMS believes a solution that increases provider and patient choice is superior to existing policy and may lead to additional cost savings over the long-term. By encouraging innovation and greater manufacturer participation in the marketplace, this policy change will result in the licensing of more biosimilar products, creating a stable and robust market, driving competition and decreasing uncertainty about access and payment. Carrying out this policy change as early as possible, rather than waiting, is expected to bring more certainty to the new and developing marketplace.

Part B Drug Payment: Infusion Drugs Furnished through an Item of Durable Medical Equipment (DME)

The 21st Century Cures Act transitioned payment for infusion drugs or biologicals furnished through a covered item of DME from average wholesale price (AWP) to average sales price (ASP) pricing methodology on Jan. 1, 2017. CMS is finalizing the proposed revision to 42 CFR §414.904(e)(2) to conform regulations with the statutory payment requirements in section 5004(a) of the 21st Century Cures Act.

New Care Coordination Services and Payment for Rural Health Clinics (RHCs) and Federally-Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs)

CMS is finalizing the proposal to revise payment for chronic care management in RHCs and FQHCs, and establish requirements and payment for RHCs and FQHCs furnishing general behavioral health integration (BHI) services and psychiatric collaborative care model (CoCM) services. Effective Jan. 1, 2018, RHCs and FQHCs will be paid for CCM, general BHI, and psychiatric CoCM using two new billing codes created exclusively for RHC and FQHC payment. This payment would be in addition to the payment for an RHC or FQHC visit.

Appropriate Use Criteria for Advanced Diagnostic Imaging

CMS is finalizing a start date for the Medicare Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) Program for Advanced Diagnostic Imaging. The program will begin in a manner that allows practitioners more time to focus on and adjust to the Quality Payment Program before being required to participate in the AUC program. The Medicare AUC program will begin with an educational and operations testing year in 2020, which means physicians would be required to start using AUCs and reporting this information on their claims. During this first year, CMS is proposing to pay claims for advanced diagnostic imaging services regardless of whether they correctly contain information on the required AUC consultation. This allows both clinicians and the agency to prepare for this new program.

CMS posted newly qualified provider-led entities and clinical decision support mechanisms in July of this year. Qualified provider-led entities are permitted to develop AUC, and qualified clinical decision support mechanisms are the tools that physicians use to access the AUC. Physicians may begin exploring these mechanisms well in advance of the start of the Medicare AUC program through the voluntary participation period that will begin mid-2018 and run through 2019. During this time CMS will collect limited information on Medicare claims to identify advanced imaging services for which consultation with appropriate use criteria took place.

In addition, by having qualified clinical decision support mechanisms available (some of which are free of charge) clinicians may use one of these mechanisms to earn credit under the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System as an improvement activity. This improvement activity was included in the 2018 Quality Payment Program final rule.

Medicare Diabetes Prevention Program Expanded Model

The final rule also implements the Medicare Diabetes Prevention Program (MDPP) expanded model starting in 2018. The MDPP expanded model was announced in early 2016, when it was determined that the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) model test through the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation’s Health Care Innovation Awards met the statutory criteria for expansion. The final rule includes additional policies necessary for suppliers to begin furnishing MDPP services nationally in 2018, including the MDPP payment structure, as well as additional supplier enrollment requirements and supplier compliance standards aimed to enhance program integrity.

Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS)

Under the PQRS, individual eligible professionals and group practices who did not satisfactorily report data on quality measures for the CY 2016 reporting period are subject to a downward payment adjustment of 2.0 percent in 2018 to their PFS covered professional services. 2016 was the last reporting period for PQRS. The final data submission timeframe for reporting 2016 PQRS quality data to avoid the 2018 PQRS downward payment adjustment was January through March 2017. PQRS is being replaced by the Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) under the Quality Payment Program (QPP). The first MIPS performance period is January through December 2017.

CMS proposed and is finalizing a change to the current PQRS program policy that requires reporting of nine measures across three National Quality Strategy domains to only require reporting of six measures for the PQRS with no domain requirement. We are also finalizing similar changes to the clinical quality measure reporting requirements under the Medicare Electronic Health Record Incentive Program for eligible professionals who reported electronically through the PQRS portal.

We finalized these changes based on stakeholder feedback and to better align with the MIPS data submission requirements for the quality performance category. For MIPS, eligible clinicians need only report six quality measures for the quality performance category, except those reporting via the Web Interface, and there is no requirement to ensure that the measures span across three National Quality Strategy domains.

Patient Relationship Codes

In May 2017, CMS posted the operational list of patient relationship categories that are required under section 101(f) of MACRA. In this rule, we finalized certain Level II HCPCS modifiers to be used on claims to indicate these patient relationship categories. Further, we finalized a policy that the reporting of these HCPCS modifiers may be voluntarily by clinicians associated with these patient relationship categories beginning Jan. 1, 2018. We anticipate that there will be a learning curve with respect to the use of these modifiers, and we will work with clinicians to ensure their proper use.

Medicare Shared Savings Program

CMS is finalizing several modifications to the rules for accountable care organizations (ACOs) participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program. These modifications are designed to reduce burden and streamline program operations. The new policies include the following:

  • Revisions to the assignment methodology for ACOs that include FQHCs and RHCs by eliminating the requirement to enumerate each physician working in the FQHC or RHC on the ACO participant list;
  • Reduction of burden for ACOs submitting an initial Shared Savings Program application or the application for use of the skilled nursing facility (SNF) Three-Day Rule Waiver; and
  • The addition of three new chronic care management codes (CCM) and four behavioral health integration (BHI) codes to the definition of primary care services used in the ACO assignment methodology.

2018 Value Modifier

In order to better align incentives and provide a smoother transition to the new Merit-based Incentive Payment System under the Quality Payment Program, we are finalizing the following changes to previously-finalized policies for the 2018 Value Modifier:

  • Reducing the automatic downward payment adjustment for not meeting the criteria to avoid the PQRS adjustment from negative four percent to negative two percent (-2.0 percent) for groups of ten or more clinicians; and from negative two percent to negative one percent (-1.0 percent) for physician and non-physician solo practitioners and groups of two to nine clinicians;
  • Holding harmless all physician groups and solo practitioners who met the criteria to avoid the PQRS adjustment from downward payment adjustments for performance under quality-tiering for the last year of the program; and
  • Aligning the maximum upward adjustment amount to 2 times the adjustment factor for all physician groups and solo practitioners.
  • Given final policy changes for the Physician Quality Reporting System and the Value Modifier, we finalized that we will not report 2018 Value Modifier data in the Physician Compare downloadable database as this would be the first and only year such data would have been reported. However, to promote transparency we will continue to make available the Value Modifier public use and research identifiable files.

Posted in: CMS

Leave a Comment (0) →

What Eight Things You Should Do to Protect Your Business from Cyber Threats

What Eight Things You Should Do to Protect Your Business from Cyber Threats

Cyber threats take many forms. The widespread WannaCry ransomware attack in May 2017 highlighted how computer files could be held hostage in return for payment, while the Dyn denial of service in October 2016 highlighted how websites like Airbnb and Twitter could be made inaccessible. Cyber threats are on the rise within the health care industry, as the information gained as a result is lucrative in value. Thus, it is important every physician practice take steps to protect itself from a cyberattack.

Identify the types of cyberattacks to which your practice is most likely vulnerable.

By doing so, you can invest in measures that will be most relevant to your practice. For instance, practices that host websites must preempt denial of service attacks, while those that hold private customer information electronically must prevent unauthorized access to their data. Of course, many practices will likely be vulnerable to a variety of cyberattacks.

Develop a framework to prevent, investigate and respond to the cyberattacks to which your practice is most vulnerable.

In 2014, the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) issued and continues to update, a voluntary Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity (the “Framework”). In addition to their own independent initiatives, practices should periodically consult the Framework to keep abreast of cybersecurity best practices in order to assess their security status relative to others. In addition, the website for the Office of Civil Rights, the government entity responsible for HIPAA compliance, contains guidance on various cybersecurity topics that may also prove helpful.

Invest in the latest computer security and protection measures.

To the extent feasible, practices should strive to use the most up-to-date software and avail themselves of periodic releases of software updates. Cyberattack methods constantly evolve, and older versions of software are more vulnerable to newer and more complex threats. For example, victims of the WannaCry ransomware attack were mainly those organizations that ran older versions of Windows operating software. Practices should also consider regularly backing up data and insulating that data from their computer network, segmenting their computer network, and monitoring network activity.

Implement employee vigilance and training measures.

Perpetrators of cyberattacks often employ phishing scams by sending emails with attached malware to individuals who then promptly download the attachments and infect their employers’ computer networks. Practices should train employees to identify suspicious emails in order to guard against phishing schemes. Such training can be incorporated into your practice’s periodic HIPAA training.

Given that malicious emails are often sent by seemingly familiar senders, practices should teach employees how to spot subtle clues that indicate dangerous emails. For instance, employers should instruct employees to check whether the domain name of the originating account is a “near-miss” from what would be expected. For example, an employee recognizing “dot com” and “dot co” could be the difference in avoiding hefty losses.

Test your cybersecurity measures and monitor the effectiveness.

To test whether employees take instructed precautions against phishing attacks, practices should send their employees emails from a “near-miss” domain and tally how many employees fall for them. Of course, even after enhancing computer security systems and increasing employee awareness of network defenses, practices may nonetheless succumb to a cyberattack, but at least the chances of doing so may be reduced.

Obtain effective cyberattack insurance coverage.

Practices should compare potential damages in the event of a cyberattack to the coverage provided in their existing insurance policies and seek out supplementary insurance for any uncovered damages or liabilities that may arise in the event of a cyberattack. For instance, since courts are divided as to whether computer systems constitute “tangible property” for purposes of an insurance claim, practices should consider consulting their insurance companies, brokers, or legal counsel to obtain insurance that covers the types of damages that arise in cyberattacks, including, but not limited to, expenses associated with providing patients with written notice when a reportable HIPAA breach occurs.

Adopt an effective legal strategy for your practice that preempts and limits liability.

As practices retain confidential personal and medical information, any data breach or unauthorized disclosure could subject the practice to liability under a host of federal and state law claims, in addition to HIPAA fines and penalties. Thus, the establishment of an effective legal strategy that preempts and limits liability is essential.

Employ traditional security measures for your practice at locations that could be vulnerable to physical disruption of your cyber capabilities.

Practices should account for some of the more traditional ways in which perpetrators can disrupt their computer networks. To prevent someone from unplugging the power source to a computer network or server, you could consider installing CCTV cameras and limiting access to such areas. In addition, have security incident procedures in place and be prepared to continue operations if an interruption occurs. For example, if an interruption with respect to your EMR system occurs, be prepared to continue business utilizing paper medical records until the interruption can be resolved and your EMR is back online.

Article contributed by David D. Dowd III, Elizabeth B. Shirley and Kelli C. Fleming with Burr & Forman LLP practicing in the firm’s Health Care Industry Group. Burr & Forman LLP, is an official Bronze Partner with the Medical Association.

Posted in: Technology

Leave a Comment (0) →

November is American Diabetes Month

November is American Diabetes Month

 

November marks the annual observance of American Diabetes Month. Sponsored by the American Diabetes Association, this observance aims to focus our nation’s attention on the disease and the tens of millions of Americans affected by it.

Judging by the numbers, it is imperative that individuals are informed about diabetes and the consequences associated with the disease. Data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey suggests that approximately more than 552,000 adults in Alabama (14.6 percent of the adult population) have been diagnosed with diabetes. However, there are many who are unaware they have the disease. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, an estimated 30 million Americans have diabetes and 84 million have prediabetes.

Diabetes is not just physically costly – complications include heart disease, stroke, amputation, end-stage kidney disease, blindness and even death – it is also economically costly. Individuals with diabetes have medical expenses 2.3 times higher than those who do not have diabetes. Combined, diabetes and prediabetes cost an estimated $5.4 billion each year in Alabama.

While these statistics are alarming, there are programs available to help individuals keep from developing the disease and assist those diagnosed with diabetes to better manage their health. Diabetes Prevention Programs (DPPs) and Diabetes Self-Management Education (DSME) Programs are available throughout the state and can help reduce the burden caused by the disease. These programs are proven effective for those who regularly attend.

For more information, visit these resources from the Alabama Department of Public Health:  alabamapublichealth.gov/diabetes. To access information about DPP, including a map featuring sites throughout the state, click the “Prevention” link in the left-hand column. For information on DSME sites, select the “Self-Management Education” link. More information from ADPH regarding diabetes can be found online at facebook.com/DiabetesInAlabama or twitter.com/DiabetesInAL.

Posted in: Health

Leave a Comment (0) →

CMS Announces New Medicaid Policy to Combat Opioid Crisis

CMS Announces New Medicaid Policy to Combat Opioid Crisis

Just a week after President Trump declared the opioid epidemic a public health emergency, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced a new policy to allow states to design demonstration projects that increase access to treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) and other substance use disorders (SUD). CMS’s new demonstration policy responds to the President’s directive and provides states with greater flexibility to design programs that improve access to high quality, clinically appropriate treatment.

Through this updated policy, states will be able to pay for a fuller continuum of care to treat SUD, including critical treatment in residential treatment facilities that Medicaid is unable to pay for without a waiver, according to a letter CMS sent to state Medicaid directors. Previously, states had been required to build out their entire delivery system for SUD treatment while also meeting rigid CMS standards before Medicaid demonstration approvals could be granted. The new policy will allow states to provide greater treatment options while improving their continuum of care over time.

According to a new study, nearly a quarter of patients on Medicaid filled a prescription for an opioid painkiller in 2015. Express Scripts, one of the largest pharmacy benefits manager of Medicaid drug benefits in the country, analyzed data on 1.8 million opioid prescriptions given to 3.1 million Medicaid enrollees in 14 states. It found that 6 percent of all Medicaid prescriptions were for opioids. Of those that acquired opioids, nearly one-third took the medications for more than 30 days.

Opioids also contributed notably to costs, accounting for 4.1 percent of plan costs overall. Medicaid enrollees are 10 times more likely to be drug addicts or substance abusers than the general population, according to the report.

In the letter, CMS said that state projects under its new program should aim to make notable improvements over the course of five years with goals to increase access, reduce overdose deaths, reduce use of the emergency department or inpatient care for drug addiction treatment and improve care coordination.

CMS also said that it will “ensure states take significant steps” to reduce opioid prescribing.

Posted in: Opioid

Leave a Comment (0) →
Page 1 of 2 12