Archive for September, 2018

After EMR Implementation, Surgeons Spend Less Time Interacting with Patients

After EMR Implementation, Surgeons Spend Less Time Interacting with Patients

Implementing an electronic medical records (EMR) system at an orthopaedic clinic may have unanticipated effects on clinic efficiency and productivity – including a temporary increase in labor costs and a lasting reduction in time spent interacting with patients, reports a study in September 19, 2018, issue of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. The journal is published in the Lippincott portfolio in partnership with Wolters Kluwer.

Even after an initial learning period, introducing a new EMR system may affect several aspects of clinic workflow, according to the paper by Daniel J. Scott, MD, MBA, of Duke University, Durham, N.C., and colleagues. They write, “Healthcare systems and policymakers should be aware that the length of the implementation period is approximately six months and that implementation may alter the time that providers spend with patients.”

Introducing EMRs Could Have ‘Negative Trade-Off’ for Patient Care

The researchers used time-driven activity-based costing methods to evaluate how a new EMR system affected costs and productivity at two outpatient orthopaedic arthroplasty (joint replacement) clinics. The analysis included detailed observations of 143 patient visits before implementation of the EMR system, and again at two months, six months, and two years after implementation.

At two months after EMR implementation, total labor costs had increased significantly, from $36.88 to $46.04 per patient visit. The cost increase was related to increases in the time that attending surgeons spent per patient, from 9.38 to 10.97 minutes, and in the time that certified medical assistants spent on patient assessment, from 3.4 to 9.1 minutes. For surgeons and medical assistants combined, the time spent documenting patient encounters more than doubled: from 3.3 to 7.6 minutes.

By six months after implementation of the EMR system, total labor costs were similar to costs in the pre-implementation period. From six months to two years, labor costs remained stable. Average weekly patient volume decreased for one of the surgeons studied, but remained stable for the other surgeon.

However, the increases in time spent on documentation persisted, even after the initial learning period. This was accompanied by a significant reduction in time spent interacting with patients, from 14.65 to 10.03 minutes.

Electronic medical records systems are rapidly being adopted throughout the US healthcare system, in part due to increased regulation. “EMR implementation can be costly and typically requires workflow redesign,” Dr. Scott and coauthors write. The study is the first to assess the impact of EMR systems in orthopaedic practice.

“This could suggest that providers ultimately were able to spend less time with patients as documentation requirements increased,” Dr. Scott and coauthors write. “If so, this could represent a negative trade-off for patient care and leave patients less satisfied, a trend worthy of further study.”

Posted in: Advocacy

Leave a Comment (0) →

A Good Leader’s Sphere of Influence Expands in Every Area of Contact

A Good Leader’s Sphere of Influence Expands in Every Area of Contact

In Stephen R. Covey’s The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, seven behaviors are examined in relation to how they contribute to being effective in achieving goals.

The first of these behaviors is being proactive. Covey explains that proactive people focus their efforts on their Circles of Influence, meaning they proactively seek out opportunities to initiate and influence change in various areas of their life and career. The result is that proactive leaders find their Circles of Influence to be constantly expanding, and this expansion is the case with wise physician leaders. In this article, we will examine how this power of expanding influence is found in your impact outside your family and your practice.

The reputation of a physician doesn’t just precede him or her; it races far ahead of him or her, and it travels faster than you might think. In both small and large towns, in both specialty practices and primary care, for both young and mature physicians, there is an aura of reputation which permeates their community.

When a new physician enters a group practice, we often recommend he or she buy lunch for the staff within his or her first month of practice. This creates an understanding among the staff that the new doc appreciates them, and it initiates the leadership process. This is the beginning of physician reputation in the clinic, which spreads to the hospital staff and then to the medical community as a whole. It goes without saying that physician behavior supportive of a poor reputation spreads like a nuclear blast, while the construction of a stellar reputation occurs very slowly.

This leadership in a physician’s broader sphere of influence occurs for reasons different than other areas of life. Self-leadership and your position in your family are yours by reason of authority. Leadership of your group’s physicians and practice team is based in their permission. But leadership in your hospital, medical community, church and community come to you by invitation and therein lies the nicest of compliments about the person you are.

When your staff or the staff and administration team at your hospital ask if you will see and treat their family members, take those requests for the high compliments they are. When you are asked to lend your name to a civic event or fundraiser, do so, and then be present to add your personal support.

Giving your time, talents and treasure is modestly beneficial to the recipients and can be immensely rewarding to you. Recognize these opportunities, invest in yourself and lead like your M.D. designation required it — because it actually does. Powerful leadership begins with you but finds its end, and its purpose, in the community of people who respect and admire you.

Article contributed by James A. Stroud, CPA, D. Maddox Casey, CPA, and Sae Evans, CPA, with Warren Averett CPAs and Advisors, an official partner with the Medical Association.

Posted in: Leadership

Leave a Comment (0) →

In Memoriam: Brig. Gen. Max McLaughlin, M.D.

In Memoriam: Brig. Gen. Max McLaughlin, M.D.

We are saddened to share the passing of Mobile physician Max V. McLaughlin. Known as Dr. Max to many, he passed away peacefully in his sleep on Monday, Sept. 10, 2018. He is survived by his wife, Nikki, his children Victor, Anne and Lauren, and his granddaughter Savannah. He leaves a legacy of achievement across Alabama, and his love of this state showed in his dedication to improving the lives of Alabamians from his personal relationships to statewide influence.

Early Life

Dr. Max was born in 1928 to Dr. James D. McLaughlin (1880-1953) and Alma Dovie Whigham McLaughlin (1890-1983) in the tiny town of Blue Springs, Alabama. He was the seventh of eight children, six boys and two girls. Stories of his childhood paint a picture of a funny, clever, and social young man that set the stage for the friends and accomplishments of his adult years. In 1946 he presented a calf he brought by plane to President Harry Truman on the White House lawn in his role as president of the Alabama Future Farmers of America.

Military Career

In 1946 he joined the Army during WWII, becoming a paratrooper in the 11th Airborne, a division known as “The Angels.” He was fond of saying that one’s third jump was the most frightening, as the newness and excitement wore off and the reality of mid-century parachuting technology set in. He was stationed at snowy Camp Haugen for the occupation of Japan and returned to Alabama in 1948 to go to college on the G.I. Bill, hitchhiking from Blue Springs to Tuscaloosa to start his life at the university.

After graduating from college and medical school, he joined the Alabama National Guard. He remained enlisted until age 60, when he retired at the rank of Brigadier General. In 1988, the armory formerly on Museum Drive was renamed to Fort Hardeman/McLaughlin, a fitting tribute to its most vocal advocate. He was known and respected as “The General” to many, with this title softened to the nickname “Gen-Gen” by his granddaughter.

Roll Tide

Dr. Max was fond of saying that he was a Bama fan twice-over, as he was a fan of Bear Bryant when the Bear played for Alabama in the 1930s as well as his more well-known role as Coach in the 1970s. Dr. Max was at Alabama from 1948 to 1952, continuing on to medical school to complete his M.D. in 1956. At Alabama, he joined the Phi Gamma Delta fraternity where he found lifetime friendships with Jack McWhirter and Robert McWhorter. His stories from this time included escapades with his friend Dick Bounds, working on the Rammer Jammer magazine and winning second place in the “World’s Ugliest Man” contest with a costume of raw meat and bones. He loved Alabama football and delighted in their win on the Saturday before he passed.

Medical Career

He started his practice on Dauphin Island Parkway in 1952 when he moved to Mobile. It is difficult to summarize the impact of Dr. Max’s 46-year career as he treated thousands, delivered hundreds of babies, and mentored many other physicians. For example, his own cardiologist had Dr. Max as a family doctor when he was a child and several of the nurses who took care of him used to be patients of his or used to work in his office. He often joked to his own children when they complained of a skinned knee that he “wasn’t on call,” but of course he was. When he retired in 1998 he was still making house calls for his patients, for which he was profiled in the Mobile Press-Register as one of the last doctors to do so. In the summer, he took mission trips to Guatemala to freely treat those in need, armed with only one Spanish phrase: “Dos cervezas, por favor.” His black, old-time medical bag was always present. He cared for his patients as people, and they responded in kind.

Personal Life

Dr. Max passed down independence (and stubbornness) to his children along with the desire to leave the world a better place, albeit with differences in opinion on how to best do so. His son Victor, currently practicing radiology in New York, was born to his first wife Sally, who preceded him in death along with their daughters Holly and Lucy. He was married to his current wife Nikki for forty-four years and lived most of that time in his home on Old Shell Road, curating a magnificent vegetable garden in the front yard and an equally magnificent compost heap in the back. They had two daughters, Anne and Lauren. Anne earned her Ph.D. at Georgia Tech and is a professor in the psychology department at North Carolina State University. Lauren holds a master’s degree in exercise physiology as well as raising Max’s precocious granddaughter, “Savi.” In Dr. Max’s later years, his dog Killer was a constant companion whether it was quail hunting in Baldwin County or riding in the pickup truck to the post office. We hope they are together again.

Medical Legacy

Over ninety-two percent of Alabama’s counties have a shortage of health care providers, particularly primary care physicians. This statistic has worsened as Alabama has grown and as medical students chose specialties other than family medicine. Max McLaughlin was a family doctor his entire career, giving him a dogged passion for improving access to primary care in underserved areas of the state. Over fifteen years ago, he began work with Wil Baker, Ph.D., and the Alabama Medical Education Consortium to help establish the Alabama College of Osteopathic Medicine (ACOM), a medical school dedicated to training family practitioners who commit to serving rural areas across Alabama. ACOM graduated its first class in 2017, sending 128 doctors to their residencies in the towns and cities that most needed them. That number is growing every year, resulting in the largest impact of any program in the state dedicated to increasing primary care providers. Dr. Max also remained active locally in the University of South Alabama, serving on their Board of Trustees, was on the ALAPAC Board of Directors, a state medical association committee encouraging physician involvement in legislative affairs, and was a former president of the Alumni Association of the Medical College of Alabama.

In closing, it is impossible to sum up ninety years of life in a few paragraphs. We miss him immeasurably and are grateful for this chance to share some of what made Max McLaughlin so unique.

Celebrating His Life

Memorial Service was held at St. Paul’s Episcopal Church on Old Shell Road on Thursday, Sept. 13 at 10:30 a.m. In lieu of flowers, please consider donating to the USA Children’s and Women’s Hospital Collins Marie Carr NICU Garden in honor of his late granddaughter, Collins. His family would like to thank the nursing staff in the cardiology unit at Springhill Memorial Hospital and the Springhill Rehabilitation and Senior Residence for their kindness and care and for treating Dr. Max with dignity.

Posted in: Members

Leave a Comment (0) →

Two-Minute Primer on Electronic Prescription of Controlled Substances

Two-Minute Primer on Electronic Prescription of Controlled Substances

The contents of a recent Drug Enforcement Administration policy statement on electronic prescriptions for controlled substances sound simple enough—you can use a mobile device for EPCS if it meets the latest Federal Information Processing Standards security requirements (FIPS 140-2), and you can use it as a “hard token” if it is separate from the device used to create the EPCS. But what does that mean? Are there any more limitations?

The Controlled Substances Act regulates drugs and other substances that have a potential for abuse and psychological and physical dependence, i.e., “controlled substances.” Controlled substances are organized into five schedules. Schedule I drugs have a high risk of abuse and no current accepted medical uses in the United States. Drugs in Schedules II through IV have currently accepted medical uses, but they also have a high potential for abuse. Drugs in Schedule II can only be issued pursuant to a written prescription, whereas drugs in Schedules III and IV may be issued pursuant to written or oral prescriptions.[1] The written prescription may be an electronic one, if it satisfies certain requirements.

An EPCS may be created with input and data entry from the DEA registrant (the prescribing practitioner) or his or her agent, provided that only the registrant can actually sign the prescription using the EPCS application.[2] To sign the application, however, the registrant has to complete a two-factor authentication process while at the same time viewing certain information about the EPCS (date of issuance; full name of patient; drug name; dosage strength and form, quantity prescribed, and directions for use; number of refills authorized; earliest date on which a pharmacy may fill each prescription; name, address and DEA number of the registrant)[3] and a statement of acknowledgement[4] regarding the EPCS, as prescribed by regulation. The provider’s completion of the two-factor authentication process in the EPCS application is the equivalent of signing a hard-copy paper prescription.[5]

The two-factor authentication process includes the use of two of the following authentication factors: (1) something only the practitioner knows (e.g., a password or response to a challenge question); (2) biometric data (e.g., a fingerprint or iris scan); or (3) a device, known as a hard token, which is separate from the computer or other device used to access the EPCS application (i.e., the hard token could be your phone, as long as you are not electronically prescribing the EPCS through an EPCS application on your phone).[6] The hard token is subject to FIPS 140-2 Security Level 1 requirements,[7] and the system used to validate biometric data must comply with other regulatory requirements,[8] all of which are beyond the scope of this article and beyond this author’s expertise.[9] Whichever factors are used in the two-factor authentication process, the prescribing practitioner/registrant must not share the authentication factors with any other person or allow it to be used to electronically sign an EPCS.[10] Additionally, if a practitioner/registrant loses his or her hard token (if applicable), he must notify the appropriate access control managers for the EPCS application (either in his/her individual practice or through an institutional provider such as a hospital) within one business day of the discovery, or he or she may be held responsible for any controlled substances written using his or her two-factor authentication credential.[11]

In addition to the requirements above and the responsibilities the practitioner normally has when issuing paper or oral prescriptions for controlled substances, there are more practitioner responsibilities when it comes to EPCS.[12] To the extent an EPCS is not successfully delivered, the practitioner must ensure that any paper or oral prescription issued as a replacement for a failed EPCS indicates that the prescription was originally transmitted electronically to a particular pharmacy and that the transmission failed. The practitioner must also exercise certain reasonable precautions to ensure that the EPCS application complies with all applicable regulatory requirements, especially if the practitioner is on notice that the EPCS system may not meet all the requirements.[13]

An exhaustive discussion of all the applicable requirements for EPCS is beyond the scope of this article. However, practitioners should be thinking about the vendors they are using for their EPCS system, the system’s capabilities and process control limitations, and the information security or physical safeguards they must maintain to ensure their two-factor authentication credentials are secure. In addition, it should be noted that EPCS are subject to other laws, such as the Ryan Haight Online Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act of 2008, which generally requires a practitioner to conduct at least one in-person medical examination for a patient if they are prescribing controlled substances for the patient.[14]

From a process standpoint, EPCS may be easier to work with, but it implicates substantial compliance concerns with a variety of laws. Practitioners should carefully consider the volume of legal and regulatory requirements applicable to EPCS and ensure their operations conform to all applicable requirements.

Article contributed by Christopher L. Richard with Gilpin Givhan, P.C. Gilpin Givhan, P.C. is an official partner with the Medical Association.

 

Resources

[1] Drugs in Schedule V may only be distributed or dispensed for medical purposes, but are not grouped in with either Schedule II or Schedules III and IV for purposes of the prescription requirements. See 31 U.S.C. § 829.

[2] 21 C.F.R. § 1311.135.

[3] 21 C.F.R. § 1311.120(b)(9).

[4] “By completing the two-factor authentication protocol at this time, you are legally signing the prescription(s) and authorizing the transmission of the above information to the pharmacy for dispensing. The two-factor authentication protocol may only be completed by the practitioner whose name and DEA registration number appear above.” 21 C.F.R. § 1311.140(a)(3).

[5] 21 C.F.R. § 1311.140(a)(5).

[6] 21 C.F.R. § 1311.115.

[7] Incorporated by reference in 21 C.F.R. § 1311.08.

[8] See 21 C.F.R. § 1311.116.

[9] This author suggests consulting with information technology experts in order to verify applications meet regulatory requirements, or at least include in agreements with vendors that the service they are providing complies with the applicable regulatory requirements.

[10] 21 C.F.R. § 1311.102(a).

[11] 21 C.F.R. § 1311.102(b).

[12] See 21 C.F.R. § 1311.102.

[13] 21 C.F.R. § 1311.102.

[14] See 21 U.S.C. § 829(e).

Posted in: Legal Watch

Leave a Comment (0) →

Speak Out! Don’t Allow Suicide to Take Another Physician’s Life.

Speak Out! Don’t Allow Suicide to Take Another Physician’s Life.

Did you know cancer was the most common cause of death among residents? Suicide was the second-leading cause of resident death — and the most common cause of death among male residents. A 2015 review of studies estimated 22 to 32 percent of resident physicians in the U.S. suffer from depressive symptoms and multiple studies have shown that residency training places physicians at risk for mental illness and suicidal thoughts.

Monday, Sept. 17, is National Physician Suicide Awareness Day, organized by the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD), in collaboration with AAEM, ACEP, ACOEP, EMRA, RSA, RSO and SAEM to annually dedicate the 3rd Monday in September to remind physicians and other health care workers that suicide can be prevented and resources are available.

“Medicine is a calling, and the practice of medicine can be a very stressful career,” said Medical Association Executive Director Mark Jackson. “Alabama’s physicians care for thousands of patients each year, but they may not always stop to take care of themselves when they need it most. Physicians have a multitude of options designed just for them when they feel they are reaching a breaking point, and that’s where we can be a lifeline.”

While estimates of the actual number of physician suicides vary, literature has shown that the relative risk for suicide being 2.27 times greater among women and 1.41 times higher among men versus the general population. Each physician suicide is a devastating loss affecting everyone – family, friends, colleagues and up to 1 million patients per year. It is both a very personal loss and a public health crisis.

Help is available for physicians who feel they need assistance. The Alabama Physician Health Program is a confidential, effective, first-line resource for physicians and other medical professionals with depression and other mental health issues. Physicians may contact the APHP at (800) 239-6272 or email staff@alabamaphp.org.

 

Additional Resources

Let’s Talk About Physician Burnout

Physician Suicide

Medical specialties with the highest burnout rates

Suicide Is Much Too Common among U.S. Physicians

Posted in: Health

Leave a Comment (0) →

What Can Physicians Charge for Medical Records?

What Can Physicians Charge for Medical Records?

The State of Alabama Board of Medical Examiners amended its rules that govern the fees physicians may charge to provide patients with copies of their medical records.2 The rules are set forth in Section 540-X-9-.10(2) of the Alabama Administrative Code, and the new rules became effective April 13, 2018.

Here are the key dos and don’ts physicians should take into account to determine how much (and whether) they should charge patients for copies of their records.

Don’t charge anything other than a “reasonable, cost-based fee” for necessary supplies, labor and postage.

As in the past, the new rules permit a physician to recover a reasonable, cost-based fee to comply with a patient’s request for copies of his medical records, subject to the prohibitions, requirements and recommendations below. Federal law and applicable U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) guidance specify that a reasonable, cost-based fee may include (i) certain costs for the labor required to copy the medical record (subject to certain limitations, as noted below); (ii) the physician’s costs reasonably incurred for supplies (e.g., costs for paper, toner and the like for paper copies, or for CDs, USB drives, or similar electronic media, if requested); and (iii) the physician’s costs reasonably incurred for postage, if the patient requests mail delivery to him or his designee. Only charge postage if the patient specifically requests mail delivery (and agrees to be responsible for the cost).

Don’t charge a “search” fee or other labor costs not specifically authorized by law.

Physicians may recover only certain, limited costs for labor required to copy a patient’s record. The fee may not include the physician’s costs, if any, to verify or document the patient’s request, costs to search for or retrieve the record, or costs to access, store and maintain electronic or paper records, or similar infrastructure costs. Among other things, this means that “search fees,” authorized by state law, are prohibited following the issuance of the new ALBME rules.3

In determining a reasonable, cost-based fee, labor generally may be calculated using either of two methods: (a) the physician’s actual labor cost to respond to the patient’s request; or (b) the average cost to respond to a similar request, based on a schedule.

Don’t charge more than the statutory limits, no matter what.

In contrast to prior rules, the new rules include additional nuance pertaining to the permissible charge for copying electronic medical records.

If the patient requests a paper copy of his medical record, whether the record is maintained in electronic or paper form, or an electronic copy of his paper record, the physician may charge a reasonable, cost-based fee, calculated using the factors listed above. The fee may be a per-page fee, so long as it is a reasonable, cost-based fee.4 As in the past, the new rules limit the amount a physician may charge for copies to $1.00 per page for the first 25 pages and $.50 per page for additional pages, plus the actual cost of mailing the record.5

However, if the patient requests an electronic copy of his electronic record, (i) the physician may not charge a per-page fee (regardless of amount); and (ii) the physician may either charge (a) a reasonable, cost-based fee, as determined above (subject to the prohibition on per-page fees) or (b) a flat fee of $6.50.

Don’t charge patients for copies if they can’t afford it.

Significantly, recent changes in federal and Alabama laws (i.e., HIPAA and the new ALBME rules) prohibit a physician from charging any fee to make copies of the medical record of a patient who is not able to pay.6 Unfortunately, there is no specific guidance to help physicians determine whether a patient is able to pay a reasonable, cost-based fee. The new rules indicate that, in making this determination, physicians “should give primary consideration to the ethical and professional duties owed to other physicians and to their patients.”

Don’t charge for access via an online patient portal.

Likewise, physicians may not charge a fee to a patient to access his electronic health record. Specifically, HIPAA precludes physicians and other covered entities from charging a fee to the patient to access his record using the View, Download and Transmit functionality of a certified electronic health record (“CEHRT”).

Notify the patient about any charges in advance.

Laws also prohibit a physician from charging a fee for copies unless the physician notifies the patient about the fee in advance (i.e., when the patient makes the request). The physician must also provide the patient with a breakdown of the fee, upon request. In fact, HHS recommends the physician make its normal charges for copies available to the public on its website or by other means.

Discussion

The new ALBME rules include some limitations not before instituted in previous rules. It is important to note the limitations discussed in this article only apply to a request made by the patient.7 So, for example, if a patient needs to provide copies of his medical record to an attorney, a physician may be permitted to charge a different (read: greater) fee if the attorney makes the request (by subpoena, for example), as opposed to the patient requesting the physician transfer the records to the attorney.

The new rules also include provisions intended to bring the Alabama rules into compliance with applicable provisions of the federal HIPAA rules.8 While the new rules provide needed clarity as to certain matters, questions remain. Likewise, HIPAA imposes certain additional limitations on permissible charges that must be taken into account, even though they are not mentioned in the ALBME rules.

In any event, the fact is, as in most legal and regulatory matters, the answer to the seemingly simple question, “What can I charge to make a copy of the patient’s record?” is it depends on a number of factors. In addition, federal and State of Alabama authorities have made it clear they intend to target physicians who charge excessive fees in future enforcement actions. Consequently, it is vital physicians have a proper understanding of the issues addressed above and promptly take appropriate action to comply.

Nothing in this article should be considered legal advice. In the event you need legal advice in respect to the matters above, or other matters, please contact appropriate legal counsel.

Article contributed by D. Brent Wills, Esq., and Mazie Bryant1 of Gilpin Givhan, PC. Gilpin Givhan, PC, is an official partner with the Medical Association.

References
1 Ms. Bryant is a Juris Doctor candidate at the University of Alabama School of Law.

2 See Ala. Admin. Code § 540-x-9-.10(2).

3 Note Section 12-21-6.1 of the Alabama Code still permits a $5.00 “search fee” to be charged. HIPAA explicitly pre-empts Alabama law on this issue. It is not clear whether or when the Alabama Legislature will update the statute.

4 Although HIPAA does not specify a per-page fee that constitutes a reasonable, cost-based fee, there is no indication that the (maximum) per-page fees specified in the new ALBME rules would not pass muster.

5 See Ala. Admin. Code § 540-x-9-.10(2).

6 Ala. Admin. Code 540-X-9.10(2).

7 Note HIPAA treats a request by the patient’s personal representative (as defined in the Privacy Rule) as a request made by the patient.

8 “HIPAA” means, in this context, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, together the privacy, security and breach notification rules promulgated thereunder, as set forth at 42 CFR Part 160 and Part 164, as modified by the Health Information and Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (“HITECH”).

Posted in: Legal Watch

Leave a Comment (0) →

A Promise to Help with Sandra Mathews Ford, M.D.

A Promise to Help with Sandra Mathews Ford, M.D.

BIRMINGHAM – When Sandra Ford was just 8 years old, her father took her to the doctor. Back then, Alabama was under segregationist laws, so it wasn’t anything out of the ordinary for young Sandra and her father to wait on one side of the doctor’s office from the time they walked in around 4 p.m. until after 11 p.m. But there was one time a visit to the doctor left an indelible mark on her, which not only shaped her career in medicine, but it also marked the beginning of her spiritual path.

Originally from Montgomery, Dr. Ford’s parents were school teachers in Clayton. During the week, the family would live in Alabama’s Black Belt and in Montgomery on the weekends. The family would do their best if someone got sick during the week. Health care in rural areas back then was different than it is now. It was actually worse.

“During segregation, the doctor could only take so many patients. So we sat,” Dr. Ford explained. “But, I still remember that day very vividly. I was 8 years old sitting in the doctor’s office, and there was this elderly woman just suffering sitting in the chairs with us. It seemed like they were passing her by. I couldn’t understand why no one could help her. It bothered me a lot…and then I watched her take her last breath. At the age of 8, I watched her die.”

That one visit to the doctor as a child changed Dr. Ford’s life. It planted a seed, which grew through the years. “This is how A Promise to Help started,” she said.

A Promise to Help is a nonprofit medical missionary organization founded by Dr. Ford and her husband, Henry, which is now in its 16th year. The organization serves Alabama’s Black Belt counties, including Barbour, Bullock, Butler, Choctaw, Dallas, Greene, Hale, Lowndes, Macon, Marengo, Montgomery, Perry, Russell, Sumter and Wilcox Counties.

“We’ve been to the most underserved, underprivileged and underinsured counties in this state. A Promise to Help is a volunteer-based organization whose goals are to assist in eliminating health care disparities in Alabama. We have physicians, nurses, ministers, media specialists, counselors, social workers, business leaders, skilled laborers, community activists and others all working together with one thing in mind — helping others,” Dr. Ford said.

The organization hosts volunteers worldwide who come to Alabama once a month to visit communities in the most need. There are 12 missions a year, and although the organization is designated as a nonprofit, it operates almost completely on the generosity of others by donations, not grants.

“We’re both ordained ministers, so this is a ministry for us. It’s a holistic health care initiative where we can minister to the entire body. We have a medical team, a mentoring team, a ministry team, and a team to address their immediate needs such as clothing and food. This is truly a mission of God because we don’t enjoy the benefit of grants. This is just people helping other people. This is the hand of God moving all of us. People give what they can, and we accept that to give to others,” Dr. Ford said.

Each month’s mission presents its own logistical challenges. Using Dr. Ford’s small medical practice in Birmingham as a base of operations, donations of clothing, medicine, equipment and other necessities are stored in every spare space waiting to be deployed once the location has been secured. After local county resources and ministries are contacted and a liaison is in place, it’s time to roll out the mobile health clinic.

The mobile health clinic has two exam beds and is larger on the inside than it looks from the outside. It serves a higher purpose to bring more than just needed health care and medicine to the residents of what Dr. Ford and some volunteers have come to call “Alabama’s Third World.”

“It takes us a while for us to gain the trust of the people in these communities. So many different studies and research projects have come through these areas looking for information, but these things never really touched these people’s lives. And that’s what we want to do. Believe it or not, we have no agenda. This is just something that God has put on our hearts to do…to help,” Dr. Ford said.

A Promise to Help is part of the Spirit of Luke Charitable Foundation™ cofounded by the Fords. If you would like more information about either organization, to make a donation, or to volunteer, visit www.spiritofluke.com.

Posted in: Physicians Giving Back

Leave a Comment (0) →

WIC Program Seeks Public Comment about 2019 State Plan

WIC Program Seeks Public Comment about 2019 State Plan

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for WIC provides nutrition education and supplemental foods, and serves pregnant, postpartum and breastfeeding women and children up to age 5 whose family incomes are up to 185 percent of poverty. Special emphasis is placed on the participation of infants, children and high-risk pregnant women.

The WIC Program regulations require public comment from interested individuals in the writing of the 2019 State Plan of Program Operations for the WIC Program. The plan may be reviewed online at http://alabamapublichealth.gov/wic/ between Sept. 4-18, 2018.

Written comments may be e-mailed via the adph.org website or mailed to the following address by Sept. 18, 2018:

Alabama Department of Public Health
WIC Program, Attention Amanda Martin
The RSA Tower, Suite 1300
201 Monroe St.
P.O. Box 303017
Montgomery, Ala. 36130-3017

Telephone: (334) 206-5673

Posted in: WIC

Leave a Comment (0) →

Medical Association, AMA, Others Take a Stand on New CMS Rule

Medical Association, AMA, Others Take a Stand on New CMS Rule

The Medical Association joined with the American Medical Association and more than 170 other organizations to support some components of CMS’ “Patients Over Paperwork” initiative, and say three of its components need to be enacted immediately to reduce “note bloat” redundancy, yet also to oppose a proposal to collapse payment rates for physician office visit services over concern about unintended consequences included in the proposed 2019 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule and Quality Payment Program rule.

Read the letter here.

The AMA and other organizations called for the immediate adoption of these proposals:

  • Changing the required documentation of a patient’s history to focus only on the interval since the previous visit.
  • Eliminating requirement for physicians to redocument information that has already been documented in the patient’s record by practice staff or by the patient.
  • Removing the need to justify providing a home visit instead of an office visit.

However, the CMS proposal to “collapse” payment rates for five evaluation and management (E/M) office visit services into two has the potential to create unintended negative consequences for patients.

“We oppose the implementation of this proposal because it could hurt physicians and other health care professionals in specialties that treat the sickest patients, as well as those who provide comprehensive primary care, ultimately jeopardizing patients’ access to care,” the letter states. The AMA and the other organizations joining the letter also oppose a proposed policy that would cut payments for multiple services delivered on the same day.

The organizations note their willingness to work with CMS to resolve issues connected with calculating the appropriate coding, payment and documentation requirements for different levels of E/M services. They also declare their support for the workgroup the AMA created of coding experts who would “arrive at concrete solutions” in time for CMS to implement in the 2020 Medicare physician fee schedule.

Posted in: Advocacy

Leave a Comment (0) →

Big Changes Proposed for Evaluation and Management Services

Big Changes Proposed for Evaluation and Management Services

It’s been more than 20 years since the 1997 revisions to Evaluation and Management guidelines, which focus mainly on physical examination. The 2019 proposed changes provide practitioners a choice in the basis of documenting E/M visits; alleviating the burdens and focusing attention on alternatives that better reflect the current practice of medicine. The implementation of electronic medical records has allowed providers to document more information, yet repetitive templates, cloning and other workflows have pushed the envelope on compliance in documenting the traditional elements of the visit.

The proposed changes to Evaluation and Management were released in the Federal Register on July 27. The Center of Medicare and Medicaid Services is taking comments until Sept. 10, before releasing the Final 2019 Medicare Fee Schedule.

The CPT guidelines are not changing! The American Medical Association is the author of the CPT books, and there is no change in the 1995 or 1997 guidelines for E/M documentation. Medical necessity remains the overarching criteria to select a level of service. There are three proposals to reduce documentation burdens related to CMS:

Proposal One

Simplify History and Exam Documentation, allowing the physicians to focus on changes in health and allow ancillary staff to document chief complaint and history without the physician re-entering it.

Proposal Two

Remove History and Exam from E/M level decision. Currently, history and exam are two of three required elements along with medical decision-making. Medical decision-making would be the sole determinant of E/M level. Providers could use face-to-face time as a determining factor when selecting an E/M service level.

Proposal Three

Pay a single rate for Level E/M visits for the reduced burden in documentation and coding guidelines. Proposals one and two will be a package deal in proposal three. The tables below reflect the proposed payment rates.

Table A – New Patient E/M: Non-facility

Code        2018 Payment Rate     CY 2018 New Payment Rate

99201 $45 $44
99202 $76 $135
99203 $110 $135
99204 $167 $135
99205 $211 $135

 

Table B – Established Patient E/M: Non-facility

Code           2018 Payment Rate             CY 2018 New Payment Rate

99211 $22 $24
99212 $45 $93
99213 $74 $93
99214 $109 $93
99215 $148 $93

 

There are two add-on codes proposed, including one for primary care to cover inherent complexity. The primary care add-on code is GPC1X. It can only be utilized by primary care. By adding the G code to Medicare claims, internal medicine and family practice can actually earn up to five percent more revenue and reduce documentation efforts.

The add-on code available to a list of ten specialties is GPC0X. The specialties were chosen due to the inherent complexity related to E/M. The specialties eligible for this add-on code are: endocrinology, rheumatology, hematology/oncology, urology, neurology, obstetrics/gynecology, allergy/immunology, otolaryngology, cardiology or interventional pain. The big loser in this proposal is pulmonary medicine, with a reduction of 6.2 percent in revenue projected by Part B News. The big winner is urology, with a projected increase in revenue of 22 percent with the add-on code.

As a certified coder, I believe the reduction in documentation is a positive change. Most physicians were not educated on CPT coding as part of their clinical training. Physicians want to be compliant, but the guidelines are too complex to analyze during each encounter. The ancillary staff should be trained to effectively gather pertinent information to support the physician. This would allow physicians to focus on the clinical needs of the patient. CMS expects medical necessity to prevail and each encounter to stand alone in relation to the full medical record.

A proposal for 2019, we aren’t hearing about is an E/M multiple procedure payment adjustment related to duplicative resource costs when an E/M is visited and a procedure with global periods are furnished on the same day. CMS would reduce the E/M payment by 50 percent.

Administrators should review the proposed options for documentation to understand the effect on their practice. If your practice has the potential to see a negative adjustment without the option to utilize an add-on code, you should analyze the E/M dispersion pattern to understand the financial impact to your practice. For the most part, the proposed changes are positive in an effort to reduce the burden of redundant documentation. We should continue to hear much more information regarding this game-changing proposal particularly after the comment period ends on Sept. 10. The final 2019 fee schedule will be released around the first week of November. Stay tuned!

If you would like to send a comment to CMS on these changes (and we suggest you do), go to https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/07/27/2018-14985/medicare-program-revisions-to-payment-policies-under-the-physician-fee-schedule-and-other-revisions.

Article contributed by Tammie Lunceford, Healthcare and Dental Consultant, Warren Averett Healthcare Consulting Group. Warren Averett is an official partner with the Medical Association.

Posted in: CMS

Leave a Comment (0) →
Page 1 of 2 12