Archive for January, 2021

Op-ed: Alabama physicians face challenges head-on during vaccine rollout

Op-ed: Alabama physicians face challenges head-on during vaccine rollout

By: John Meigs, Jr., MD, President – Medical Association of the State of Alabama

Because of a seemingly slow rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine, physicians have started to hear many concerns from their patients. Understandably, the people of Alabama are growing more eager each day to get vaccinated. Physicians were privileged to be included in the first tier of vaccine recipients and remain our patients’ biggest advocate for vaccination against the Coronavirus. 

In addition to issues like staffing shortages, a major obstacle we face is the fact that from week to week, our practices and hospitals are not alerted to when we are getting more vaccines or exactly how many we will receive. Even the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH) has no input into the quantity allocated and is typically notified less than 24 hours before the vaccine is shipped. This makes it extremely difficult to set up vaccination and follow-up appointments. 

It’s tempting but comparing Alabama’s response to surrounding states doesn’t necessarily make sense. The number of COVID-19 vaccine doses allocated to Alabama is based on our population and is not determined by how much vaccine is on hand in the state. The number of doses remaining from previous allocations does not affect the number of doses that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) authorizes for Alabama.

Alabama still faces struggles in figuring out the logistics of vaccine distribution and allocation but there are a few things your physician wants you to know about the process.

  • The Federal Government determines the quantity of vaccines that are allocated to the state.
  • There is a shortage of available vaccines in Alabama.
  • There are 326,000 healthcare providers, nursing home residents, law enforcement officers, firefighters and 350,000 persons 75 years of age and older that are currently eligible for the vaccine.
  • The number of first doses of the vaccine shipped to Alabama per week only averages around 50,000 to 60,000.

Wide distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine will take time. While we are anxious for the vaccine to be made available to all Alabamians, physicians also want to urge you to wait until you fall into the appropriate tier. As of January 28th, Alabama is administering vaccines to healthcare workers, residents and staff in long-term care facilities, first responders, and individuals 75 years of age and older. 

We know vaccines are the best bet to slow this pandemic down and get enough folks immunized so the virus won’t spread as easily. However for now, even after we get vaccinated, we need to continue to wear masks and physically distance. We want to protect folks from a disease that can be very deadly. If we all work together, we will be that much closer to getting life back to normal.

Posted in: Coronavirus, Leadership, Members

Leave a Comment (0) →

Ben Robbins Wins the Special General Election for House District Seat 33

Republican candidate, Ben Robbins, won the special general election against Democrat candidate, Fred Crum, for house district seat 33 yesterday, Tuesday, January 19, 2021. The house district seat was previously held by Rep. Ron Johnson (R) who passed away on July 14, 2020.

According to the Alabama Daily News, Robbins received 2,232 of the 3,269 votes, 68%, Tuesday. He is an attorney in Sylacauga.

Click here to read the full article about the election from Alabama Daily News.

As the political action committee for the Medical Association, ALAPAC supports candidates who best represent the interests of physicians and their patients. This is why ALAPAC supported Ben Robbins (R) for the house district seat 33.

Posted in: Uncategorized

Leave a Comment (0) →

ALAPAC Announces Support for April Weaver in Senate District 14

ALAPAC Announces Support for April Weaver in Senate District 14

Alabama Medical PAC (ALAPAC) is proud to announce its support of former State Representative April Weaver in the upcoming special election for Senate District 14.

The ALAPAC Board considers many factors in making campaign support decisions, including candidate-vetting meetings with ALAPAC staff and board members, electronic surveys of ALAPAC contributors, third-party polling data and outreach from local physician ALAPAC contributors voicing support. Regarding its decision to support Weaver, ALAPAC Board Chairman David Herrick, M.D. noted her previous role as Chair of the House Health Committee and the relationships Weaver has built with physicians in her area and across the state.

“Supporting April Weaver for Senate District 14 was an easy decision,” Herrick said. “From her previous roles in both the Alabama House of Representatives and HHS, Weaver has consistently been a leader in healthcare industry and an advocate of policies that move medicine forward. The overwhelming outreach and support from physicians in her area, as well as statewide, is a testament to the positive impact Weaver has made both personally and professionally.”

At a time when healthcare policy is so polarized, electing candidates who understand these issues and value physician input is a top priority. April Weaver is that type of candidate, and we encourage all physicians in Senate District 14 to support her campaign. The special primary election is Tuesday, March 30, 2021. Senate District 14 represents portions of Bibb, Chilton, Hale, Jefferson and Shelby counties.

Posted in: Advocacy, ALAPAC

Leave a Comment (0) →

Physician Compensation Models in Light of Recent Stark Law Changes

Physician Compensation Models in Light of Recent Stark Law Changes

by Kelli C. Fleming, Burr Forman

On December 2, 2020, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) finalized sweeping changes to the federal Physician Self-Referral Law, commonly known as the Stark Law. At least one such change may materially impact how physician group practices allocate profits from Stark Law designated health services (“DHS”).

Under the Stark Law, a medical practice with at least two physicians must qualify as a “group practice” in order to take advantage of the Stark Law in-office ancillary services exception, which is the exception often used to allow a physician owner or physician employee to order DHS from his or her own medical practice. As part of the group practice requirements, DHS profits must be distributed to all physicians in the group, or to a pool of five or more physicians in the group, in a manner that does not directly take into account the volume or value of a physician’s referrals for DHS.

Currently, many physician group practices, especially large or multi-specialty practices, allocate DHS profits to its physicians based on DHS categories. For example, profits from one DHS category (e.g., imaging services) may be allocated to certain physicians in the group practice while profits from a second DHS category (e.g., physical therapy) may be allocated to a different (or possibly overlapping) subset of physicians in the group practice.

However, under the new Stark Law rules, CMS has clarified that DHS profits can no longer be allocated based on DHS category. Instead, profits from all DHS categories for all physicians in the group practice (or a component of at least five physicians in the group practice) must be aggregated and then distributed to all physicians in the group practice (or a component of at least five physicians in the group practice) in a manner that does not directly take into account the volume or value of referrals. Using the example above, under this new clarification, DHS profits from both imaging services and physical therapy services ordered by physicians in the group practice (or a component of at least five physicians in the group practice) must be aggregated and then the total aggregated profits distributed to such physicians in a manner that does not take into account the volume or value of referrals.

CMS also clarified that if a physician practice has more than one pool of five physicians, each pool does not have to be treated in an identical manner. For example, one pool may utilize one distribution methodology and a second pool may utilize another distribution methodology, as long as the methodologies used are Stark Law compliant (i.e., not based on the volume or value of referrals).

CMS recognizes that its prior regulatory guidance on the distribution of DHS profits has led to confusion by industry participants. While the other recent changes to the Stark Law take effect on January 19, 2021, the changes with regard to the distribution of DHS profits take effect on January 1, 2022.

Kelli Fleming is a Partner at Burr & Forman LLP and practices exclusively in the firm’s Health Care Practice Group.

Posted in: Legal Watch, MVP

Leave a Comment (0) →