Posts Tagged primary

Can We Fix Alabama’s Rural Physician Shortage?

Can We Fix Alabama’s Rural Physician Shortage?

It takes up to 10 years to train a physician. That decade of training is just one contributing factor for the reason the United States is facing a serious shortage of physicians. Other factors include the growth and aging of the population and the impending retirements of older physicians. While medical schools have increased enrollment by nearly 30 percent since 2002, the 1997 cap on Medicare support for graduate medical education has stymied increases in the number of residency training positions, which are necessary to address the projected shortage of physicians.

A 2019 study conducted for the Association of American Medical Colleges by IHS Markit predicts the United States will face a shortage of between 46,900 and 121,900 physicians by 2032. There will be shortages in both primary and specialty care, and specialty shortages will be particularly large.

Unfortunately, the State of Alabama is already experiencing a physician shortage, most notably in rural areas, and to make matters worse Alabama ranks in the last five of 50 states in health status categories.

Even with Alabama’s medical schools working to educate and nurture a future crop of physicians, there’s no guarantee these medical school graduates will remain here through their residencies or return to Alabama to practice medicine should they complete residencies outside of the state.

In 2018, the Pickens County Medical Society introduced a resolution at the Medical Association’s Annual Business Session to create a planning task force to develop and restore adequate health care manpower with a specific focus on Alabama’s rural areas. The resolution stands as a reminder that while primary care medicine is effective in raising health status, supporting hospitals and improving the economic status of disadvantaged communities, the state’s aging population is also causing an escalation in need for primary care physicians.

“The task force has brought together physicians from across the state with various practice situations to work with the many entities that comprise our health care system,” said Beverly Jordan, M.D., a family and sports medicine physician from Enterprise, Ala., who chairs the task force. “Both long
and short-term goals are being developed, and we look forward to expanding our work to non-physician groups that play an essential role in the development and sustainability of physicians in rural Alabama. A variety of barriers to physician practice in rural Alabama have already been identified, as well as several amazing programs that address those barriers and ideas for innovative solutions.”

Members of the task force met in person for the first time in August 2018 and discussed a number of issues but focused on the importance of fully funding the Board of Medical Scholarship Awards, scope of practice, physician pipeline programs, education and the possibility of GME expansion, recruitment and retention of physicians through meaningful tax credits and rural community support, and start-up business models.

Medicaid Commissioner Stephanie Azar and Dave White from the Governor’s Office joined the meeting to hear the concerns of the task force and take their report back to Gov. Kay Ivey.

“Because this was the first face-to-face meeting of the task force, we had a lot of ground to cover,” said Executive Director Mark Jackson. “Naturally there are a lot of concerns about health care shortages in rural areas, but our goal is a long-term solution. The members of the task force realize this isn’t an easy fix, which is why they were willing to express their concerns openly and honestly to the Governor’s staff.”

This year during the Annual Business Meeting the task force offered a report of its first year’s work including a number of initiatives to improve the rural primary care workforce, new and proposed initiatives, and future recommendations.

 

What Are We Doing NOW to Improve the Rural Alabama Primary Care Physician Network?

There are already a number of initiatives in place designed to improve the rural physician workforce in Alabama. These have proven successful in the past, yet given the growth trends in population and fewer physicians are choosing to locate to rural settings, these initiatives will not be enough to sustain adequate access to care for our residents living in rural areas:

Alabama Board of Medical Scholarship Awards  Amended in 1994, this legislative program was funded at about $1.4 million in 2018. Funding currently allows about nine recipients a year (full cost of medical school attendance), with a significant waiting list. As a result, 96 percent of recipients practice in Alabama; 98 percent in primary care (78 percent family medicine); 90 percent in rural Alabama; 73 percent continue in their original communities after completing the scholarship obligation.

Physician Tax Credit Act  The State of Alabama allows a state income tax credit of $5,000 for up to five years for a physician or dentist in rural practice. Legislation is currently being considered to enhance the tax credit. The Medical Association staff will report on any changes to this legislation as the Regular Session of the Alabama Legislature continues.

Rural Medical Scholar Program (RMSP)  Since 1996 this program has enjoyed statewide and national acclaim as a successful model for rural college students through medical school. On average, 11 students are admitted to this highly selective five-year medical education program of The University of Alabama and the University of Alabama School of Medicine. The Rural Medical Scholars Program includes a year of study, after students receive their undergraduate degree, that leads to a master’s degree in Rural Community Health and early admission to the School of Medicine. Undergraduates may qualify after their junior year if they have met most of the requirements for their undergraduate major. In the year prior to entry into medical school, students take courses related to rural health and the practice of primary care in rural areas, and participate in special seminars, field trips and community service programs. Since its founding in 1996, more than 200 students have participated in the program, and of the graduates, 81.8 percent practice in Alabama while 62 percent practice in rural Alabama.

Rural Medical Program (RMP)  The Rural Medical Program began in 2005 and is modeled after the RMSP. This five-year medical school curriculum’s sole purpose is the training of physicians to serve in the areas of greatest necessity. RMP is a jointly sponsored program by the Auburn University College of Sciences and Mathematics and UAB School of Medicine Huntsville Regional Campus. The RMP curriculum promotes family medicine by providing for students to attend the annual meetings of the Alabama Academy of Family Practice and the National Student American Academy of Family Practice. Students also participate in the Medical Association’s Governmental Affairs Conference in Washington, D.C. The program has 79 percent of graduates that are family physicians, 90 percent are in primary care practice, and 74 percent are rural.

Early Medical and Other Health Professions Pipeline Programs  Rural Health Scholars, Rural Minority Scholars and others have sought to provide high school and community college student recruitment and guidance. Tuscaloosa’s Rural Minority Health Scholars has had 200 members and 15 have gone to medical school. Of the 650 Rural Health Scholars from 1993-2018, 56 have gone to medical school. These programs are aimed at all health care occupations and serve to raise awareness of medical opportunities for hundreds.

Huntsville Rural Premedical Internship (HRPI)  Since 2004, by bringing college students with rural backgrounds to the UAB Huntsville medical campus for a summer experience including clinic shadowing, didactic sessions, field trips, and medical skill workshops. With 74 percent of available graduates being accepted to medical school (125/169); 67 percent of participants having completed medical school and residency are in primary care; 67 percent are in Alabama with 46 percent rural. Of those in HRPI and a rural track such as RMP or RMSP, 75 percent are rural Alabama family physicians.

Alabama Area Health Education Centers (AHEC)  Started in 2012, five centers across Alabama focus on improving access and workforce in rural and underserved communities. AHEC engages in student recruitment and support and physician education and retention activities, partnering with medical and other health professions schools to link students to positive clinical rotations in underserved areas. Revised HRSA funding directions have decreased support for this level of activity by AHEC, through its centers continue to address these goals through other support. Improved networking, information and digital resources may provide leverage for these important but challenging activities.

Medical School Admissions Committees  Important factors include student recruitment, school policies and priorities for recruiting rural and underserved students, and committee membership (particularly rural and family physicians). The Medical Association can provide opportunities for expanded dialogue with our medical schools about how to increase the number of rural medical students, utilizing successful models from our own state and others. Using these current programs and initiatives as benchmarks, the task force began to work outward searching for changes and new models to reinforce what was already working and expand opportunities for new physicians in rural areas.

“The most important fact about this rural task force is that the Medical Association is stepping up to the plate to address the wide range of problems and challenges facing rural health in our state. That’s a highly responsible and even courageous act. The last time our Association did this was more than 20 years ago, and the outcome was the modern version of the Medical Scholarship Act and our current collaborative model for advanced practice providers such as nurse practitioners and physician assistants,” said Bill Curry, M.D., Dean of Rural Programs for University of Alabama Birmingham School of Medicine and one of the chairs of the Manpower Shortage Task Force. “This time, Dr. Jordan and the Board have taken a comprehensive and long term approach. We’re looking at everything from the physician workforce pipeline – reaching from rural schools through college, medical school, residency, and practice recruitment and retention – to the plight of rural hospitals to the responsibilities of our medical schools and state agencies to partner with communities and professional societies across all that’s involved in rural health. It’s a very full plate, and it’s important to identify initiatives with impact and to set priorities.”

The Next Step

Fact: During the last five years nationwide, applications to and enrollment in medical schools have increased.

Fact: While there is a projected shortage of primary care physicians, there is also a projected shortage of specialists.

Fact: Fixing the physician shortage requires a multipronged approach including innovations in team-based care and better use of technology to make care more effective and efficient.

Facing the facts of a physician shortage is the first part of the battle. The members of the Manpower Shortage Task Force had the opportunity to define new initiatives to begin to create a path to move the state forward and away from a deficit of physicians in rural areas.

Practice Incubator Models  Multiple partnerships involving existing or new practices, health systems and local governments, with or without initial support through the Alabama Board of Medical Scholarship Awards, the National Health Service Corps, or other scholarship programs. The incubator process involves recruitment of mentee doctors (frequently just out of training) to rural practices established by mentors. The mentee then learns private practice and is subsequently enabled to move to another rural location by the mentor or the mentee may simply buy into the existing practice if sufficient growth has occurred. The benefit to the mentor is a return on investment of satellite practices or income realized above the salary of the mentee.

Improved Workforce Database  Traditional sources of information about the Alabama physician workforce include the Alabama Board of Medical Examiners, the American Medical Association physician database, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the National Rural Health Association, County Health Rankings, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and information from the Alabama Department of Industrial Relations. Recently the UASOM Huntsville Office for Family Health, Education and Research (OFHER) has combined, analyzed and displayed data from various sources into more usable and interactive formats, and the Alabama Rural Health Association has collaborated in this effort also.

Improve and Standardize the Designation of Primary Care Shortage Areas for Alabama  HRSA has established a work directive for all state Offices of Primary Care (PCOs) to establish a state network of rational service areas for identifying local and/or regional shortages and developing rational and reasonable solutions to eliminate identified shortages. The Alabama medical community must be a major player in the development of Alabama’s Rational Service Areas (RSAs). There is a major concern if the Medical Association and the medical community are not involved in the formation of state RSAs, then private practice primary care providers and physician mental health providers and rural hospitals will be left out.

Scholarships  Graduate medical education programs in primary care need more scholarships. Some scholarships expect recipients to enter primary care while others require rural service. Currently, the BMSA is the most successful program in the state, and possibly the nation, for providing physicians to rural areas. The scholarship is repaid by rural service of four to six years depending upon the size of the underserved town.
Changes in Undergraduate Medical Education Students most likely to enter rural practice are those from rural areas. Selecting students from rural Alabama, expanding rural premedical programs, and expanding the rural tracks will provide a larger pool of applicants to the state’s family medicine residencies. Other options include allowing early admission as college juniors providing they achieve predetermined academic and MCAT standards; and placing third-year students with primary care physicians, which serve to increase student familiarity and comfort with the practice.

Changes in Graduate Medical Education  Data shows the physician most likely to practice in Alabama is one who is from Alabama and who attends medical school and residency here. Also, the person who is from a rural area in the state is the most likely to return to a rural area. The most important mission is to fill the current family medicine slots with the Alabamians most likely to enter rural practice. New residency programs are also an option. These programs are beginning to pop up across the state from Madison County to Baldwin County in a variety of specialties.

Transition from Residency to Practice  The final chapter of the process is moving from a residency to a medical practice. The expansion of the BMSA is the surest and fastest method of attracting physicians (which has solid, objective data proving its worth). Out-of-state physicians may be attracted to rural Alabama because of the advantages in cost of living and professional satisfaction. Physicians may move from states ranked as the worst in which to practice medicine (IL, CA, MD, OR, MA, DC, NY, RI, NM and NJ) to Alabama, which was ranked the third best in the U.S. behind NC and TX. (Medscape Physician Survey, 2016).

Targeting the Black Belt Communities  According to the Black Belt Solutions/Community Engagement Subcommittee’s Co-chair John Wheat, M.D., engagement and partnerships among communities and resource agencies for this area will be the lynchpin for its success.

“This population and region desire doctors and other health professionals who understand their life, identify with them, and want to live and practice among them,” Dr. Wheat explained. “It is apparent such physicians are far more likely to be from the Black Belt than elsewhere, their course through medical education must be supported in many ways, that practice facilities must be on par with urban counterparts, that social and professional contexts must be prepared for them, and patients must be able to afford to come to them. Our first and continuing task is to engage the knowledge, trust and commitment of multiple groups with varying perspectives and influences for making changes required to succeed in these efforts.”

Dr. Wheat and co-chair Brittney Anderson, M.D., are originally from Alabama’s Black Belt and have begun reaching into the community to contact local ministers, county commissioners, physicians who grew up in the region, and other community activists with strong commitments to the region for opinions and ideas about how to better serve the area.

“We have been well received and encouraged to continue toward setting up a planning structure that will be inclusive and unify multiple groups and agencies. We look forward to having a planning group that will receive enthusiastic invitations from various Black Belt communities asking us to partner with them in producing and maintaining the health care professionals in their community,” Dr. Wheat said.

The Long Road Ahead…

The Medical Association and the members of the Manpower Shortage Task Force realize there is a long road ahead to finding the best solutions to Alabama’s physician shortage in our rural areas, but we are working toward solutions…and there will be many solutions and many partners to take part in the process.

“We recognized that without a viable rural health system – which has to include either a hospital or a freestanding facility with after-hours and emergency coverage – it’s difficult or impossible to have effective primary care and other services in a rural community,” Dr. Curry said. “The Association’s reaching out to the Alabama Hospital Association and other partners is a huge step, and I hope the regulatory or other changes needed will happen soon.”

Dr. Jordan agreed, adding that help from established physicians is always welcome.

“Our work has just begun, and we look forward to continued efforts to both develop and sustain excellent health care communities in rural Alabama,” Dr. Jordan said. “As we expand our workgroups to include educational, business, political and religious leaders in our state, we welcome the involvement of our physician members. Please don’t hesitate to contact us if you are willing to help – we need you!”

If you would like to be involved with the task force, have questions, or would like to contribute an idea, please email Association Executive Director Mark Jackson.

Posted in: Advocacy

Leave a Comment (0) →

E/M Code Changes: A Deeper Dive at What Could be Coming for 2021

E/M Code Changes: A Deeper Dive at What Could be Coming for 2021

This is the second in a series of articles reviewing notable changes in the 2019 Physician Fee Schedule Final Rule and provides a deeper discussion of the potential changes to the E/M Coding regime scheduled to take effect in 2021. For the original article, please see Evaluating and Managing the E/M Codes for 2019 and Beyond.

Brief Recap

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services proposed some major changes to the way Evaluation and Management services are reimbursed in the 2019 Physician Fee Schedule Proposed Rule. The PFS Final Rule[1] adopted some of the proposed changes but scheduled them to take effect in 2021. The commentary on these proposals and CMS’s responses in the PFS Final Rule provide some valuable insight into what CMS is trying to accomplish with the E/M reimbursement changes and what these changes might ultimately look like when made effective in 2021.

Proposals for 2021

Collapsing Reimbursement for Levels 2-4.  CMS has proposed to collapse the reimbursement for E/M level 2 through level 4[2] codes into a single reimbursement amount for office/outpatient settings. To come up with this combined payment rate, CMS is taking the average of the current inputs for determining E/M reimbursement (work RVUs, direct PE inputs, time, and specialty mix) for level 2 through 4 E/M codes, weighted by the frequency with which each code is currently billed (based on the most recent five years of utilization data). For an example of what this new reimbursement structure might look like, see Table 19 and Table 20 below (excerpted from the Final Rule), which compare the 2021 E/M reimbursement methodology to the current methodology for both new and established patients in terms of 2018 dollars:

As you might expect, this new reimbursement structure will likely result in a reduction in overall reimbursement for many physicians who ordinarily bill higher level E/M codes. Fortunately, CMS is proposing new add-on codes (to be billed only with the combined level 2 through 4 visits) with additional reimbursement which should mitigate some of the effects of the new E/M reimbursement structure.

Add-On Codes.  CMS finalized its proposal for new add-on codes to account for primary care and particularly complex visits, as well as extended visits associated with E/M services. CMS indicated that there should not be any additional documentation requirements for these add-on codes (for the most part)[3] and that information already captured on the claim form should suffice to show that the E/M service provided was for primary care.

Primary Care Add-On Code.  CMS proposed an add-on code (GPC1X) to be appended to claims for primary care E/M services. Notably, the add-on code only applies to face-to-face time with patients[4], and it cannot be appended to a global procedure code that encompasses E/M services. CMS expects this add-on code to be used predominantly by primary care practitioners (e.g., family medicine, internal medicine, pediatrics, and geriatrics), and in fact, indicated that this add-on code would likely be billed for almost all office/outpatient-based E/M services provided by these practitioners. However, CMS also noted that some specialists also function as primary care practitioners (e.g., OB/GYN or cardiologist) and may be able to utilize this add-on code.

Add-On Code for Specialty Professionals with Large E/M Volume.  CMS also proposed an add-on code (GCG0X) for certain specialties which perform mostly high-level (4 or 5) E/M services (rather than procedures) involving “non-procedural approaches to complex conditions that are intrinsically diffuse to multi-organ or neurologic diseases.” CMS originally included certain specialties[5] in the descriptor for this add-on code but has noted that several appropriate specialties[6] were omitted and that the appropriate reporting of this add-on code “should be apparent based on the nature of the clinical issues addressed at the E/M visit, and not limited by the practitioner’s specialty.” CMS also noted that there may be some rare instances where both the primary care add-on code and the specialty professional add-on code could be billed for the same service (provided all the requirements for both codes are met in a single E/M visit).[7]

Extended Visit Add-On Code.  There is also an add-on code (GPRO1) to account for additional resources utilized when physicians have extended visits with patients. This code may be billed if the practitioner spends between 34 and 69 minutes (for established patients) or 38 and 89 minutes (for new patients) of face-to-face time with the patient, regardless of which level (2, 3, or 4) E/M code was reported. Providers will have to note the amount of time spent face-to-face with the patient in order to bill for the extended visit code.

Choice of Documentation Method.  The current (1995 or 1997) E/M documentation guidelines[8] are based on three factors (all of which must be documented): History or Present Illness, Physical Examination, and Medical Decision Making (MDM). Starting in 2021, practitioners will have the option to document E/M services using any one of the following documentation methods: (1) the current (1995 or 1997) guidelines; (2) MDM only; or (3) time only. If practitioners decide to use the existing guidelines or the MDM-only documentation approach, they would only need documentation consistent with the current level 2 E/M service in order to be reimbursed the combined amount for level 2 through 4 E/M services,[9] or consistent with the level 5 documentation requirements where a level 5 E/M code is billed. For practitioners using time as the documentation method, the practitioner must document face-to-face time personally spent with the patient at least equal to the typical time associated with the applicable level of E/M Code.[10]

Regardless of which documentation method practitioners choose, they must still be diligent in documenting medical necessity, as CMS noted several times in the Final Rule that medical necessity would have to be documented in the record regardless of the documentation method the provider chooses. Based on CMS’s comments in the Final Rule, practitioners may expect additional opportunities to comment on the allowable documentation methods in the coming years before the policy is finalized in 2021.

Conclusion

If these proposals move forward over the next several years, it appears there will be substantial disruption not only in how E/M services are reimbursed, but in how they are documented and billed. It is unclear whether these proposals will achieve CMS’s goal of reducing the administrative burden on practitioners, as the proposals simplify E/M coding in some respects and complicate it in others. Either way, practitioners should have the opportunity over the next two years to continue to comment on these proposals in an effort to have CMS modify or refine them before they go into effect in 2021.

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

 

[1] CMS-1693-F, available at https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2018-24170.pdf.

[2] CMS originally proposed to collapse the reimbursement for E/M level 2 through 5 services into a single reimbursement amount but for now has decided to keep a separate reimbursement amount for level 5 E/M services to “better account for the care and needs of particularly complex patients.”

[3] For instances where the billing of the appropriate add-on code is not as readily apparent based on the information on the claim form, practitioners should consider additional documentation in the medical record to support the billing of the add-on codes.

[4] There are already add-on codes for non-face-to-face time, such as CCM and BHI codes.

[5] Endocrinology, rheumatology, hematology/oncology, urology, neurology, OB/GYN, allergy/immunology, otolaryngology, cardiology, or interventional pain management.

[6] Nephrology, psychiatry, pulmonology, infectious disease, and hospice and palliative care medicine.

[7] CMS provides an example of a cardiologist in a rural area who provides care for complex cardiac conditions as well as primary care in his or her clinical practice. If the cardiologist provided both primary care services and specialty cardiology services in a given E/M visit, both GPC1X and GCG0X could be billed for the visit.

[8] 1995 Documentation Guidelines for Evaluation and Management Services, available at https://www.cms.gov/Outreach-and-Education/Medicare-Learning-Network-MLN/MLNEdWebGuide/Downloads/95Docguidelines.pdf; 1997 Guidelines for Evaluation and Management Services, available at https://www.cms.gov/Outreach-and-Education/Medicare-Learning-Network-MLN/MLNEdWebGuide/Downloads/97Docguidelines.pdf.

[9] For example, under the current guidelines, the practitioner must document: (1) a problem-focused history that does not include a review of systems or a past family or social history; (2) a limited examination of the affected body area or organ system; and (3) a straightforward MDM measured by minimal problems, data review, and risk (two of these three). By contrast, a practitioner using the MDM-only method would only have to document straightforward MDM measured by minimal problems, data review and risk (two of these three).

[10] This approach is consistent with the current policy guidelines that time can only be used as the applicable documentation method for E/M codes where counseling and/or coordination of care accounts for more than 50% of the face-to-face time between physician and patient. The typical time associated with a service or procedure is maintained in the AMA CPT codebook.

Posted in: CMS

Leave a Comment (0) →

Association Special Committee Looks at Solving Manpower Shortage

Association Special Committee Looks at Solving Manpower Shortage

MONTGOMERY – Earlier this week, the Association’s Manpower Shortage Task Force met in person for the first time to begin addressing a resolution adopted by the House of Delegates at the 2018 Annual Meeting in April. The resolution, submitted by the Pickens County Medical Society, directs the Association’s new task force to develop and restore adequate health care manpower in all geographic areas in order to provide quality local health care for all Alabama citizens.

Members of the task force discussed a number of issues but focused on the importance of fully funding the Board of Medical Scholarship Awards, scope of practice, physician pipeline programs, education and the possibility of GME expansion, recruitment and retention of physicians through meaningful tax credits and rural community support, and start-up business models.

Medicaid Commissioner Stephanie Azar and Dave White from the Governor’s Office joined the meeting to hear the concerns of the task force and take their report back to Gov. Kay Ivey.

“Because this was the first face-to-face meeting of the task force, we had a lot of ground to cover,” said Executive Director Mark Jackson. “Naturally there are a lot of concerns about health care shortages in rural areas, but our goal is a long-term solution. The members of the task force realize this isn’t an easy fix, which is why they were willing to express their concerns openly and honestly to the Governor’s staff.”

The task force and the resolution stand as a reminder that Alabama ranks in the last five of 50 states in health status categories, and while primary care medicine is effective in raising health status, supporting hospitals and improving the economic status of disadvantaged communities, the state’s aging population is causing an escalation in need for primary care physicians.

See also Association’s New Task Force to Address Health Care Manpower Shortage

Posted in: Members

Leave a Comment (0) →

Demand for Non-Physician Providers Rose to Make Up for Physician Shortage

Demand for Non-Physician Providers Rose to Make Up for Physician Shortage

The Medical Group Management Association has released its 2018 MGMA DataDive Provider Compensation Survey revealing primary care physicians’ compensation rose by more than 10 percent over the past five years. This increase, which is nearly double that of specialty physicians’ compensation over the same period, is further evidence of the worsening primary care physician shortage in the American health care system.

A closer look at this data shows this rise in compensation is not necessarily tied to an increase in productivity. When broken down by primary care focus, family medicine physicians saw a 12 percent rise in total compensation over the past five years, while their median number of work relative value units (wRVUs) remained flat, increasing by less than one percent. Practices offered more benefits to attract and retain physicians, including higher signing bonuses, continuing medical education stipends, and relocation expense reimbursements.

“MGMA’s latest survey has put strong data behind a concerning trend we’ve seen in the American healthcare system for some time—we are experiencing a real shortage of primary care physicians,” said Dr. Halee Fischer-Wright, President and Chief Executive Officer at MGMA. “Many factors contribute to this problem, chief among them being an increasingly aging population that’s outpacing the supply of chronic care they require. And with a nearly two-fold rise in median compensation for primary care physicians over their specialist counterparts and increased additional incentives, we can now see the premium organizations are placing on primary care physicians’ skills to combat this shortage.”

Further supporting this trend, the new survey identified meaningful growth in compensation for non-physician providers over the past 10 years. Nurse practitioners saw the largest increase over this period with almost 30 percent growth in total compensation. Primary care physician assistants saw the second-largest median rise in total compensation with a 25 percent increase.

“In many communities that we visit, nurse practitioners and other advanced practice providers provide immediate care and same day access. These providers play an important role in today’s health care system. It’s more efficient and less expensive than visiting the emergency room,” said Nick Fabrizio, Principal Consultant at MGMA.

Based on comparative data from over 136,000 providers in over 5,800 organizations, the 2018 MGMA DataDive Provider Compensation is the most comprehensive sample of any physician compensation survey in the United States. The survey represents a variety of practice types including physician-owned, hospital-owned, academic practices, as well as providers from across the nation at small and large practices.

Other highlights from the survey include:

  • Over the past five years, rises in median compensation varied greatly by state. In two states, median total compensation actually decreased for primary care physicians: Alabama (-9 percent) and New York (-3 percent). Many states saw much larger increases in median total compensation compared to the national rate, the top five being Wyoming (41 percent), Maryland (29 percent), Louisiana (27 percent), Missouri (24 percent) and Mississippi (21 percent).
  • Current median total compensation for primary care physicians also varies greatly by state. The District of Columbia is the lowest paying with $205,776 in median total compensation. Nevada is the highest paying state with $309,431 in median total compensation.
  • Over the last five years, looking beyond just nurse practitioners, overall non-physician provider compensation has increased at a rate of 8 percent. Looking at the changes over the past 10 years, that rate has doubled to 17 percent. As non-physician providers have increasingly become patients’ primary care providers over the past 10 years, combined with a subsequent shortage of non-physician providers, compensation rates continue to grow for nurse practitioners and primary care physician assistants.
  • The difference in compensation between the highest-paid state compared to the lowest ranges between $100,000 and almost $270,000 for physicians depending on specialties, and $65,000 for non-physician providers.

The 2018 MGMA DataDive Provider Compensation is the most trusted compensation survey in the U.S., undergoing a rigorous evaluation and inspection. Learn more at www.mgma.com/data.

Posted in: Advocacy

Leave a Comment (0) →

What If No One Was On Call…2017 Legislative Review

What If No One Was On Call…2017 Legislative Review

In times of illness, injury and emergency, patients depend on their physicians. But what if no one was on call? Public health would be in jeopardy. However, the same holds true during a legislative session. What would happen if the Medical Association was not on call, advocating for you and your patients at the Alabama Legislature? Keep reading to find out.

Moving Medicine Forward

Patients and their physicians want assurances about not only the quality of care provided, but also its continued availability, accessibility, and affordability. Patients want to make health decisions with their doctors, free from third-party interference. Continued progress toward these objectives requires constant vigilance in the legislative arena, where special interest groups seek to undermine physician autonomy, commoditize medicine and place barriers between physicians, their patients and the care their patients need.

If no one was on call… Alabama wouldn’t be the 20th state to enact Direct Primary Care legislation. DPC puts patients and their doctors back in control of patients’ health and helps the uninsured, the under-insured and those with high-deductible health plans. SB 94 was sponsored by Sen. Arthur Orr (R-Decatur) and Rep. Nathaniel Ledbetter (R-Rainsville).

If no one was on call… the Board of Medical Scholarship Awards could have seen its funding slashed but instead, the program retained its funding level of $1.4 million for 2018. The BMSA grants medical school loans to medical students and accepts as payment for the loan that student’s locating to a rural area to practice medicine. The BMSA is a critical tool to recruiting medical students to commit to practice in rural areas. As well, the economic footprint of every physician is at least $1 million, which improves both community health and local economies.

If no one was on call… Medicaid cuts could have been severe, possibly reducing access for patients within an already fragile system in which less than 20 percent of Alabama physicians participate. Due to work done during the 2016 second special session and the 2017 session, sufficient funds were made available for Medicaid without any scheduled cuts to physicians for 2018. Increasing Medicaid reimbursements to Medicare levels – a continued Medical Association priority – could further increase access to care for Medicaid patients.

Beating Back the Lawsuit Industry

Personal injury lawyers are constantly seeking new opportunities to sue doctors. While Alabama’s medical liability laws have fostered fairness in the courtroom and improved the legal climate, each year personal injury attorneys seek to undo parts of the very law that helps keep “jackpot justice” and frivolous suits in check.

If no one was on call… an $80 million tax increase on physicians to fund a new government-administered malpractice claims payout system called the Patients Compensation System could have passed. The PCS would administer damage claims for physical injury and death of patients allegedly sustained at the hands of physicians. Complaints against individual physicians would begin with a call to a state-run 1-800 line and would go before panels composed of trial lawyers, citizens and physicians to determine an outcome. In addition, any determinations of fault would be reported to the National Practitioner Databank. The Patient Compensation System would undo decades of medical tort reforms, which the Medical Association championed and is forced to defend from plaintiff lawyer attacks each session. The PCS deprives both patients and doctors of their legal rights.

If no one was on call… physicians could have been exposed to triple-damage lawsuits for honest Medicaid billing mistakes. The legislation would create new causes of civil action in state court for Medicaid “false claims.” The legislation would incentivize personal injury lawyers to seek out “whistleblowers” in medical clinics, hospitals and the like to pursue civil actions against physicians and others for alleged Medicaid fraud, with damages being tripled the actual loss to Medicaid. The standard in the bill would have allowed even honest billing mistakes to qualify as “Medicaid fraud,” creating new opportunities for lawsuits where honest mistakes could be penalized.

If no one was on call… physicians would have been held liable for the actions or inactions of midwives attending home births. While a lay midwife bill did pass this session establishing a State Board of Midwifery, the bill contains liability protections for physicians and also prohibitions on non-nurse midwives’ scope of practice, the types of pregnancies they may attend, and a requirement for midwives to report outcomes.

If no one was on call… the right to trial by jury, including jury selection and jury size, could have been manipulated in personal injury lawyers’ favor.

If no one was on call… physicians could have been held legally responsible for others’ mistakes, including home caregivers, medical device manufacturers and for individuals following or failing to follow DNR orders.

Protecting Public Health and Access to Quality Care

Every session, various pieces of legislation aimed at improving the health of Alabamians are proposed. At the same time however, many bills are also introduced that endanger public health and safety, like those where the legislature attempts to set standards for medical care, which force physicians and their staffs to adhere to non-medically established criteria, wasting health care dollars, wasting patients’ and physicians’ time and exposing physicians to new liability concerns.

If no one was on call… legislation could have passed to lower biologic pharmaceutical standards in state law below those set by the FDA, withhold critical health information from patients and their doctors, and significantly increase administrative burdens on physicians.

If no one was on call… allergists and other physicians who compound medications within their offices could have been shut down, limiting access to critical care for patients.

If no one was on call… numerous scope of practice expansions that endanger public health could have become law, including removing all physician oversight of clinical nurse specialists; lay midwives seeking allowance of their attending home births without restriction or regulation; podiatrists seeking to amputate, do surgery and administer anesthesia up the distal third of the tibia; and marriage and family therapists seeking to be allowed to diagnose and treat mental disorders as well as removing the prohibition on their prescribing drugs.

If no one was on call… state boards and agencies with no authority over medicine could have been allowed to increase medical practice costs through additional licensing and reporting requirements.

If no one was on call… legislation dictating medical standards and guidelines for treatment of pregnant women, the elderly and terminal patients could have been placed into bills covering various topics.

Other Bills of Interest

Rural physician tax credits… legislation to increase rural physician tax credits and thereby increase access to care for rural Alabamians did not pass but will be reintroduced next session.

Infectious Disease Elimination… legislation to establish infectious disease elimination pilot programs to mitigate the spread of certain diseases failed to garner support on the last legislative day.

Constitutional amendment proclaiming the State of Alabama’s stance on the rights of unborn children… legislation passed to allow Alabamians to vote at the November 2018 General Election whether to add an amendment to the state constitution to:

“Declare and affirm that it is the public policy of this state to recognize and support the sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children, most importantly the right to life in all manners and measures appropriate and lawful…”

If ratified by the people in November 2018, this Amendment could have implications for women’s health physicians.

Coverage of autism spectrum disorder therapies… legislation passed to require health plans to cover ASD therapies, with some restrictions.

Portable DNR for minors… legislation establishing a portable DNR for minors to allow minors with terminal diseases to attend school activities failed to garner enough votes to pass on the last legislative day.

If the Medical Association was not on call at the legislature, countless bills expanding doctors’ liability, increasing physician taxes and setting standards of care into law could have passed. At the same time, positive strides in public health — like passage of the direct primary care legislation — would not have occurred. The Medical Association is Alabama physicians’ greatest resource in advocating for the practice of medicine and the patients they serve.

Posted in: Advocacy

Leave a Comment (0) →

What If No One Was on Call [at the Legislature]?

What If No One Was on Call [at the Legislature]?

2017 Legislative Recap

In times of illness, injury and emergency, patients depend on their physicians. But what if no one was on call? Public health would be in jeopardy. However, the same holds true during a legislative session. What would happen if the Medical Association was not on call, advocating for you and your patients at the legislature? Keep reading to find out.

Moving Medicine Forward

Continued success in the legislative arena takes constant vigilance. Click here to see our 2017 Legislative Agenda.

If no one was on call… Alabama wouldn’t be the 20th state to enact Direct Primary Care legislation. DPC puts patients and their doctors back in control of patients’ health and helps the uninsured, the underinsured and those with high-deductible health plans. SB 94 was sponsored by Sen. Arthur Orr (R-Decatur) and Rep. Nathaniel Ledbetter (R-Rainsville) and awaits the Governor’s signature.

If no one was on call… the Board of Medical Scholarship Awards could have seen its funding slashed but instead, the program retained its funding level of $1.4 million for 2018. The BMSA grants medical school loans to medical students and accepts as payment for the loan that student’s locating to a rural area to practice medicine. The BMSA is a critical tool for recruiting medical students to commit to practice in rural areas. As well, the economic footprint of every physician is at least $1 million, which improves both community health and local economies.

If no one was on call… Medicaid cuts could have been severe, possibly reducing access for patients within an already fragile system in which less than 20 percent of Alabama physicians participate. Due to work done during the 2016 second special session and the 2017 session, sufficient funds were made available for Medicaid without any scheduled cuts to physicians for 2018. Increasing Medicaid reimbursements to Medicare levels — a continuing priority of the Medical Association — could further increase access to care for Medicaid patients.

Beating Back the Lawsuit Industry

Personal injury lawyers are constantly seeking new opportunities to sue doctors. While Alabama’s medical liability laws have fostered fairness in the courtroom and improved the legal climate, each year personal injury attorneys seek to undo parts of the very law that helps keep “jackpot justice” and frivolous suits in check.

If no one was on call… an $80 million tax increase on physicians to fund a new government-administered malpractice claims payout system called the Patients Compensation System could have passed. The PCS would administer damage claims for physical injury and death of patients allegedly sustained at the hands of physicians. Complaints against individual physicians would begin with a call to a state-run 1-800 line and would go before panels composed of trial lawyers, citizens and physicians to determine an outcome. In addition, any determinations of fault would be reported to the National Practitioner Databank. The Patient Compensation System would undo decades of medical tort reforms which the Medical Association championed and is forced to defend from plaintiff lawyer attacks each session. The PCS deprives both patients and doctors of their legal rights.

If no one was on call… physicians could have been exposed to triple-damage lawsuits for honest Medicaid billing mistakes. The legislation would create new causes of civil action in state court for Medicaid “false claims.” The legislation would incentivize personal injury lawyers to seek out “whistleblowers” in medical clinics, hospitals and the like to pursue civil actions against physicians and others for alleged Medicaid fraud, with damages being tripled the actual loss to Medicaid. The standard in the bill would have allowed even honest billing mistakes to qualify as “Medicaid fraud,” creating new opportunities for lawsuits where honest mistakes could be penalized.

If no one was on call… physicians would have been held liable for the actions or inactions of midwives attending home births. While a lay midwife bill did pass this session establishing a State Board of Midwifery, the bill contains liability protections for physicians and also prohibitions on non-nurse midwives’ scope of practice, the types of pregnancies they may attend and a requirement for midwives to report outcomes.

If no one was on call… the right to trial by jury, including jury selection and jury size, could have been manipulated in personal injury lawyers’ favor.

If no one was on call… physicians could have been held legally responsible for others’ mistakes, including home caregivers, medical device manufacturers and for individuals following or failing to follow DNR orders.

Protecting Public Health and Access to Quality Care

Every session, various pieces of legislation aimed at improving the health of Alabamians are proposed. At the same time however, many bills are also introduced that endanger public health and safety, like those where the legislature attempts to set standards for medical care, which force physicians and their staffs to adhere to non-medically established criteria, wasting health care dollars, wasting patients’ and physicians’ time and exposing physicians to new liability concerns.

If no one was on call… legislation could have passed to lower biologic pharmaceutical standards in state law below those set by the FDA, withhold critical health information from patients and their doctors and significantly increase administrative burdens on physicians. ICYMI, read our joint letter to the Alabama Legislature opposing the bill.

If no one was on call… allergists and other physicians who compound medications within their offices could have been shut down, limiting access to critical care for patients.

If no one was on call… numerous scope of practice expansions that endanger public health could have become law, including removing all physician oversight of clinical nurse specialists; lay midwives seeking allowance of their attending home births without restriction or regulation; podiatrists seeking to amputate, do surgery and administer anesthesia up the distal third of the tibia; and marriage and family therapists seeking to be allowed to diagnose and treat mental disorders as well as removing the prohibition on their prescribing drugs.

If no one was on call… state boards and agencies with no authority over medicine could have been allowed to increase medical practice costs through additional licensing and reporting requirements.

If no one was on call… legislation dictating medical standards and guidelines for treatment of pregnant women, the elderly and terminal patients could have been placed into bills covering various topics.

Other Bills of Interest

Rural physician tax credits… legislation to increase rural physician tax credits and thereby increase access to care for rural Alabamians did not pass but will be reintroduced next session.

Infectious Disease Elimination… legislation to establish infectious disease elimination pilot programs to mitigate the spread of certain diseases failed to garner support on the last legislative day.

Constitutional amendment proclaiming the State of Alabama’s stance on the rights of unborn children… legislation passed to allow the people of Alabama to vote at the November 2018 General Election whether to add an amendment to the state constitution to:

“Declare and affirm that it is the public policy of this state to recognize and support the sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children, most importantly the right to life in all manners and measures appropriate and lawful…”

If ratified by the people in November 2018, this Amendment could have implications for women’s health physicians.

Coverage of autism spectrum disorder therapies… legislation passed to require health plans to cover ASD therapies, with some restrictions.

Portable DNR for minors… legislation establishing a portable DNR for minors to allow minors with terminal diseases to attend school activities failed to garner enough votes to pass on the last legislative day.

If the Medical Association was not on call at the Alabama Legislature, countless bills expanding doctors’ liability, increasing physician taxes, and setting standards of care into law could have passed. At the same time, positive strides in public health — like passage of the direct primary care legislation — would not have occurred. The Medical Association is Alabama physicians’ greatest resource in advocating for the practice of medicine and the patients they serve.

Click here for a downloadable version of our 2017 Legislative Recap.

Posted in: Advocacy

Leave a Comment (0) →

Research: Physician Shortage Likely to Have Severe Impact on Patient Care

Research: Physician Shortage Likely to Have Severe Impact on Patient Care

The United States continues to face a projected physician shortage over the next decade, creating a real risk to patient care, according to new data released by the Association of American Medical Colleges. The latest projections continue to align with previous estimates, showing a projected shortage of between 40,800 and 104,900 doctors.

For the third consecutive year, the Life Science division of the global information company, IHS Markit, conducted a study of physician supply and demand on behalf of the AAMC, modeling a wide range of health care and policy scenarios, such as payment and delivery reform, increased use of advanced practice nurses and physician assistants, and delays in physician retirements. This year’s report extended the date of the projections by five years, from 2025 to 2030, to account for the time needed to train a physician who would start medical school in 2017. The report also includes an expanded section modeling the additional demand for physicians that would be generated by health care utilization equity.

“The nation continues to face a significant physician shortage. As our patient population continues to grow and age, we must begin to train more doctors if we wish to meet the health care needs of all Americans,” said AAMC President and CEO Darrell G. Kirch, M.D.

The report aggregates the shortages in four broad categories: primary care, medical specialties, surgical specialties, and other specialties. By 2030, the study estimates a shortfall of between 7,300 and 43,100 primary care physicians. Non-primary care specialties are expected to experience a shortfall of between 33,500 and 61,800 physicians.

These findings are largely consistent with the 2015 and 2016 reports. In particular, the supply of surgical specialists is expected to remain level, while demand increases. The study also finds that the numbers of new primary care physicians and other medical specialists are not keeping pace with the health care demands of a growing and aging population.

“By 2030, the U.S. population of Americans aged 65 and older will grow by 55 percent, which makes the projected shortage especially troubling,” Kirch said. “As patients get older, they need two to three times as many services, mostly in specialty care, which is where the shortages are particularly severe.”

Expanding on last year’s findings, the new report also includes an analysis of the needs and health care utilization of underserved populations. These data show that if the barriers to utilization were removed for these patients, and all Americans accessed health care at the same levels as insured, non-Hispanic white populations, the United States would have needed up to 96,800 doctors in 2015. Nearly three-quarters of those physicians would be needed in metropolitan areas. This figure is in addition to the projected workforce shortage based on current practice patterns.

“Not only do these utilization equity data highlight the need for the nation to train more doctors, they also demonstrate the importance of a diverse health care workforce. Many of those who underutilize health care — despite their need — are from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds,” Kirch said. “A diverse and culturally competent workforce will enable us to provide the care all Americans need and deserve.”

To help alleviate the physician shortage, the AAMC supports a multipronged solution, including expanding medical school class size, innovating in care delivery and team-based care, making better use of technology, and increasing federal support for an additional 3,000 new residency positions per year over the next five years.

“We urge Congress to approve a modest increase in federal support for new doctors,” Kirch said. “Expanded federal support, along with all medical schools and teaching hospitals working to enhance education and improve care delivery, would be a measured approach to solving what could be a dangerous health care crisis.”

The Association of American Medical Colleges is a not-for-profit association dedicated to transforming health care through innovative medical education, cutting-edge patient care, and groundbreaking medical research. Its members comprise all 147 accredited U.S. and 17 accredited Canadian medical schools; nearly 400 major teaching hospitals and health systems, including 51 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers; and more than 80 academic societies. Through these institutions and organizations, the AAMC serves the leaders of America’s medical schools and teaching hospitals and their nearly 160,000 faculty members, 83,000 medical students, and 115,000 resident physicians. Additional information about the AAMC and its member medical schools and teaching hospitals is available at www.aamc.org.

Posted in: Research

Leave a Comment (0) →