Long-Term Implications of Post-ACA Health Reform on State Health Care Policy.

In the midst of the COVID-19 outbreak, health care reform has again taken a major role in the 2020 election, with Democrats weighing Medicare for All against extensions of the Affordable Care Act, while Republicans quietly seem to favor proposals that would eliminate much of the ACA and cut Medicaid. Although states play a major role in health care funding and administration, public and scholarly debates over these proposals have generally not addressed the potential disruption that reform proposals might create for the current state role in health care. We examine how potential reforms influence state-federal relations, and how outside factors like partisanship and exogenous shocks like the COVID-19 pandemic interact with underlying preferences of each level of government. All else equal, reforms that expand the ACA within its current framework would provide the least disruption for current arrangements and allow for smoother transitions for providers and patients, rather than the more radical restructuring proposed by Medicare for All or the cuts embodied in Republican plans.

Lessons From the Long and Winding Road to Medicare for All.

Recently there has been a surge in political attention to Medicare for all, the latest chapter in a long history of conflict over national health insurance in the United States. This essay places the current Medicare for all debate in historical perspective.My aim is to illuminate past struggles over single-payer reform, explore the genesis and evolution of Medicare, and analyze the implications for contemporary health politics of the public and private insurance arrangements developed by the United States over the past century.The history of US health reform provides critical lessons for understanding the enduring appeal of single-payer models as well as the formidable political obstacles to transforming Medicare for all from an aspiration into a legislative reality.

Solidarity as a national health care strategy.

The Trump Administration's recent attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act have reignited long-running debates surrounding the nature of justice in health care provision, the extent of our obligations to others, and the most effective ways of funding and delivering quality health care. In this article, I respond to arguments that individualist systems of health care provision deliver higher-quality health care and promote liberty more effectively than the cooperative, solidaristic approaches that characterize health care provision in most wealthy countries apart from the United States. I argue that these claims are mistaken and suggest one way of rejecting the implied criticisms of solidaristic practices in health care provision they represent. This defence of solidarity is phrased in terms of the advantages solidaristic approaches to health care provision have over individualist alternatives in promoting certain important personal liberties, and delivering high-quality, affordable health care.

Evolving Federal and State Health Care Policy: Toward a More Integrated and Comprehensive Care-Delivery System for Children With Medical Complexity.

Irrespective of any future changes in federal health policy, the momentum to shift from fee-for-service to value-based payment systems is likely to persist. Public and private payers continue to move toward alternative payment models that promote novel care-delivery systems and greater accountability for health outcomes. With a focus on population health, patient-centered medical homes, and care coordination, alternative payment models hold the potential to promote care-delivery systems that address the unique needs of children with medical complexity (CMC), including nonmedical needs and the social determinants of health. Notwithstanding, the implementation of care systems with meaningful quality measures for CMC poses unique and substantive challenges. Stakeholders must view policy options for CMC in the context of transformation within the overall health system to understand how broader health system changes impact care delivery for CMC.

What's at Stake in U.S. Health Reform: A Guide to the Affordable Care Act and Value-Based Care.

The U.S. presidential election of 2016 accentuated the divided perspectives on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, commonly known as Obamacare. The perspectives included a pledge from then candidate Donald J. Trump to "repeal and replace on day one"; Republican congressional leaders' more temperate suggestions in the first weeks of the Trump administration to "repair" the Affordable Care Act (ACA); and President Trump's February 5, 2017 statement-16 days after inauguration-that a Republican replacement for the ACA may not be ready until late 2017 or 2018. The swirling rhetoric, media attention, and the dizzying rate of U.S. health and payment reforms both within and outside of the ACA makes it difficult for nurses, both United States and globally, to discern which health policy issues are grounded in the ACA and which aspects reflect payer-driven "volume to value" reimbursement changes. Moreover, popular and controversial elements of the ACA-for example, the clause that prohibits insurance carriers to deny coverage to those with preexisting health conditions and the more controversial individual mandate that bears Supreme Court support as a constitutional provision-are paired in ways that might be unclear to those unfamiliar with nuances of insurance rate determination. To support nurses' capacity to maximize their impact on health policy, this overview distills the 906-page ACA into major themes and describes payment reform legislation and initiatives that are external to the ACA. Understanding the political and societal forces that affect health care policy and delivery is necessary for nurses to effectively lead and advocate for the best interests of their patients.

Sustainable growth rate 2013: time for definitive intervention.

Federal healthcare spending has been a subject of intense concern as the US Congress continues to search for ways to reduce the budget deficit. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that, even though it is growing more slowly than previously projected, federal spending on Medicare, Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) will reach nearly $900 billion in 2013. In 2011 the Medicare program paid $68 billion for physicians and other health professional services, 12% of total Medicare spending. Since 2002 the sustainable growth rate (SGR) correction has called for reductions to physician reimbursements; however, Congress has typically staved off these reductions, although the situation remains precarious for physicians who accept Medicare. The fiscal cliff agreement that came into focus at the end of 2012 averted a 26.5% reduction to physician reimbursements related to the SGR correction. Nonetheless, the threat of these devastating cuts continues to loom. The Administration, Congress and others have devised many options to fix this unsustainable situation. This review explores the historical development of the SGR, touches on elements of the formula itself and outlines current proposals for fixing the SGR problem. A recent CBO estimate reduces the potential cost of a 10-year fix of SGR system to $138 billion. This has provided new hope for resolution of this long-standing issue.

Obamacare 2012: prognosis unclear for interventional pain management.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), informally referred to as ObamaCare, is a United States federal statute signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010. ACA has substantially changed the landscape of medical practice in the United States and continues to influence all sectors, in particular evolving specialties such as interventional pain management. ObamaCare has been signed into law amidst major political fallouts, has sustained a Supreme Court challenge and emerged bruised, but still very much alive. While proponents argue that ObamaCare will provide insurance for almost everyone, with an improvement in the quality of and reduction in the cost of health care,, opponents criticize it as being a massive bureaucracy laden with penalties and taxes, that will ultimately eliminate personal medicine and individual practices. Based on the 2 years since the passage of ACA in 2010, the prognosis for interventional pain management is unclear. The damage sustained to interventional pain management and the majority of medicine practices is irreparable. ObamaCare may provide insurance for all, but with cuts in Medicare to fund Obamacare, a limited expansion of Medicaid, the inadequate funding of exchanges, declining employer health insurance coverage and skyrocketing disability claims, the coverage will be practically nonexistent. ObamaCare is composed of numerous organizations and bureaucracies charged with controlling the practice of medicine through the extension of regulations. Apart from cutting reimbursements and reducing access to interventional pain management, administration officials are determined to increase the role of midlevel practitioners and reduce the role of individual physicians by liberalizing the scope of practice regulations and introducing proposals to reduce medical education and training.

Emerging perspectives on transforming the healthcare system: redesign strategies and a call for needed research.

BACKGROUND: U.S. healthcare requires major redesign of its delivery systems, finances, and incentives. Healthcare operations, leadership, and payors are increasingly recognizing the need for community-business-research partnerships to transform healthcare. New models of continuous learning, research, and development should help focus and sustain redesign efforts. PURPOSE: This study summarizes suggested strategies for transformational change in healthcare and identifies needed areas for research to inform, spread, and sustain transformational change. METHODS: We developed these recommendations based on a series of review papers, invited expert discussion, and a subsequent review in the context of a health system transformation research conference (The Regenstrief Biennial Research Conference). The multidisciplinary audience included health systems researchers, clinicians, informaticians, social and engineering scientists, and operational and business leaders. FINDINGS: Conference participants and literature reviews identified key strategies for system redesign with the following themes: using the framework of complex adaptive systems; fostering organizational redesign; developing appropriate performance measures and incentives; creating continuous learning organizations; and integrating health information, technology, and communication into practice. Sustained investment in research and development in these areas is crucial. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple issues influence the likelihood that healthcare leaders will make transformational changes in their healthcare systems. Healthcare leaders, clinicians, researchers, journals, and academic institutions, in partnership with payors, government and multiple other stakeholders, should apply the recommendations relevant to their own setting to redesign healthcare delivery, improve cognitive support, and sustain transformation. Fostering further research investments in these areas will increase the impact of transformation on the health and healthcare of the public.

Emerging perspectives on transforming the healthcare system: key conceptual issues.

BACKGROUND: Despite reform efforts, today's healthcare system faces multiple challenges. Limitations of the current system result in major gaps between evidence and practice, suboptimal quality, inequitable patterns of utilization, inadequate safety and reliability, and unsustainable cost increases. Furthermore, there are major problems of overuse, underuse, and misuse of healthcare. Beyond the healthcare reform legislation passed in 2010 mandate, major transformation of how U.S. A healthcare system is comprised of multiple levels. PURPOSE: This article briefly outlines the need for transformational change in healthcare and key conceptual issues. METHODS: We identified literature and concepts relevant to developing a research agenda on transformational change in healthcare. Relevant concepts were further developed through conference presentations and discussions. CONCLUSIONS: This introduction to the 10th Regenstrief Conference proceedings provides a foundation for understanding key terms, questions, and concepts relevant to the area of transformational change in healthcare.

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010: reforming the health care reform for the new decade.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the ACA, for short) became law with President Obama's signature on March 23, 2010. It represents the most significant transformation of the American health care system since Medicare and Medicaid. It is argued that it will fundamentally change nearly every aspect of health care, from insurance to the final delivery of care. The length and complexity of the legislation and divisive and heated debates have led to massive confusion about the impact of ACA. It also became one of the centerpieces of 2010 congressional campaigns. Essentials of ACA include: 1) a mandate for individuals and businesses requiring as a matter of law that nearly every American have an approved level of health insurance or pay a penalty; 2) a system of federal subsidies to completely or partially pay for the now required health insurance for about 34 million Americans who are currently uninsured - subsidized through Medicaid and exchanges; 3) extensive new requirements on the health insurance industry; and 4) numerous regulations on the practice of medicine. The act is divided into 10 titles. It contains provisions that went into effect starting on June 21, 2010, with the majority of provisions going into effect in 2014 and later. The perceived major impact on practicing physicians in the ACA is related to growing regulatory authority with the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) and the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). In addition to these specifics is a growth of the regulatory regime in association with further discounts in physician reimbursement. With regards to cost controls and projections, many believe that the ACA does not fix the finances of our health care system - neither public nor private. It has been suggested that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the administration have used creative accounting to arrive at an alleged deficit reduction; however, if everything is included appropriately and accounted for, we will be facing a significant increase in deficits rather than a reduction. When posed as a global question, polls suggest that public opinion continues to be against the health insurance reform. The newly elected Republican congress is poised to pass a bill aimed at repealing health care reform. However, advocates of the repeal of health care reform have been criticized for not providing a meaningful alternative approach. Those criticisms make clear that it is not sufficient to provide vague arguments against the ACA without addressing core issues embedded in health care reform. It is the opinion of the authors that while some parts of the ACA may be reformed, it is unlikely to be repealed. Indeed, the ACA already is growing roots. Consequently, it will be extremely difficult to repeal. In this manuscript, we look at reducing the regulatory burden on the public and providers and elimination of IPAB and PCORI. The major solution lies in controlling the drug and durable medical supply costs with appropriate negotiating capacity for Medicare, and consequently for other insurers.

Medicare physician payment systems: impact of 2011 schedule on interventional pain management.

Physicians in the United States have been affected by significant changes in the patterns of medical practice evolving over the last several decades. The recently passed affordable health care law, termed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (the ACA, for short) affects physicians more than any other law. Physician services are an integral part of health care. Physicians are paid in the United States for their personal services. This payment also includes the overhead expenses for maintaining an office and providing services. The payment system is highly variable in the private insurance market; however, governmental systems have a formula-based payment, mostly based on the Medicare payment system. Physician services are billed under Part B. Since the inception of the Medicare program in 1965, several methods have been used to determine the amounts paid to physicians for each covered service. Initially, the payment systems compensated physicians on the basis of their charges. In 1975, just over 10 years after the inception of the Medicare program, payments changed so as not to exceed the increase in the Medical Economic Index (MEI). Nevertheless, the policy failed to curb increases in costs, leading to the determination of a yearly change in fees by legislation from 1984 to 1991. In 1992, the fee schedule essentially replaced the prior payment system that was based on the physician's charges, which also failed to live up to expectations for operational success. Then, in 1998, the sustainable growth rate (SGR) system was introduced. In 2009, multiple attempts were made by Congress to repeal the formula - rather unsuccessfully. Consequently, the SGR formula continues to hamper physician payments. The mechanism of the SGR includes 3 components that are incorporated into a statutory formula: expenditure targets, growth rate period, and annual adjustments of payment rates for physician services. Further, the relative value of a physician fee schedule is based on 3 components: physician work, practice expense (PE), and malpractice expense that are used to determine a value ranking for each service to which it is applied. On average, the work component represents 53.5% of a service's relative value, the fee component represents 43.6%, and the malpractice component represents 3.9%. The final schedule for physician payment was issued on November 24, 2010. This was based on a total cut of 30.8% with 24.9% of the cut attributed to SGR. However, as usual, with patchwork efficiency, Congress passed a one-year extension of the 0% update, effective through December 2011. Consequently, CMS issued an emergency update of the 2011 Medicare fee schedule, with multiple revisions, resulting in a reduction of the conversion factor of $36.8729 from December 2010 to $33.9764 for 2011.

Historical and comparative reflections on the U.S. national health insurance reforms.

The 2010 US reforms addressed forms of public and private insurance designed to reinforce a delivery system that developed to maximize the autonomy of physicians and hospitals. That autonomy emphasizes fees and specialization, which led to for-profit incorporation and overtreatment. Powerful corporate lobbies have defeated previous reforms and diluted the impact of the Obama reform. It barely passed and does little to manage costs or rationalize medicine. US health care does not fit established models of welfare states and contains five different models of health care delivery. Most interesting are forms of democratically run community health centres. Selected features of the reforms are highlighted.