The financial and employment effects of coronavirus disease 2019 on physicians in the United States.

Although the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created havoc with the U.S healthcare system and physicians, the financial and contractual implications for physicians are now beginning to come to the forefront. Financial assistance from the federal government has mainly been received by hospitals, which have borne the brunt of the COVID-19 illness. Some physician groups have, or are, receiving assistance through a few programs, although the accelerated and advance payments have been suspended. Employed surgeons are now being furloughed, terminated, or persuaded to agree to a significant cut in pay, forego bonuses, or take leave without pay as healthcare systems and some physician groups have started to experience the consequences of halting elective procedures. Newly hired surgeons might be forced in a few cases to agree to delays in starting their employment, new amendments, changes in employment status, and other terms for fear of losing their employment. In the present report, we have explained some agreement terminology and options available to allow physicians to understand the terms of their employment agreement and make their decisions after consulting with an expert healthcare attorney.

COVID-19 financial resources for physicians.

The appropriate focus in managing the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States has been addressing access and delivery of care to the population affected by the outbreak. All sectors of the U.S. economy have been significantly affected, including physicians. Physician groups of all specialties and sizes have experienced the financial effects of the pandemic. Hospitals have received billions of dollars to support and enable them to manage emergencies and cover the costs of the disruption. However, many vascular surgeons are under great financial pressure because of the postponement of all nonemergency procedures. The federal government has announced a myriad of programs in the form of grants and loans to reimburse physicians for some of their expenses and loss of revenue. It is more than likely that unless the public health emergency subsides significantly, many practices will experience dire consequences without additional financial assistance. We have attempted to provide a concise listing of such programs and resources available to assist vascular surgeons who are small businesses in accessing these opportunities.

Nobody Knew How Complicated: Constraining The President's Power To (Re)Shape Health Reform.

Beginning on inauguration day, President Trump has attempted an executive repeal of the Affordable Care Act. In doing so, he has tested the limits of presidential power. He has challenged the force of institutional and non-institutional constraints. And, ironically, he has helped boost public support for the ACA's central features. The first two sections of this article respectively consider the use of the President's tools to advance and to subvert health reform. The final two sections consider the forces constraining the administration's attempted executive repeal. I argue that the most important institutional constraint, thus far, is found in multifaceted actions by states - and not only blue states. I also highlight the force of public voices. Personal stories, public opinion, and 2018 election results - bolstered by presidential messaging - reflect growing support for government-grounded options and statutory coverage protections. Indeed, in a polarized time, "refine and revise" seems poised to supplant "repeal and replace" as the conservative focus countering liberal pressure for a common option grounded in Medicare.

Pharmacy Benefit Managers: Practices, Controversies, and What Lies Ahead.

Issue: Pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are responsible for negotiating payment rates for a large share of prescription drugs distributed in the U.S. Recently, policymakers have expressed concern that certain PBMs' business practices may not be consistent with public policy goals to improve the value of pharmaceutical spending. Goal: We sought to explain key controversies related to PBM practices and their roles in driving value in the pharmaceutical market. Methods: Literature review and feedback from top experts on PBM business practices and potential policy solutions. Key Findings and Conclusion: In some cases, PBMs' use of rebates has contributed to high pharmaceutical costs, yet proposed solutions to the rebate controversy--including passing the rebate through to payers or patients--will not on their own reduce overall pharmaceutical spending without other policies that drive toward value. Policymakers seeking to reform pharmaceutical reimbursement beyond the practice of rebates will need to consider these changes in light of the recent mergers between PBMs and insurers and the entry of new market competitors.

A Farewell to Falsity: Shifting Standards in Medicare Fraud Enforcement.

For the better part of a decade, Americans have had a front-row seat to a fervent and turbulent debate over the future of their health care system. The passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA), the most comprehensive health reform effort since the mid-1960s, ushered in a new era in health law and policy, granting millions of Americans access to health care. After multiple legal challenges and congressional efforts that ultimately failed to slay the law, the ACA had become entrenched by the end of the Obama administration, even though pieces of the law had failed to work exactly as planned. Now, with the surprising election of President Donald Trump, reenergized Republicans are targeting the law once more, and it suddenly appears more vulnerable than ever. Dynamic uncertainty again permeates the national debate. Although most powerful protections of the ACA may evaporate--no small event, to be sure--the value-based era which it unleashed seems here to stay. Indeed, this era--focused on efficiency, standardization, and quality within American medicine--has just begun to bear fruit. Illustrated prominently by recent changes to Medicare that alter how the program pays its doctors for services they provide to its beneficiaries, America is moving away from the old strictures of fee-for-service medicine. At the same time, traditional legal tools, and particularly the federal government's most prominent anti-fraud tool, the civil federal False Claims Act (FCA), seem to be facing new limits. This has been recently evident in medical necessity-based fraud cases, and particularly highly publicized fights that have targeted the burgeoning industry of hospice care. This Article tracks this development, ultimately arguing that the move to "reimbursement-based regulation" may be a positive step in finally reining in the worst excesses of American health care. But it also cautions against the deceptive simplicity of allowing medical heterogeneity and clinical complexity to prevent application of America's most powerful anti-fraud tools to its medical industry. Just because reimbursement policy has shifted to shoulder some of the regulatory burden of overtreatment does not mean that health care fraud--like fee-for-service medicine--should be confined to the past. In the end--and regardless of whatever legislation the national debate surrounding American health care produces--American medicine must adequately address its susceptibility to overtreatment, its incentives toward financial excess and waste, and its inability to push providers and entities into adopting more efficient practices. Medicare is finally moving quickly to bring about effective changes, and the program is seeking clarity in the midst of a period of tremendous uncertainty for American health care.

Balancing early access with uncertainties in evidence for drugs authorized by prospective case series - systematic review of reimbursement decisions.

AIMS: To review clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence underlying reimbursement decisions relating to drugs whose authorization mainly is based on evidence from prospective case series. METHODS: A systematic review of all new drugs evaluated in 2011-2016 within a health care profession-driven resource prioritization process, with a market approval based on prospective case series, and a reimbursement decision by the Swedish Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency (TLV). Public assessment reports from the European Medicines Agency, published pivotal studies, and TLV, Scottish Medicines Consortium and National Institute of Health and Care Excellence decisions and guidance documents were reviewed. RESULTS: Six drug cases were assessed (brentuximab vedotin, bosutinib, ponatinib, idelalisib, vismodegib, ceritinib). The validity of the pivotal studies was hampered by the use of surrogate primary outcomes and the absence of recruitment information. To quantify drug treatment effect sizes, the reimbursement agencies primarily used data from another source in indirect comparisons. TLV granted reimbursement in five cases, compared with five in five cases for Scottish Medicines Consortium and four in five cases for National Institute of Health and Care Excellence. Decision modifiers, contributing to granted reimbursement despite hugely uncertain cost-effectiveness ratios, were, for example, small population size, occasionally linked to budget impact, severity of disease, end of life and improved life expectancy. CONCLUSION: For drugs whose authorization is based on prospective case series, most applications for reimbursement within public health care are granted. The underlying evidence has limitations over and above the design per se, and decision modifiers are frequently referred to in the value-based pricing decision making.

Changes in prescription pattern, pharmaceutical expenditure and quality of care after introduction of reimbursement restriction in diabetes in Korea.

Background: To ensure effective prescription practices and reduce diabetes-related pharmaceutical expenditures, Korea adopted a clinical practice guideline for the reimbursement system. Health care providers cannot receive reimbursement from National Health Insurance(NHI) unless it is for an appropriate prescription under the predefined clinical condition. The aim of this study was to evaluate prescription patterns in oral hypoglycemic agents, costs and effects on patient care since the introduction of the diabetes reimbursement restriction. Methods: We used claim data from 2008 to 2013, which included 26 315 diabetes patients and 9907 hospitals. An interrupted time series study design using generalized estimating equations was used to evaluate changes in patterns of single and combination therapy, brand name drug prescriptions, cost and hospital admission following the reimbursement restriction. Results: Following reimbursement restriction initiation, we found a statistically significant decrease in the average prescription rate of brand name drugs (-6.2%), whereas single therapy prescription increased (9.9%). There was also a reduction in trend change in the monthly prescription rate for combination therapy (-1.7%) and brand name drugs (-0.8%). For single therapy, the trend change in prescription rate increased after the intervention (0.8%). A reduction of trend change in pharmaceutical costs (-0.3%) was observed. However, we did not find a significant change in hospital admission for diabetes. Conclusions: Reimbursement restriction affects both pharmaceutical costs and physicians' decisions to prescribe oral hypoglycemic agents. We did not observe a significant reduction in quality of care following the intervention. Collectively, these findings indicate that reimbursement restriction has improved effective drug utilization and decreased health expenditures.

Medical Care in Foreign Countries and Filing for Reimbursement for Community Care Not Previously Authorized by VA. Final rule.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) adopts as final, with no changes, a proposed rule amending its medical regulations related to hospital care and medical services in foreign countries. We simplified and clarified the scope of these regulations, address medical services provided to eligible veterans in the Republic of the Philippines, and removed provisions related to grants to the Republic of the Philippines that are no longer supported by statutory authority. VA also amends its medical regulations related to filing claims for reimbursement of medical expenses incurred for VA care not previously authorized. We provided a 60-day period to receive comments from the public on the proposed changes, and received no comments. VA adopts the proposed rule as final, with no changes.

Medicare Program; Durable Medical Equipment Fee Schedule Adjustments To Resume the Transitional 50/50 Blended Rates To Provide Relief in Rural Areas and Non-Contiguous Areas. Interim final rule with comment period.

This interim final rule with comment period makes technical amendments to the regulation to reflect the extension of the transition period from June 30, 2016 to December 31, 2016 that was mandated by the 21st Century Cures Act for phasing in fee schedule adjustments for certain durable medical equipment (DME) and enteral nutrition paid in areas not subject to the Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) Competitive Bidding Program (CBP). In addition, this interim final rule with comment period amends the regulation to resume the transition period's blended fee schedule rates for items furnished in rural areas and non-contiguous areas (Alaska, Hawaii, and United States territories) not subject to the CBP from June 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. This interim final rule with comment period also makes technical amendments to existing regulations for DMEPOS items and services to reflect the exclusion of infusion drugs used with DME from the DMEPOS CBP.

Medicare Program; Update to the Required Prior Authorization List of Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) Items That Require Prior Authorization as a Condition of Payment. Update to list.

This document announces the addition of 31 Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes to the Required Prior Authorization List of Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) Items that require prior authorization as a condition of payment. Prior authorization for these codes will be implemented nationwide.

Medicare Program; Changes to the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Payment Model (CJR): Extreme and Uncontrollable Circumstances Policy for the CJR Model. Final rule.

This final rule finalizes a policy that provides flexibility in the determination of episode spending for Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Payment Model (CJR) participant hospitals located in areas impacted by extreme and uncontrollable circumstances for performance years 3 through 5.

Medicare Program; Prior Authorization Process for Certain Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) Items; Update to the Master List of Items Frequently Subject to Unnecessary Utilization. Master list deletions.

This document announces the deletion of four Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes from the Master List of Items Frequently Subject to Unnecessary Utilization that could be potentially subject to Prior Authorization as a condition of payment.

Reimbursement for Emergency Treatment. Interim final rule.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) revises its regulations concerning payment or reimbursement for emergency treatment for non-service-connected conditions at non-VA facilities to implement the requirements of a recent court decision. Specifically, this rulemaking expands eligibility for payment or reimbursement to include veterans who receive partial payment from a health-plan contract for non-VA emergency treatment and establishes a corresponding reimbursement methodology. This rulemaking also expands the eligibility criteria for veterans to receive payment or reimbursement for emergency transportation associated with the emergency treatment, in order to ensure that veterans are adequately covered when emergency transportation is a necessary part of their non-VA emergency treatment.

Medicare Program; Certain Changes to the Low-Volume Hospital Payment Adjustment Under the Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment Systems (IPPS) for Acute Care Hospitals for Fiscal Years 2011 Through 2017. Application of a payment adjustment.

This document announces changes to the payment adjustment for low-volume hospitals under the hospital inpatient prospective payment systems (IPPS) for acute care hospitals for fiscal years (FYs) 2011 through 2017 in accordance with section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018.

TeleMental Health: Standards, Reimbursement, and Interstate Practice [Formula: see text].

BACKGROUND: TeleMental Health (TMH) is gaining widespread acceptance in the United States. OBJECTIVE: Summarize current evidence regarding TMH risks and benefits, standards of care, practice guidelines, reimbursement, and interstate practice issues pertinent to psychiatric nurses and consumers. DESIGN: A targeted review of literature, current practice, and TMH websites was generated using the following key search words: clinical outcomes, practice guidelines, regulations, interstate practice, and reimbursement for TMH. A search of government and professional organization websites and a literature review of PubMed and PsychINFO databases was limited to the past 15 years. RESULTS: Studies demonstrate TMH services are equal in efficacy to that provided in face-to-face encounters and preferred by some populations. Current TMH practice guidelines, reimbursement, and regulatory issues are reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: Providers, including psychiatric advanced practice registered nurses, can use TMH to effectively address the growing need for mental health services, although regulatory, licensure, and clinical issues must be addressed prior to offering TMH services.

CURRENT ENVIRONMENT FOR INTRODUCING HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN GREECE.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe the current regulatory environment in Greece to evaluate the potential introduction of health technology assessment (HTA) for medicinal products for human use. METHODS: Data sources consist of national legislation on pricing and reimbursement of health technologies to identify the potential need of establishing HTA and its relevant structure. RESULTS: The pricing procedure regarding medicinal products for human use is based on an external reference pricing mechanism which considers the average of the three lowest Euorpean Union prices. Currently, a formal HTA procedure has not been applied in Greece, and the only prerequisite used for the reimbursement of medicinal products for human use is their inclusion in the Positive Reimbursement List. To restrict pharmaceutical expenditure, a variety of measures-such as clawback mechanisms, rebates, monthly budget caps per physician, generics penetration targeting-have been imposed, aiming mainly to regulate the price level rather than control the introduction of medicinal products for human use in the Greek pharmaceutical market. CONCLUSIONS: Greece has the opportunity to rapidly build capacity, implement, and take advantage of the application of HTA mechanisms by clearly defining the goals, scope, systems, context, stakeholders, and methods that will be involved in the local HTA processes, taking into account the country's established e-prescription system and the recently adapted legislative framework.

Pathway to pharmacist medical provider status in Washington State.

OBJECTIVES: To describe Washington State's successful legal and legislative efforts to gain pharmacist medical provider status and major medical compensation and to compare those efforts with similar efforts in other states to identify key lessons learned. SUMMARY: Washington State Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 5557 was enacted in 2015, securing pharmacists as medical providers and requiring compensation under major medical insurance for pharmacists providing health services (Revised Code of Washington 48.43.715). Other states have passed, or attempted to pass, pharmacist provider status bills, but none have achieved both pharmacist medical provider status and mandatory major medical compensation. CONCLUSION: Pharmacist medical provider status ideally should include recognition as a medical provider and compensation through major medical health insurance as a clinical decision maker rather than an "incident-to" provider. Both elements should be sought as part of a complete legislative package to ensure sustainable patient access to needed health care services.

Statewide Payment and Delivery Reform: Do States Have What It Takes?

States' role in payment as well as coverage will be subject to debate as the administration and the Congress decide how to address the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and otherwise reshape the nation's health policies. Acting as stewards of health care for the entire state population and stimulated by concern about rising costs and federal support under the ACA, the elected and administrative leaders of some states have been using their political influence and authority to improve their state's overall systems of care regardless of who pays the bill. In early 2015 we conducted on-site interviews with key stakeholders in five states to explore their strategies for payment and delivery reform. We found that despite these states' similar goals, differences in their statutory authority and purchasing power, along with their leaders' willingness to use them, significantly influence a state's ability to achieve reform objectives. We caution federal and state policy makers to recognize the reality that state leaders' political desire to exercise stewardship may not be enough to achieve it.

Legal Mapping Analysis of State Telehealth Reimbursement Policies.

BACKGROUND: There exists rapid growth and inconsistency in the telehealth policy environment, which makes it difficult to quantitatively evaluate the impact of telehealth reimbursement and other policies without the availability of a legal mapping database. INTRODUCTION: We describe the creation of a legal mapping database of state-level policies related to telehealth reimbursement of healthcare services. Trends and characteristics of these policies are presented. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Information provided by the Center for Connected Health Policy was used to identify statewide laws and regulations regarding telehealth reimbursement. Other information was retrieved by using: (1) LexisNexis database, (2) Westlaw database, and (3) retrieval from legislative Web sites, historical documents, and contacting state officials. We examined policies for live video, store-and-forward, and remote patient monitoring (RPM). RESULTS: In the United States, there are 24 states with policies regarding reimbursement for live video transmission. Fourteen states have store-and-forward policies, and six states have RPM-related policies. Mississippi is the only state that requires reimbursement for all three types of telehealth transmission modes. Most states (47 states) have Medicaid policies regarding live video transmission, followed by 37 states for store-and-forward and 20 states for RPM. Only 13 states require that live video will be reimbursed "consistent with" or at the "same rate" as in-person services in their Medicaid program. DISCUSSION: There are no widely accepted telehealth reimbursement policies across states. They contain diverse restrictions and requirements that present complexities in policy evaluation and in determining policy effectiveness across states.