Outreach physiatry clinics in remote Manitoba communities: an economic cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: One in 5 people in Canada have a disability affecting daily activities, and, for rural patients, accessing lifelong physiatry care to improve function and manage symptoms requires complex and expensive travel. We compared the costs of new outreach physiatry clinics with those of conventional urban clinics in Manitoba. METHODS: Six outreach clinics were held from January 2018 to September 2019 in the remote communities of St. Theresa Point and Churchill, Manitoba. A general physiatry population was seen in these clinics, including patients with musculoskeletal and neurologic conditions seen in consultation and follow-up. We performed a societal cost-minimization analysis comparing outreach clinic costs to estimated costs of standard care at conventional outpatient clinics in Winnipeg. Outcomes of interest included direct costs to government health services and patients, and indirect opportunity cost of travel time. We calculated total costs, average cost per clinic visit and incremental costs for outreach clinics compared to conventional urban clinics. Costs were inflated to 2020 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients (48 visits) were seen at the outreach clinics. The total cost of providing outreach clinics, $33 136, was 21% of the estimated cost of standard care, $158 344. When only direct costs were included, outreach clinics cost an estimated 24% of conventional care costs. The average unit cost per outreach visit was $690, compared to $3299 per conventional visit, for an incremental cost of -$2609 per outreach visit. INTERPRETATION: An outreach physiatry visit in Manitoba cost an estimated 21% of a conventional urban outpatient visit, or 24% when only direct costs were included, with costs savings largely related to travel. Outreach physiatry care in this model provides substantial cost savings for the public health care system as the primary payer, and can reduce the travel cost burden for patients who do not have public travel funding.

Comparing fly-in fly-out and telehealth models for delivering advanced-practice physiotherapy services in regional Queensland: An audit of outcomes and costs.

INTRODUCTION: Recruitment of advanced-practice physiotherapists to regional and rural healthcare facilities in Queensland, Australia remains a challenge. To overcome this barrier, two different service delivery models (Fly-In, Fly-Out (FIFO), Telehealth) were trialled by one regional facility. This study aims to describe the economic- and service-related outcomes of these two methods of service delivery. METHODS: A retrospective audit was conducted where two nine-week time periods were selected for each service delivery model. Outcomes of interests include patient demographics and case-mix, service utilisation, clinical actions, adverse events and costs. Net financial position for both models was calculated based upon costs incurred and revenue generated by service activity. RESULTS: A total of 33 appointment slots were recorded for each service delivery model. Patient case-mix was variable, where the Telehealth model predominately involved patients with musculoskeletal spinal conditions managed from a neurosurgical waiting list. Appointment slot utilisation and pattern of referral for further investigations were similar between models. No safety incidents occurred in either service delivery model. An estimated cost-savings of 13% for the Telehealth model could be achieved when compared to the FIFO model. DISCUSSION: Telehealth is a safe, efficient and viable option when compared to a traditional in-person outreach service, while providing cost-savings. Telehealth should be seen as a service delivery medium in which sustainable recruitment of advanced-practice physiotherapists to regional and rural healthcare facilities can be achieved.

Integrated Physical Medicine at Employer-Sponsored Health Clinics Improves Quality of Care at Reduced Cost.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes associated with integrating physical medicine in employer-sponsored clinics. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis comparing clinical and economic outcomes of physical medicine services delivered in employer-sponsored clinics with the community. RESULTS: Integrating physical medicine in employer-sponsored clinics decreased wait times to access these services to 7 days (2 to 4× faster than in the community). Patients receiving care in employer-sponsored clinics experienced marked improvements in fear of pain avoidance behaviors (P < 0.00001) and functional status (P < 0.01) in eight fewer visits than in the community (P < 0.0001), resulting in $472 to $630 savings/patient episode. Noncancer patients received 1/10th the opioid prescriptions in employer-sponsored clinics compared with the community (2.8% vs 20%). Patients were highly likely to recommend integrated employer-sponsored care (Net Promoter Score  = 84.7). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest robust clinical and economic benefits of integrating physical medicine services into employer-sponsored clinics.

Controlling the Midfield: Treating Patients With Chronic Pain Using Alternative Payment Models.

The entire American health care system is turning upside down, except for the parts that aren't--yet. For physiatrists who manage pain problems, the future is complex. The usual challenge of treating these devastating and costly problems that cannot be measured physiologically is compounded by the requirement to do so in a health care system that doesn't know what it wants to be yet. Payment, regulation, and the very structure of practice are changing at a pace that is halting and unpredictable. Nonetheless, knowledge about some structures is necessary, and some themes almost certainly emerge. I propose that the role of the pain physiatrist is best understood through a soccer analogy. Whereas the casual spectator of the past might note the goals scored by surgical colleagues and shots missed by primary care partners, sophisticated health care systems of the future will learn that the pain game is won by creating a strong physiatry midfield. Physiatrists can reach to the backfield to help primary care with tough cases, send accurate referrals to surgeons, and reorganize the team when chronic pain complicates the situation. Current and emerging payment structures include insurance from government, employers, or individuals. Although the rules may change, certain trends appear to occur: Individuals will be making more choices, deductibles will increase, narrow groups of practitioners will work together, pricing will become important, and the burden on primary care colleagues will increase. Implications of each of these trends on pain medicine and specific strategy examples are addressed. A general concept emerges that, although procedure- and activity-based practice is still important, pain physiatrists can best prepare for the future by leading programs that create value for their health care system.

Current research funding methods dumb down health care and rehabilitation for disabled people and aging population: a call for a change.

Health care systems in Western societies are faced with two major challenges: aging populations and the growing burden of chronic conditions. This translates into more persons with disabilities and the need for more Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) services. We raise the point of how these emerging needs are faced by the actual research funding. We briefly present the results of an analysis we made about research funding by the Italian National Health Service as an interesting case study, since it relates to Italy (the financer) and the United States, where National Institutes of Health (NIH) reviewers were identified according to their classification of research topics. The topics of potentially greatest interest for aging Western societies, like chronicity, disability and rehabilitation, were among those least often funded and considered in the traditional method of financing research projects. These results could be based on those PRM peculiarities that make the specialty different from all other classical biomedical specialties, namely the bio-psycho-social approach and its specific research methodologies. Moreover, PRM researchers are spread among the different topics as usually classified, and it is probable that PRM projects are judged by non-PRM reviewers. There are at least two possible ways in which research can be better placed to meet the emerging needs of Western societies (chronicity, disability and consequently also rehabilitation). One is to create specific keywords on these topics so as to improve the match between researchers and reviewers; the second is to allocate specific funds to research in these areas. In fact, the not coherence between emerging needs and research priorities have already been periodically addressed in the past with specific "political" and/or "social" initiatives, when researchers were forced to respond to new emergencies: some historical examples include cancer or HIV and viral diseases or the recent Ebola outbreak.

A position paper on Physical & Rehabilitation Medicine programmes in post-acute settings. Union of European Medical Specialists Section of Physical & Rehabilitation Medicine (in conjunction with the European Society of Physical & Rehabilitation Medicine).

Physical & Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) programmes in post-acute settings cover interventions for the rehabilitation of people with a variety of disabling health conditions. The setting of the intervention is more important than the timing and these programmes can be carried out in a variety of facilities. This paper describes the role of PRM services and of PRM specialists in delivering rehabilitation programmes to people, who have initially been admitted to hospital. The emphasis is on improving patients' activities and addressing participation issues. PRM programmes in post-acute settings provide a range of treatments and have a major influence in the long-term on the pace and extent of return of function and recovery from ill-health. This paper will define the meaning of post-acute settings and will describe the patient's journey through the post-acute setting. In particular, it addresses the standards of care across Europe that patients should expect. This paper also examines the general principles of funding such programmes within the context of different health care systems across Europe. Coordinated care improves outcomes and economic profiles for both payers and providers of services. This paper describes the value of PRM interventions and PRM specialist-led teams in promoting better outcomes for people with disabilities with complex needs.

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: potential effects on physical medicine and rehabilitation.

The objective was to review pertinent areas of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) to determine the PPACA's impact on physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R). The law, and related newspaper and magazine articles, was reviewed. The ways in which provisions in the PPACA are being implemented by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and other government organizations were investigated. Additionally, recent court rulings on the PPACA were analyzed to assess the law's chances of successful implementation. The PPACA contains a variety of reforms that, if implemented, will significantly impact the field of PM&R. Many PPACA reforms change how rehabilitative care is delivered by integrating different levels of care and creating uniform quality metrics to assess quality and efficiency. These quality metrics will ultimately be tied to new, performance-based payment systems. While the law contains ambitious initiatives that may, if unsuccessful or incorrectly implemented, negatively impact PM&R, it also has the potential to greatly improve the quality and efficiency of rehabilitative care. A proactive approach to the changes the PPACA will bring about is essential for the health of the field.

The World Report on Disability ­ implications, perspectives and opportunities for physical and rehabilitation medicine (PRM).

On June 9th 2011 the WHO World Report on Disability(WRD), called for by the World Health Assembly (WHA),was launched at the United Nations headquarters in NewYork. The WRD displays what has come to be known as the integrative model of functioning and disability as expressed in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). The present paper summarizes the representation of the role of rehabilitation in the WRD. It in particular highlights implications, perspectives and opportunities for Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) and the International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine(ISPRM). The WRD acknowledges the genuine role of PRM and its contribution to enhancing a person's functioning and participation in life. Challenges lie in the delivery of rehabilitation services in underserved parts of the world,ranging from the provision of timely, cost efficient and effective treatment, and the involvement of people with disability,family and care givers in the decision making process.In the present paper it is concluded that these challenges and the implementation of the WRD's recommendations call upon multiple actors including ISPRM and for national rehabilitation strategies that can coordinate scarce resources effectively, especially in times of crisis such as disaster relief efforts.

Adopting new technologies in stroke rehabilitation: the influence of the US health care system.

Stroke rehabilitation is entering a new era of technological innovation, including the development of robotic aids for therapy, peripheral electrical stimulation devices, and brain stimulation systems. These technologies have the potential to significantly improve the efficiency and efficacy of stroke rehabilitation. The United States health care system creates both opportunities for new technologies to be created and adopted, as well as important barriers. Inadequate support of clinical trials of the efficacy of new non-invasive devices is a particular concern for practitioners seeking to determine if new devices are clinically useful. Government support of clinical trials of efficacy, coupled with reform of FDA approval processes for novel therapies, is needed to create an evidence-based approach to improving stroke rehabilitation.

The American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM) and rehabilitation research in a changing postacute landscape. The 2007 ACRM presidential address.

Postacute rehabilitation is on the threshold of several major changes that have implications for rehabilitation practice and research. The most important of these is the desire of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to establish a uniform patient assessment method and implement a more setting-neutral prospective payment system across all major postacute settings. The proposed uniform patient assessment instrument will in all likelihood displace the FIM instrument as the industry standard. The rehabilitation research community needs to remain vigilant about the nature, scope, and measurement properties of the proposed uniform patient assessment instrument. A new instrument and setting-neutral payment system may provide new opportunities for service innovation and research. Neurorehabilitation has been one of the strengths of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM). ACRM needs to build on this strength and examine more earnestly the rehabilitation interventions and outcomes associated with the increasing prevalence of people with orthopedic and musculoskeletal conditions seen in rehabilitation centers today. ACRM's ability to do so will depend in part on its ability to join forces with other professional and consumer organizations to increase research funding significantly for each of the major federal agencies that currently fund rehabilitation research.