Wednesday, February 20, 2019

Small Practice

Small Practice

Bridging the Gap between MUS2 and Patient Engagement Through Appointment Reminders

0

MaloofMedical technology has undergone dramatic changes in the last 10 years. Right now, I make and cancel appointments, get prescriptions filled, look at test results, pay bills and email my doctor—all from my computer. I track multiple health markers on my cellphone, and am proactive about my preventive screenings. I am the definition of an engaged patient.

But, I know how the system works from the inside out. The question for most doctors is how to teach patients to be more engaged with the convoluted, fragmented, and confusing healthcare system. They are asking this because they are struggling to meet Meaningful Use Stage 2 requirements.

Most docs complain that the 5% patient portal requirement is unfair because it is out of their control. Maybe it is, or maybe there are smarter ways to work the system in their favor that they just don’t know about.

How I Use P4 Medicine to Maximize Patient Engagement

0

Molly MaloofThe healthcare industry is changing as new models of care and reimbursement emerge. One of these approaches is P4 Medicine. P4 Medicine stands for predictive, preventive, personalized, and participatory. This approach deeply resonates with me because the philosophy is aligned with how I have been developing my medical practice, which is focused on optimizing health and avoiding disease. In my opinion, P4 Medicine is one of the best models for maximizing patient engagement.

The earliest manifestation of P4 Medicine began eight years ago at the Institute of Systems Biology when Dr. Lee Hood, MD, PhD, a physician scientist and creator of the automated gene sequencer, recognized that the application of systems biology to medicine would fundamentally alter our understanding of health and disease. This model has merged three powerful aspects of science and technology:

Patient-Centered Service

13

flying cadeuciiAmerican healthcare has a customer service problem.  No, customer service in the US is terrible when it comes to healthcare.  No, the customer service in the US healthcare system is horrendous.  No, healthcare has the worst customer service of any industry in the US.

There.  That seems about right.

What makes me utter such a bold statement?  Experience.  I regularly hear the following from people when they come to my practice:

  • “You are the first doctor who has listened to me.”
  • “This office makes me feel comfortable.”
  • “I didn’t have to wait!”
  • “Where’s all the paperwork?”
  • “Your office staff is so helpful. They really care about my needs.”
  • “This is the first time I’ve been happy to come to the doctor.”
  • “It’s amazing to have a doctor who cares about how much things cost.”
  • “You explain things to me.”
  • “You actually return my calls.”

Surviving the Affordable Care Act Grace Period

0

Screen Shot 2015-04-16 at 10.39.10 AMSince the first open enrollment in 2014 more than 11 million people have gotten coverage through the insurance exchanges established through the Affordable Care Act (ACA). While the plans offered through the exchanges are provided by the same insurers you deal with every day, there are some differences.

The biggest one is the 90-day grace period. As we near the end of the grace period for 2015, many practices are still struggling to manage the ins and outs to ensure they get paid. Here’s why.

When a person goes into the exchange to select a policy, they get a 90-day grace period to pay premiums. This grace period is between the insurance company and the policy holder. As with other coverage, when the patient makes an appointment and/or goes to the doctor, he or she shows the insurance card. When the practice verifies eligibility, it shows that the patient is covered. If the patient comes into the office during the grace period, the claim will go out as usual and get paid. However, if the patient did not pay their premium during this grace period, the insurance company will come back to the practice and ask for the money back. Then, the practice has to bill the patient directly. This is difficult for providers for many reasons, not the least of which is that the longer it takes to bill a patient, the lower the chances of getting paid.

As a provider you may feel a strong reaction to this 90-day grace period and want to wait to see patients until the grace period is past. This is probably not realistic. Patients need care, and you need to have a positive relationship with your patients. So, here are a few steps to help manage the grace period and ensure you get paid:

  1. If the patient is in this grace period, ask them to bring proof of payment of their premium (cancelled check or receipt of some kind).

  2. If the patient cannot provide this, have them pay at least 50% of the billed charges at the time of service.

  3. Have patients sign a contract that states that they will pay the charges if the payer denies them or asks for the payment back after services are rendered.

  4. Implement a credit card on file option. Patients provide a credit or debit card and sign a contract that it can be charged up to a specified amount (i.e., $150). If the payer denies the claim or asks for the payment back, the practice can charge the card and send a receipt to the patient.

Over 30% of physicians believe that the largest barrier to good healthcare is inadequate insurance coverage. So it is no wonder that over 40% of physicians also believe that the Affordable Care Act is mostly good and a similar number are accepting exchange plans. However, this doesn’t change the fact that the new plans come with challenges.

As a small business you can’t really afford to wait too long to get paid, or worse, have to return payments and then wait again. By implementing some simple steps now you can help reduce the headaches of exchanges plans in the years to come.

Kathleen Young is the CEO and co-founder of Resolutions Billing & Consulting, Inc., which was founded in 2003. Kathleen is also the owner of Healthcare Chart Audits, which offers auditing to physicians and attorneys. Kathleen has been in healthcare since 1989 and has worked for physicians, large corporations and three billing companies. Kathleen is a CPC and a CPMA with the American Academy of Professional Coders and speaks to many groups on coding, billing, and auditing.

 

Calcium Scan and Subtractive Medicine

0

Being a radiologist, I rarely speak to patients, but I was asked to counsel Mrs. Patel (not her real name, so calm down HIPAA totalitarians), who was worried about the risks of radiation from cardiac calcium CT scan. Because of her risk factors for atherosclerosis, her cardiologist wanted her to take statins for primary prevention, but she was reluctant to start statins. They eventually reached a truce. If she had even a speck of calcium in her coronary arteries she would take statins. If her calcium score was zero she wouldn’t. This type of shared decision making is the most frequent reason why cardiologists order calcium scans at my institution.

Death By Documentation

2

In my work with hundreds of over stressed and burned out physicians, one thing is constant. Documentation is always one of their biggest sources of stress.

In fact, if you ask the average working doctor to make a list of their top five stresses, documentation chores will take up three of the five slots.

1. EMR – especially if you use multiple EMR software programs that don’t talk to each other

2. Dealing with lab reports and refill requests

3. Returning patient and consultant calls and documenting them adequately and all the other places information streams have to be forced together by the sweat of your brow.

The average doc is walking the cliff edge of overload on a significant number of office days in any given month. Now comes ICD-10 and my biggest fear is the extra work of the new coding system will push many physicians over the edge into burnout.

How much more time will ICD-10 take?

The Doctor- Patient Relationship and the Outcomes Movement

8

Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.46.12 AMIn a recent Harvard Business Review article, authors Erin Sullivan and Andy Ellner take a stand against the “outcomes theory of value,” advanced by such economists as Michael Porter and Robert Kaplan who believe that in order to “properly manage value, both outcomes and cost must be measured at the patient level.”

In contrast, Sullivan and Ellner point out that medical care is first of all a matter of relationships:

With over 50% of primary care providers believing that efforts to measure quality-related outcomes actually make quality worse, it seems there may be something missing from the equation. Relationships may be the key…Kurt Stange, an expert in family medicine and health systems, calls relationships “the antidote to an increasingly fragmented and depersonalized health care system.”

In their article, Sullivan and Ellner describe three success stories of practice models where an emphasis on relationships led to better care.

But in describing these successes, do the authors undermine their own argument?  For in order to identify the quality of the care provided, they point to improvements in patient satisfaction surveys in one case, decreased rates of readmission in another, and fewer ER visits and hospitalizations in the third.  In other words…outcomes

Zen and the Quest For Quality

21

Screen Shot 2014-08-21 at 11.45.17 AMCelebrating its 40 anniversary this year, Robert M. Pirsig’s Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance bears several distinctions.  It is listed in the Guinness Book of World Records as the eventual bestseller that was rejected by more publishers than any other, 121.  It went on to sell more than 5 million copies, making it the most popular philosophy book of the past 50 years.  And it focuses on a truly extraordinary topic, which its narrator refers to as a “metaphysics of quality.”

Quality is a hot topic in healthcare today.  Hospitals and healthcare systems are abuzz with the rhetoric of QA and QI (quality assessment and quality improvement), and healthcare payers including the federal government are boldly touting new initiatives intended to replace quantity with quality as the basis for rewarding providers.  Yet as Pirsig’s narrator, Phaedrus (see Plato’s dialogue of the same name), comes to realize, quality is very difficult to define.

In fact, giving an account of quality is so difficult that it drove Zen’s author mad.  And this is a man whose IQ, 170, would make him one of the most intelligent people in any health system.  The problem, of course, is that there is a big difference between intelligence and wisdom, and in the quest for wisdom, mere intelligence often leads us dangerously astray.  Something similar is happening in healthcare today, where schemes to improve quality often precede sufficient efforts to understand it.

For example, we seek to gain greater control over healthcare outcomes through measurement, only to discover, to our chagrin, that people are massaging the data to meet their numbers.  We create new programs intended to increase patient throughput, only to discover unintended perverse effects on the quality of relationships between patients and physicians.  Initiatives intended to reduce error rates turn out again and again to stifle innovation.

Will Independent Physicians Go Extinct?

21

Richard Gunderman goodLife is tough for physicians in solo and small group practice.  The federally mandated introduction this fall of ICD-10 requires physicians and their staffs to learn a new system of coding diseases.  “Meaningful Use,” another federal program, requires physicians to install and use electronic health records systems, which are complex and expensive.  And PQRS, the Physician Quality Reporting System, is beginning to penalize physicians for failing to report individual data for up to 110 quality measures, such as patient immunizations, each of which takes time to collect and record.

Of course, such requirements are not being imposed solely on solo and small-group physicians.  In many ways, they affect all physicians alike.  Yet the burdens of complying are disproportionately high for small groups, which cannot spread out the costs of purchasing equipment, hiring employees and consultants, and training personnel over so large a number of colleagues.  Hospitals and large medical groups can afford to hire full-time specialists to meet these challenges, but such approaches are not economically feasible for a group that consists of only a few physicians.

Such challenges are not just raining down –  they are pouring down on the heads of physicians.  Some physicians fear they smell a conspiracy to drive solo and small-group practitioners out of business.  And the problem is not just the money.  It’s also the time.  Many physicians already work long hours and simply cannot afford to shop for such systems, negotiate contracts, and enter data.  We personally know physicians who report spending two hours each evening completing records that they did not have time to attend to while they were seeing patients.