Author Archives: henrykotula

30% of hospital healthcare workers remained unvaccinated as of September

Posted on by • Posted in Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC), Coronavirus, Coronavirus Delta Variant, Coronavirus Mutation, Employee Mandate, Health Policy, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Infection Control, Infection Control Plan, Infectious Virus, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Pandemic, Public Health, Public Health Strategy, Public Opinion, Public Perception, Public Safety, Public Schools, Public Trust, Unvaccinated, Vaccination, Vaccine, Vaccine Distribution, Vaccine Efficacy, Vaccine Mandate, Vaccine Safety, Vaccine Supply • Leave a comment
https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/30-percent-healthcare-workers-unvaccinated-CDC-CMS/610265/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Issue:%202021-11-18%20Healthcare%20Dive%20%5Bissue:38108%5D&utm_term=Healthcare%20Dive

Dive Brief:

  • Some 30% of U.S. healthcare workers employed at hospitals remained unvaccinated as of Sept. 15, according to an analysis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data published Thursday by the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology.
  • The findings include data from 3.3 million healthcare workers at more than 2,000 hospitals, collected between Jan. 20 and Sept. 15.
  • Healthcare personnel working in children’s hospitals had the highest vaccination rates, along with those working in metropolitan counties.

Dive Insight:

The vaccination rate for healthcare workers is roughly in line with that of the general population, though the risk of exposure and transmission can be higher in settings where infected COVID-19 patients are treated, Hannah Reses, CDC epidemiologist and lead author of the analysis, said.

When the shots were initially rolled out, vaccination rates climbed among healthcare workers, rising from 36% to 60% between January and April of 2021, the analysis found. But a major slowdown occurred shortly after.

From April to August, vaccination rates rose just 5%. They then rose 5% again in just one month — from August to September — likely due to the delta variant and more systems implementing their own mandates, the report said.

Researchers also found discrepancies in vaccination rates based on the type of hospitals and their geographic locations.

By September, workers at children’s hospitals had the highest vaccination rates (77%), followed by those at short-term acute care hospitals (70%), long-term care facilities (68.8%), and critical access hospitals (64%).

Among healthcare workers at facilities in metropolitan areas, about 71% were vaccinated by September, compared to 65% of workers at rural facilities.

The findings come as health systems work to comply with new vaccination mandates from the Biden administration.

Healthcare facilities must follow the CMS rule, which stipulates employees must be fully vaccinated by Jan. 4 or risk losing Medicare and Medicaid funding. Unlike the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s rule that applies to businesses with 100 employees or more but excludes healthcare providers, the CMS rule does not allow for a testing exception.

Both agencies’ rules were met with pushback. The attorneys general of 10 mostly rural states — Missouri, Nebraska, Arkansas, Kansas, Iowa, Wyoming, Alaska, South Dakota, North Dakota and New Hampshire — filed a lawsuit on Oct. 10 against CMS for its rule and said the mandates would exacerbate existing staffing shortages.

“Requiring healthcare workers to get a vaccination or face termination is unconstitutional and unlawful, and could exacerbate healthcare staffing shortages to the point of collapse, especially in Missouri’s rural areas,” the state’s attorney general, Eric Schmitt, said in a statement.

But some regional systems that implemented their own mandates have seen positive results.

After UNC Health and Novant Health in North Carolina required the shots, staff vaccination rates rose to 97% and 99%, respectively, according to a White House report.

Among Novant Health’s 35,000 employees, about 375 were suspended for not complying, and about 200 of those suspended employees did end up getting vaccinated so they could return to work, according to the report.

And some major hospital chains across the country are joining suit with the looming deadline, including HCA with its 183 hospitals and more than 275,000 employees.

The chain is requiring employees be fully vaccinated by the CMS deadline on Jan. 4, a spokesperson said in an email statement.

At the same time, this year’s flu season is difficult to predict, though, “the number of influenza virus detection reported by public health labs has increased in recent weeks,” Reses said.

“The CDC is preparing for flu and COVID to circulate along with other respiratory viruses, and so flu vaccination therefore will be really important to reduce the risk of flu and potentially serious complications, particularly in combination with COVID-19 circulating,” Reses said.

The ‘threat multiplier’ healthcare leaders can’t afford to ignore

Posted on by • Posted in Climate Change, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Health Care Without Harm, Health Policy, Health System, Healthcare Carbon Footprint, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Inhaled Anesthetic Gases, Supply Chain • Leave a comment
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-management-administration/the-threat-multiplier-healthcare-leaders-can-t-afford-to-ignore.html?origin=CIOE&utm_source=CIOE&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&oly_enc_id=2893H2397267F7G
Greenhouse Gas Emissions From U.S. Healthcare On the Rise | MedPage Today

From excessive waste to greenhouse gas emissions, healthcare organizations play a key role in contributing to climate change.

Research suggests the United States is the highest contributor to the global healthcare climate footprint. The healthcare industry accounts for 8.5 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S.. Worldwide, the healthcare industry is responsible for 4.4 percent of net emissions, which is the equivalent of 514 coal-fired power plants, according to a 2019 report from Arup and Health Care Without Harm, a group dedicated to achieving more sustainable healthcare practices. 

The medical supply chain accounts for 71 percent of healthcare’s carbon footprint. Excess waste is created from plastic gloves, surgical supplies, medicine containers and gowns, among other materials. If the American healthcare sector were its own country, it would be the 13th largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the world, according to a column by Baltimore-based Johns Hopkins physicians.

A 2010 study estimated that each occupied U.S. hospital bed created 33.8 pounds of waste per day. Hospitals also dispose of 2 million pounds of supplies that have never been used, which costs them $15 million each year.

Other key contributors to healthcare’s carbon footprint are emissions from facilities, which account for 17 percent of its footprint, and indirect emissions from electricity, heating and cooling, which account for 12 percent, according to the Arup and Health Care Without Harm report.

A study by the National Health Service in England found that 2 to 3 percent of its carbon footprint is created by inhaled anesthetic gases. The drugs are vented through hospital rooftops and can be destructive to the ozone layer. Despite the potential consequences of releasing the gases into the atmosphere, the U.S. has no regulations on how to dispose them.

Nonprofit health plans focus on reducing premiums, expanding benefits

Posted on by • Posted in Alliance of Community Health Plans (ACHP), Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Complex Care, Health Plan, Health Plan Nonprofit, High Premiums, Home Care, Home-Based Care, Price Transparency, Virtual Care Strategy, Virtual Healthcare • Leave a comment

https://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/nonprofit-health-plans-focus-reducing-premiums-expanding-benefits

Nonprofit payers have used a variety of strategies to address plan affordability throughout the next year, including reducing premiums by as much as 10% in some instances, finds a new report from the Alliance of Community Health Plans.

ACHP’s inaugural Report on Affordability found that when health plans manage premiums, provide enhanced benefits, smooth the way for access and reduce costs for governments and employers, the system – and outcomes – improve.

This is exemplified by some of the strategies employed by ACHP member plans, which largely reduced insurance premiums or held them flat, with some member companies reducing premiums by as much as 10%.

On top of that, every plan added new health benefits, or expanded existing ones, without increasing costs to consumers, the report found. Some of the additional benefits include free vaccines, transportation, hearing aids, reduced insulin costs, nutrition classes and meal services, smoking cessation programs and $0 co-pays for mental health visits.

Roughly three-quarters of ACPH plans moved acute and recovery services out of the hospital setting, which was deemed too expensive in most cases. By establishing hospital-at-home programs and remote patient monitoring, plans have generated significant savings for both consumers and the health system, plus improved consumer satisfaction, results showed.

Meanwhile, about two-thirds of the plans offered price transparency tools meant to allow consumers to make more-informed choices. They included information on inpatient and outpatient services, behavioral health, prescription drugs, lab and imaging services and other fees, and many provided options for several locations and virtual care, a move intended to reduce travel costs.

Priority Health’s cost estimator has tallied $13.8 million in shared savings and paid out roughly $4.1 million in rewards to members.

In a bid to improve access, all plans expanded telehealth offerings, smoothing access to mental healthcare as well as to specialties such as Medication Assisted Treatment, physical and occupational therapy, medication management, speech therapy and dialysis. Most eliminated co-pays and cost sharing.

WHAT’S THE IMPACT?

In the last year, ACHP members expanded the hospital-at-home care model, attempting to offer more efficient ways to provide acute and recovery care as well as care management in a home setting. The expansion of virtual care, complete with remote monitoring and social support, reduces the risk of infection, keeps patients comfortable at home and alleviates inpatient hospital bed shortages, according to the report.

For example, SelectHealth and its owner system, Utah-based Intermountain Healthcare, launched Connect Care Pro, a virtual hospital meant to enable access for patients in remote locations. The online, digital program connects more than 500 caregivers across the Intermountain system, enabling patients to receive both basic medical and specialty care without making a long journey, including by helicopter.

Presbyterian Health of New Mexico’s Complete Care, on the other hand, is a wrap-around program that combines primary, urgent and home care for patients with complex medical needs, including those with functional decline and at risk of needing long-term institutional care. Patients receive and manage their care from home, 24/7, including acute and palliative care, house-call and same-day visits, as well as medication management. In addition, care coordinators and social workers manage social needs, including transportation and food insecurity.

And the Home Care Recovery program from Wisconsin’s Security Health Plan and Marshfield Clinic Health System brings the elements of acute inpatient recovery to a patient’s home, eliminating fixed-cost allocations associated with traditional hospital-level care and reducing post-acute utilization and readmissions for 150 traditional inpatient conditions such as congestive heart failure, pneumonia and asthma.

THE LARGER TREND

A 2016 report from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services found that nonprofit organizations and health plans tend to receive higher star ratings than their for-profit counterparts.

For Medicare Part Ds, about 70% of the nonprofit contracts received four or more stars compared to 39% of the for-profit MA-Part-Ds. Similarly, roughly 63% of nonprofit prescription drug plans received four or more stars, compared to 24% of the for-profit PDPs.

New spending from Build Back Better would outweigh cuts in DSH payments, finds Urban Institute

Posted on by • Posted in ACA, Health Insurance Coverage Adequacy, Health Policy, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Medicaid, Medicaid Expansion, Medicare Disproportionate Share Reimbursement • Leave a comment

https://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/new-spending-build-back-better-would-outweigh-cuts-dsh-payments-finds-urban-institute

Earlier this year, President Joe Biden proposed a framework called Build Back Better that would, among other things, expand Medicaid. If the BBB plan is implemented, a new Urban Institute analysis predicts that federal health subsidies would outweigh a projected increase in hospital spending by about 3-to-1.

The current draft of the Build Back Better Act (BBBA) includes provisions that would extend enhanced ACA subsidies to people below 100% of the federal poverty limit in the 12 states that have not expanded Medicaid. These provisions are intended to extend health insurance coverage to millions of people and to lower the cost of healthcare for many families.

Hospitals in non-expansion states would see more than $6.8 billion in new spending as a result of the BBBA’s closing of the Medicaid gap, which is about 15 times larger than the expected disproportionate share hospital allotment cuts of $444 million, the findings showed.

Overall, new federal health subsidies disbursed to non-expansion states for people in the coverage gap would be $19.6 billion. Florida, Texas, Georgia and North Carolina hospitals are among those that would have the most substantial increases in spending because of added coverage, the analysis found.

The Urban Institute also determined that the benefits of the changes would not necessarily go to the same hospitals that would sustain reductions in DSH allotments. If true, that means some hospitals may be worse off with the proposed changes.

Still, though only a portion of the total increased federal spending under the BBBA provisions would flow to hospitals, the researcher concludes that in the years during which additional subsidies would be provided, hospitals would be substantially better off overall than they are under current law, even after proposed Medicaid DSH cuts are taken into account.

WHAT’S THE IMPACT?

The effects of the new federal health subsidies would vary across states, largely because of differences in state populations, the Urban Institute showed. 

Florida hospitals, for instance, are projected to gain $1.7 billion in new spending because of added coverage, and to lose $33 million in DSH allotments, resulting in a net gain of $1.6 billion. Texas hospitals could gain $1.6 billion in new spending and lose $157 million in DSH allotments, gaining almost $1.5 billion. Georgia and North Carolina hospitals would also have substantial increases in spending because of added coverage that would exceed their reduced Medicaid DSH allotments by more than $750 million and almost $900 million, respectively. 

Meanwhile, because Wisconsin already covers adults up to the FPL under Medicaid, it would have a small net loss in payments to hospitals for the Medicaid gap population, but a net gain overall.

Hospitals serving a disproportionately high share of undocumented people would see less benefit from reform than other hospitals, and could see substantial DSH cuts. At the same time, the overall decline in the number of uninsured people could save spending on uncompensated care for the uninsured, data showed. If states and localities save on uncompensated care, the savings could be distributed to hospitals most in need after DSH cuts.

THE LARGER TREND

The BBBA’s increased subsidies are set to end after 2025, whereas the bill’s Medicaid DSH cuts would be permanent. More broadly, nationwide Medicaid DSH cuts specified under the Affordable Care Act have been repeatedly delayed, but they are now due to be implemented in fiscal year 2024. At $8 billion in that year, those cuts are much larger than the DSH cuts specified in the BBBA. 

Unless Congress intervenes, UI said, these ACA-related DSH reductions would be in addition to the DSH cuts in the BBBA for the 12 non-expansion states. 

The BBBA was slated to go to a vote the week of November 15, but that timetable may shift. According to CNN, the Congressional Budget office has yet to give a final cost estimate score for the bill; a group of moderate Democrats is waiting to see the CBO score before deciding whether to vote for the bill.