Selling Health Insurance Across State Lines Is Unlikely to Lower Costs or Improve Choice

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/blog/2017/apr/selling-health-insurance-across-state-lines?omnicid=EALERT1190217&mid=henrykotula@yahoo.com

Image result for selling healthcare across state lines

In the wake of the failure of the legislative effort to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the fate of another of the president’s health care priorities is unclear. In his first congressional address, President Trump articulated five principles for health care reform. His fifth and last called for giving “Americans the freedom to purchase health insurance across state lines,” a reform that, in his words, would create “a truly competitive national marketplace that will bring cost way down and provide far better care.” This concept was not in the House reconciliation bill (the “American Health Care Act” or AHCA) to repeal and replace key provisions of the ACA, but President Trump may be able to use his regulatory authority to promote the cross-border sales of health insurance.

The president has the authority to act on his own thanks in part to the ACA. That law includes a provision encouraging “health care choice compacts,” whereby an insurer could establish itself in one state and sell health insurance to consumers in multiple other states without having to follow those states’ laws and regulations. However, under President Obama, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) never published regulations enabling these cross-state sales.

While the ACA provision encourages states to enter into cross-state regulatory agreements in order to facilitate interstate sales, under Trump’s campaign and several congressional proposals, the federal government would effectively override states’ authority to regulate their markets. In the absence of legislative action, there is nothing preventing HHS Secretary Tom Price from issuing the required regulations and working with states to develop standards for interstate sales. In fact, several states already allow cross-state sales.

 

An infographic of healthcare cuts in Trump’s draft budget

An infographic of healthcare cuts in Trump’s draft budget

V2_Fed_Budget_Healthcare_2017

 

Healthcare groups bash Trump’s budget proposal: Cuts threaten public health

http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/healthcare/trump-s-budget-proposal-faces-opposition-from-healthcare-industry-groups-members-both?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWXpoa05EZzFZamxrTkdVMiIsInQiOiJYVXpYMVo4VThobmJJdXRqUUlSempJc0dBeUdTVkRcL3ZDTW9qZHU5eStXdnAxOHdwbkUwTlQrdjA3bldVYXRiQ1Z2a2FQYTdKSFVxWG9qd2hlTTRmNCt5MHFZdTZKTlB5aWY4Zm5DSzBvcHVLRjBQWDNlalwvSW9LRk4xT2Jyd2JHIn0%3D&mrkid=959610&utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal

Image result for Trump's budget proposal graphic

Nurses, docs and medical research groups said the budget cuts proposed by President Donald Trump threaten the future of healthcare.

Among the cuts: Nearly 18% of HHS’ budget, with the largest cuts coming to National Institutes of Health. The agency would see a $5.9 million decrease in its budget and a significant reorganization effort that would fold the Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research into its ranks and close the Fogarty International Center

Nurses came out in force against the budget cuts. The American Nurses Association urged Congress to reject Trump’s proposal, which they said in a statement will  “weaken the nation’s healthcare system and jeopardize the scientific research needed to keep America healthy.”

The ANA is especially upset about plans to reduce funding for health professions and nursing workforce programs by $403 million. The proposal “drastically hampers efforts to address critical faculty shortages and recruit new nurses into the profession,” the association said.

Furthermore, the National Nurses United called the cuts a “broad attack on public protections that also targets some of the nation’s most vulnerable people while shifting resources to the least needed areas.”

The American Public Health Association agreed, stating that the proposal undermines the health and well-being of Americans.

“Cuts to these agencies would threaten programs that protect the public from the next infectious disease outbreak, polluted air and water, health threats due to climate change and our growing chronic disease epidemic,” APHA Executive Director Georges C. Benjamin, M.D., said in the statement.

And Andrew Gurman, M.D., president of the American Medical Association, said the cuts cause great concerns about future medical research and public health in general and in the wake of Zika, Ebola.

The Association of American Medical Colleges noted in a statement that medical research can’t be “turned on and off like a faucet.” Indeed, “the proposed cuts would set back progress toward critical advancements that could take decades to regain, prevent new ideas from being explored, and have a chilling effect on those who would potentially enter the biomedical research workforce.”

And the American Cancer Society said the reduction in funding would set cancer research back at least two decades.

“For the last 50 years every major medical breakthrough can be traced back to investments in the NIH,” Chris Hansen, president of the ACS Cancer Action Network, said in the statement. “Because of these investments, there are more than 15.5 million American cancer survivors alive today and researchers stand on the cusp of numerous innovative new diagnostic tools and treatments.”

Can ACOs survive a repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act?

http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/healthcare/future-acos-can-they-survive-a-repeal-and-replace-aca?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal&mrkid=959610&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWkRjeU1tTTFPVEUyTjJaaCIsInQiOiJBNGU4aWlDQkpcL3l6eURqQUMyR2w3aVFtNStxVzBraUpQcTVOamQ4SVNEVUNDeXFQQ1RDWG5qdmptMjI4VWpiVTdHUDltN0ZTMG5ObWlHOWl0cXRmVEpjQ0h2bFU1NXJKM2YzaHBrcnc2VlVJVkoyTHJrQjBndGI5b3BGWmdJV1oifQ%3D%3D

Doctor patient

Just as the fate of the Affordable Care Act is up in the air, so is the future of accountable care organizations, which were established under the healthcare reform law to improve care and reduce costs.

But one leading health policy expert predicted that even if Republican lawmakers come up with a plan to repeal and replace the healthcare reform law, ACOs will survive. They will just need to adapt to the new regulatory landscape.

“ACOs are here to stay,” wrote Paul Keckley, Ph.D., managing editor of The Keckley Report, in a post for Hospitals & Health Networks. “How they fit into a medical group or health system’s contracting and population health strategies will change as regulations like MACRA kick in and as employers, insurers, Medicare and Medicaid assess their value.”

More than 850 ACOs currently provide care to more than 28 million patients across the country. This year 570 ACOs will participate in Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services models, including the Shared Savings Program  (MSSP), Next Generation ACO Model and The Comprehensive ESRD Care Model.

Two recent studies showed evidence that ACOs do lead to quality improvements and cost reductions, but those benefits grow over time. The problem is that Tom Price, the new head of the Department of Health & Human Services, doesn’t support some value-based care initiatives, such as Medicare’s mandatory bundled payment initiatives for hip and knee replacements.

But Keckley predicted physician-led ACOs that follow practices to standardize care and incentives for clinicians linked to cost savings will survive. However, in order to survive the organizations must focus on primary care driven care coordination, he said. “From these primary care centric models, virtual ACOs that incorporate rural health and teleconnectivity, and clinical models that include social determinants of health in assessing risks and care coordination tactics will evolve,” he wrote.

He also predicted that CMS will change quality measures and simplify reporting requirements under MSSP ACOs. And if Congress does move to Medicaid block grants, he expects Medicaid ACOs will be a growth opportunity.

Memorial Healthcare Systems to pay $5.5M over potential HIPAA violations

http://www.healthcaredive.com/news/memorial-healthcare-systems-to-pay-55m-over-potential-hipaa-violations/436400/

Dive Brief:

  • Memorial Healthcare Systems has paid HHS $5.5 million to settle potential HIPAA violations, HHS disclosed on Thursday.
  • The six-hospital nonprofit system disclosed to HHS’ OCR that 115,143 individuals’ protected health information (PHI) had been impermissibly accessed by employees and impermissibly disclosed to affiliated physician office staff.
  • The settlement comes weeks after Children’s Medical Center of Dallas was fined $3.2 million over HIPAA violations.

Memorial Healthcare System provided Healthcare Dive the following statement on the subject:

It’s important to put this settlement in perspective to the fact that this situation happened six years ago, and that Memorial Healthcare System proactively reported the actions of the two employees and the findings of its internal investigation regarding the affiliated physicians’ staff to the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Civil Rights (OCR). Upon learning of the breaches, Memorial quickly acted to implement new, sophisticated technologies designed to monitor use and access of patient data, further restricted access to protect patient information, and enacted new policies and procedures to enhance password security. 

Memorial’s February 2017 settlement with the OCR resolves all allegations surrounding these breaches.  While Memorial strongly disagrees with many of OCR’s allegations, has admitted no liability and has chosen to settle this case, it nevertheless agrees with the importance OCR places on maintaining the security of patient information. We will continue to vigorously monitor access and use of patient information and maintain rigorous cybersecurity and internal safeguards.

Trump administration withdraws 340B mega-guidance: 6 things to know

http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/trump-administration-withdraws-340b-mega-guidance-6-things-to-know.html

Image result for 340b

The Trump administration has withdrawn guidance on the 340B Drug Pricing Program that was under review at the end of the Obama administration.

Here are six things to know about the guidance.

1. HHS’ Health Resources and Services Administration released the omnibus guidance on the 340B Drug Pricing Program in August 2015. The 340B Drug Pricing Program allows certain safety-net healthcare organizations to purchase outpatient drugs at discounted prices.

2. The guidance addressed a broad range of topics within the 340B program, including the definition of patient, contract pharmacy compliance requirements, hospital eligibility criteria and eligibility of off-site outpatient locations.

3. On Jan. 30, the White House Office of Management and Budget marked the final guidance document as withdrawn.

4. Although the pharmaceutical drug industry generally supported the guidance, hospitals raised concerns about the proposal. The American Hospital Association previously expressed concern about the guidance, arguing that redefining patient eligibility for the 340B program would have inappropriately narrowed the number of drugs that qualify for 340B pricing.

5. On Wednesday, AHA Executive Vice President Tom Nickels said, “We are pleased that the administration chose not to finalize the Health Resources and Services Administration’s guidance, which, if enacted, would have jeopardized hospitals’ ability to service vulnerable populations, including low-income and uninsured individuals and patients receiving cancer treatments.”

6. For HRSA’s guidance to move forward, it would have to be resubmitted to the Office of Management and Budget.

Five Quick Ways HHS Secretary Tom Price Could Change The Course Of Health Policy

http://khn.org/news/five-quick-ways-a-new-hhs-secretary-could-change-the-course-of-health-policy/?utm_campaign=KFF-2017-The-Latest&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=42404172&_hsenc=p2ANqtz–5EWkVt5sjIUe_63Pbf6RTjOO_GqSTuaRBRwH_raPCxqrbMpsVfuUSNHyZm7pv8SbHa4es7RH84q1NOLCwj0m44NZyWQ&_hsmi=42404172

Image result for HHS Health Policy

After a bruising confirmation process, the Senate confirmed Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., to head up the Department of Health and Human Services, by a 52-to-47 vote.

As secretary, Price will have significant authority to rewrite the rules for the Affordable Care Act, some of which are reportedly nearly ready to be issued.

But there is much more now within Price’s purview, as head of an agency with a budget of more than $1 trillion for the current fiscal year. He can interpret laws in different ways than his predecessors and rewrite regulations and guidance, which is how many important policies are actually carried out.

“Virtually everything people do every day is impacted by the way the Department of Health and Human Services is run,” said Matt Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. HHS responsibilities include food and drug safety, biomedical research, disease prevention and control, as well as oversight over everything from medical laboratories to nursing homes.

Price, a Georgia physician who opposes the Affordable Care Act, abortion and funding for Planned Parenthood, among other things, could have a rapid impact without even a presidential order or an act of Congress.

Some advocates are excited by that possibility. “With Dr. Price taking the helm of American health policy, doctors and patients alike have sound reasons to hope for a welcome and long-overdue change,” Robert Moffit, a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said in a statement when Price’s nomination was announced.

Others are less enthusiastic. Asked about what policies Price might enact, Topher Spiro of the liberal Center for American Progress said at that time: “I don’t know if I want to brainstorm bad ideas for him to do.”

Here are five actions the new HHS secretary might take, according to advocates on both sides, that would disrupt health policies currently in force:

Consensus builds that GOP will keep value-based focus for healthcare reimbursement

http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/insurers-seek-market-stabilization-prior-april-rate-setting-deadline

Health Affairs report suggests new HHS leadership should expand state all-payer models, fine-tune accountable care organizations.

Another report suggest value-based payment models will continue even, if in a different form, under the new administration’s governance of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, according to a Health Affairs report.

“The election of Donald Trump might change the strategy of advancing healthcare reform, but the movement toward value-based care both preceded the Affordable Care Act and has bipartisan support,” the authors said.

If Tom Price is confirmed as secretary and Seema Verma administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator, the agencies will support new value-based payment models said authors David Muhlestein, Natalie Burton and Lia Winfield.

But Price has already voiced his opposition to mandatory models such as bundled payments.

CMS, which has 74 healthcare initiatives and programs in different stages of research, testing, and adoption, recently proposed to make its cardiac care bundle mandatory and said opportunities exist for bundles that consider multiple chronic conditions.

While payment innovation may continue, the agency needs to articulate its overall strategy in four focus areas, the authors said.

The first is the expansion of the population-based model and disease-specific model.

Senate committee advances Price nomination without Dems present

http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/healthcare/senate-committee-advances-price-nomination-without-dems-present?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTm1RM01HUTJORE15WVdRNSIsInQiOiJFd0pManZSb09vTTVCbXdwQThsTnBycFZvaEdvbmVBZUpFWU42RFlCNHpmNW81eG5vNzFGcFRWVjRodGZFRDhWTlQ1WG1OeU5CTklYaFdjSWN0OCtaWGRLU3laOU5NVGdQV3hYWE5PVUpTeXVtcnZnWFZcL040c241SnB6SytsMXYifQ%3D%3D&mrkid=959610&utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal

Image result for political partisan controversy

In an unprecedented, dramatic step, the Senate Finance Committee this morning suspended its rules and voted without Democrats present to send Tom Price’s nomination as head of the Department of Health and Human Services to the Senate floor.

The quickly scheduled meeting today took place less than 24 hours after Democrats managed to postpone a planned vote by boycotting the meeting. Under the committee rules, 13 members—including at least one Democrat—must be present for the vote.

Republicans were furious, calling the boycott “amazingly stupid” and “pathetic.” But Democrats said they wanted more information before they vote in light of a new report this week in The Wall Street Journal that Price received a special discounted offer to buy stock in a biomedical company, which contradicted his testimony during congressional hearings.

Rep. Price, R-Ga., an orthopedic surgeon, has served as a member of the House of Representatives for seven terms. But despite his ties to Congress and his medical background, President Donald Trump’s pick to lead HHS has been controversial from the beginning due to Price’s support for dismantling the Affordable Care Act.

But Democrats also raised ethical and conflict-of-interest concerns over reports of insider trading and purchase of thousands of dollars in stock in healthcare, pharmaceutical and biomedical companies while sponsoring legislation that could have influenced those companies’ shares.

The Senate Finance Committee’s ranking member, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), said in a prepared statement Tuesday following the boycott that he “asked Congressman Price directly if he got an exclusive discount on stock in an Australian biomedical firm, and he said no. From the committee’s investigation to company documents to the company officials’ own words, the evidence tells a different story. It looks more and more like Congressman Price got special access to a special deal.”

Sepsis Tops Conditions Tracked for Readmission Rates, but Triggers No Penalties

http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/quality/sepsis-tops-conditions-tracked-readmission-rates-triggers-no-penalties?spMailingID=10315063&spUserID=MTY3ODg4NTg1MzQ4S0&spJobID=1082253801&spReportId=MTA4MjI1MzgwMQS2#

Sepsis Tops Conditions Tracked for Readmission Rates, but Triggers No Penalties

Sepsis has a higher rate of readmission than heart failure, but the federal government does not penalize hospitals for excessive readmissions due to sepsis.