SSM Health is offering $25 virtual visits to all Wisconsin, Missouri residents

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/telehealth/ssm-health-is-offering-25-virtual-visits-to-all-wisconsin-missouri-residents.html?origin=rcme&utm_source=rcme

Image result for virtual visit

St. Louis-based SSM Health is upping the ante for providers in Wisconsin and Missouri by offering all residents — established patients or not, health insurance or not — $25 virtual visits within an hour of requesting an appointment.

The service will be available Monday through Friday 9 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., and Saturday and Sunday from 10 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Residents who wish to use the service log onto SSM’s virtual visit platform, complete a questionnaire and within 15 minutes to an hour, will receive a video or phone call from an SSM Health clinician.

The service is available for patients ages 2 to 75 for nonurgent health conditions like flu, pink eye or bladder infections. Parents or guardians must complete visits for minors.   

SSM Health will charge a $25 flat fee for a virtual visit. However, if the issue cannot be resolved online and a follow-up visit in person is necessary, the virtual visit is free.

The health system plans to roll the program out in Illinois and Oklahoma later this year.

 

Podcast: Nurses to the Rescue!

Nurses to the Rescue!

Image result for Nurses to the Rescue!

They are the most-trusted profession in America (and with good reason). They are critical to patient outcomes (especially in primary care). Could the growing army of nurse practitioners be an answer to the doctor shortage? The data say yes but — big surprise — doctors’ associations say no.

 

Medicaid Is Great, but Rural Maine Needs Hospitals, Too

Image result for rural hospital

This week Maine voted to become the 32nd state to expand Medicaid despite opposition by Gov. Paul LePage, who had vetoed five previous expansion bills passed by the state legislature and has now threatened to block the results of the ballot initiative. Unless Mr. LePage succeeds, about 80,000 more Mainers will be eligible for coverage, a victory in an unsettling year for health care in America.

With the Affordable Care Act under constant threat from the Trump administration and out-of-pocket costs rising faster than wages, health care topped the list of the most important issues facing Americans this year.

However, Maine and other rural states face a health care crisis that Medicaid expansion can’t fix on its own. It’s not about affordable coverage; it’s about access: For too many rural areas, doctors and hospitals are scarce.

In the postwar era, America made hospital construction and modernization a priority. On Aug. 13, 1946, Harry Truman signed the Hill-Burton Act,giving communities grants and loans for hospital construction. By 1975, almost one-third of American hospitals owed their creation to the law. Financing for Hill-Burton health care construction ended in 1997, but one rule from the original bill still applied: These hospitals had to give free or reduced care to people who couldn’t afford services. As rural areas aged and the population shrank because of manufacturing’s decline and the rise of a technology-driven economy centered on urban areas, hospitals struggled to stay in operation.

Under the Affordable Care Act, hospitals started shutting down at worrisome rates because of an increase in financial penalties for noncompliance with A.C.A. mandates, the cost of tighter reporting standards and smaller reimbursements for certain procedures. Since the A.C.A. became law in 2010, over 80 rural hospitals have closed nationwide. Maine alone has lost three hospitals in that time, about 10 percent of its rural total.

If closings continue at this rate, 25 percent of America’s rural hospitals will have disappeared in the decade after Obamacare’s passage. This does not take into account facility deterioration, doctor departures or department closures.

This is a big problem for Maine, which has the highest percentage of rural residents in the country, according to the most recent census data. Calais Regional Hospital in Down East Maine recently oversaw its last childbirth. The obstetrics department closed in late summer, forcing women in labor to drive 50 minutes to deliver their babies. Despite an opioid crisis that increases the chance of high-risk pregnancies, this same privately owned hospital shut down its pediatrics wing and intensive care unit in recent years, because of financial pressure from the management company halfway across the country in Tennessee.

This was hardly an isolated example in Maine. The town of Jackman closed its 24-hour emergency room in September, and Boothbay lost its only hospital in 2013. Rangeley, where my wife’s family lives, is an hour away from the nearest hospital and has no doctor in town.

Meanwhile, Maine Med in Portland, Maine’s largest city, is about to break ground for a $512 million addition just a few years after it finished a $40 million renovation. While rural Maine’s hospitals and departments are closing because of large losses, Maine Med had, for 2016, a $61 million surplus.

Medicaid expansion is a welcome source of new revenue to rural hospitals in Maine because more insured patients mean fewer uncompensated treatments. Still, it comes nowhere close to fixing the problem or, politically, putting any meaningful points on the Democratic scoreboard.

In 2016, Donald Trump won Maine’s rural congressional district by a 10-point margin and rural counties in America at large by a 26-point marginon a message of repealing and replacing Obamacare. As Maggie Elehwany of the National Rural Health Association said in an NPR interview this year, rural Americans voted for Mr. Trump in part because of health care. “They see their hospitals closing,” she noted. “And one hospital C.E.O. described it as a three-pronged stool. It’s the churches, the hospitals and the schools. If you lose one of those legs of that stool, the whole community collapses.”

Since President Trump hasn’t been able to deliver on any meaningful legislation to support rural voters, it is the Democrats’ time to deliver. One good step is a bill sponsored by the Democratic senators Tim Kaine of Virginia and Michael Bennet of Colorado called Medicare-X. It would give a public option to Americans in rural counties where limited competition has yielded higher-priced health insurance options.

It still doesn’t solve the heart of the rural problem. Democrats can’t just lower premiums and expand Medicaid. We must strengthen rural communities by making access to high-quality health care services a priority of any proposal. In any future legislation, we should demand grants for new hospitals, funds to modernize crumbling ones and financial incentives for top doctors to work in these areas. This will not only make rural communities healthier, but also more welcoming for growth and new business.

No person suffering from a heart attack should die because a hospital is too far. No pregnant mother should have to risk the health of her baby because she can’t make it to a delivery room in time. As Democrats, we believe that health care is a right. It would be a big mistake to expand health care insurance but offer no place to use it.

Texas rural communities endangered as spiral of hospital closures continues with two more

http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/texas-rural-communities-endangered-spiral-hospital-closures-continues-two-more?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT0RabE1UVmtZamMzTldOaCIsInQiOiJIRmpRNFJxRnFHbG9vRGV6UXZGMzZJbmZXOEZRczZRcktRb3Z4VzZHQ01UYUdoVElGRlNGVTUrRytER3FteTZSMTdXMjdjM0dlVnlrT01CS2RSNDhCa2tuRTNvbkhVMmlkU0RWQ3pvQ0lrTGVPMnkyUG8ySGJOaGhQc0FLbWUyaSJ9

Related image

A hospital in Trinity, Texas closed on August 1, and another in Crockett, Texas on July 1.

In what advocates say is a continued downward death spiral for their state, two more Texas rural hospitals closed for good earlier this week, bringing the total count of rural hospital closures in the Lonestar State to 18 in the last four and a half years alone, according to the Texas Organization of Rural and Community Hospitals or TORCH.

A hospital in Trinity, Texas closed on August 1, and another in Crockett, Texas on July 1. The closures leave those communities without immediate access to emergency and other hospital care services.

“This closure crisis, which has left many rural communities without emergency and other care, has clearly reached epidemic proportions and unless the Texas Legislature and Congress take immediate steps, it will only worsen,” said Dave Pearson, CEO of TORCH.

TORCH represents the 163 rural hospitals in the state of Texas. Of the 18 closures, they noted that four were temporary closures and three were replaced with free-standing ERs. Still, the organization said the care is those towns is now very limited, and 11 communities have no hospital or emergency care.

Many more are teetering on the edge of closure, Pearson said, with a third of the remaining rurals operating on “shoestring budgets” and struggling to keep their doors open. The worst part is these situations could be avoided he said, and are largely due to Medicare cuts in recent years totaling more than $50 million and Medicaid underpayments to rurals that total close to $60 million each year.

Torch Director of Government Relations Don McBeath said these closures and the resulting lack of access to emergency care has resulted in “documented deaths” because the local hospital was not there to service those patients.

Additionally, the closures have a devastating impact on both the local and state economies.  Rural hospitals cover 85% of the state’s geography and serve 15% of the population. That population, kept healthy by the presence of their rural hospitals, drives the state economy, from food production to fuel. David Byrom, CEO of Coryell Hospital in Gatesville, said each Texas rural hospital employs an average 173 people and has $23 million in yearly payroll. That equals more than 22,000 jobs and expenditures of $3.7 billion a year, for a combined economic impact of more than $18 billion a year.

“The citizens of our rural communities fortunate enough to still have a rural hospital need to know this is happening around them and call their elected state and federal representatives and tell them to take action now to stem the tide of Texas’ rural hospital closures. The two closures in the last month, bringing the total to eighteen in the last four and a half years, could be the tip of the iceberg.”

Pearson said the closures have the potential to crush their local community economically and send residents moving out of town looking for jobs.  Local businesses and schools will suffer as well, and the chances of bringing future economic development are hurt.

The Texas state legislature has recently instructed the state Department of Health and Human Services to look into the ongoing situation but that could move too slowly to stem more closures. “With a two-year study window, followed by who knows how much time to react to the findings, we could see dozens more of Texas’ rural hospitals vanish.”

There’s No ‘Free Market’ Solution to Health Care

http://otherwords.org/theres-no-free-market-solution-to-health-care/

Image result for no free market solution to healthcare

A fully privatized system can never adequately provision the nation.

The Republicans have big plans for health care in this country: to eliminate coverage for millions of Americans while delivering a big tax cut to the rich.

As someone who stands to benefit from that tax cut, let me just say: I don’t need it, and I don’t want it. No tax cut is worth excluding millions of Americans from the health services they need.

Any new health care legislation should be focused on providing the best available health services for all Americans, not deliberately putting them out of reach. And yet, this is exactly what the twin monstrosities that came out of the House and Senate would have done.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the House bill would’ve left 23 million Americans uncovered by 2026. The Senate version was only a shade better, leaving 22 million people out. Those bills were nonstarters with the public — the party was forced to pull them, along with any immediate plans to repeal the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare).

This Republican-majority Congress has shown their cards: They favor less coverage for workers and the elderly and lower taxes for the wealthy.

Republicans in both chambers claim they’re doing this to support “freedom” and “choice” for the American people. They say the “free market” is the only way to provide Americans with access to affordable health care. They claim deregulation will help drive down health costs.

Well, for starters, so-called “free markets” are unicorns — fanciful creatures with magical powers that don’t exist in the real world. All markets are designed; they don’t emerge spontaneously from nature. We form, structure, regulate, and enforce markets through policy and institutions which reflect private and public interests.

When it comes to health care, we’re talking about something closer to a “natural monopoly” like electricity, not an industry like autos or breakfast cereals. Everyone needs basic medical services on a regular basis, and we need to make sure the same quality is available to everyone — even in hard to reach or low-income areas.

This will always require some form of direct government funding of services, especially with respect to primary care. Failing to do so means we’re not serious about the goal of quality care for all Americans.

This doesn’t necessarily mean an entirely government-run system — there’s plenty of room for private medical practices and businesses to provide the spectrum of services we need. But it does mean some degree of public funding is essential.

A fully privatized system can never adequately provision the nation. Rural communities don’t have adequate medical facilities and staff. Underdeveloped urban communities suffer from the same lack of basic resources, and their residents often don’t have the ability or time to travel to other locations.

Republican leaders claim they want affordable access to quality health care for all Americans, but all of their proposals have focused on lowering taxes on businesses and the rich, regardless of the very real cost in terms of human life.

It’s a false choice, and the effects will be cruel.

A healthy nation is a prosperous nation. This is primarily a challenge of real resources and the distribution of those resources, not of money. Congress can and should authorize any necessary funding to achieve the stated public goal simply by appropriating the funds.

This includes designing a system that will ensure there are enough facilities, doctors, nurses, specialists, transportation systems, and all the other elements of quality care in close proximity to all who need it — at any level of need and ability to pay.

Members of the House and Senate were put there by the voters and have an obligation to fight for and protect all of their constituents, not just the ones wealthy enough to bankroll their campaigns.

Transforming Care: Reporting on Health System Improvement

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/newsletters/transforming-care/2017/march/in-focus?omnicid=1187163&mid=henrykotula@yahoo.com

InFocus_Disparities_graphic

In Focus: Reimagining Rural Health Care

News of growing health disparities between rural and urban Americans prompted Transforming Care to focus on what’s happening in rural health care today. What we found was surprising: While there is much to worry about—including a greater risk of dying from preventable causes and worse access to care—there are also many signs of innovation, including bold experiments in organizing and financing care delivery, making services more accessible, and addressing the social determinants of poor health. This issue focuses on these bright spots—places where policymakers, providers, and community organizers are seeking to transform their health care systems to better serve residents.

Forty-six million Americans—some 15 percent of the U.S. population—live in rural areas of the country.1  Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show they are more likely to die from the five leading causes of death—heart disease, cancer, unintentional injuries, chronic lower respiratory disease, and stroke—than residents in urban regions and that a greater percentage of rural deaths may be preventable.2  Gains in life expectancy among urban and rural Americans, which once tracked fairly closely, began to diverge in the 1990s. By 2009, the life span of residents of large cities was 2.4 years longer; for poor and black rural residents, life expectancy was what urban rich and urban whites enjoyed four decades earlier.

“Rural America is a unique health care delivery environment,” says Alan Morgan, CEO of the National Rural Health Association, a nonpartisan organization with more than 21,000 members. “You have an elderly population, you have a sicker population, and you have a low-income population. Yet you have the fewest options available when it comes to seeking care. It’s a perfect storm.”

But for all these challenges, Morgan and other experts say some rural communities have begun to innovate, adopting new care delivery and payment models to address long-standing workforce shortages and population health needs.

Obamacare Repeal Could Push Rural Hospitals to the Brink

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2017/01/05/Obamacare-Repeal-Could-Push-Rural-Hospitals-Brink?utm_campaign=KHN%3A+Daily+Health+Policy+Report&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=40201659&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8KqKXcgqf_db4edAlc57mjW0ZBhwKkpUjZiSlsuEm5fUpTtlY79dLUg_WR5hqtaQqIpmHbr1QCs8iiVNz7EsE_1FhovQ&_hsmi=40201659

Many of the rural hospitals and health centers serving 62 million Americans have operated on a shoestring for years.

Since January 2010, 80 rural hospitals and health care facilities that provided treatment to large numbers of elderly and low-income families were forced to close for financial reasons. More than 670 of the remaining 2,078 facilities are vulnerable or “at risk” of closure, according to hospital industry experts.

For many of those hospitals, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was a lifeline, providing millions of their patients with the financial wherewithal to obtain health care treatment and prescription drugs without having to turn to emergency rooms for assistance.

But as the new Republican Congress and GOP President-elect Donald Trump press to repeal Obamacare in the coming months with no suitable replacement in hand, rural hospital officials say they are facing a “triple whammy” of lost financial benefits that could force many of the remaining rural hospitals out of business in the coming decade.

“We’re in the midst of a rural hospital closure crisis right now, and that is with the ACA currently in place,” Alan Morgan, the CEO of the National Rural Health Association, said in an interview Thursday. “Looking at our projections for where we’re headed, at the current rate we could see a third of all rural hospitals closed within the next decade.”

The advent of Obamacare enabled 1.7 million rural Americans to purchase subsidized private coverage on government operated exchanges last year, an 11 percent increase from 2015, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Millions more obtained expanded Medicaid coverage for low-income adults in rural states that opted into the program under Obamacare.