•Force patients to make difficult decisions on whether to find new providers or forgo care
6/ The #MFN IFR was set to be implemented on Jan. 1.
However, it has been temporarily blocked from implementation by two different lawsuits including a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction.
1/ @HHSGov @SecAzar has extended the #COVID19 Public Health Emergency (PHE) declaration effective Jan. 21, 2021 for an additional 90 days.
2/ This means that all of the #telehealth and other waivers and flexibilities that have been implemented during the #PHE will remain in effect until at least April 21, 2021.
3/ As in the summary & impact table by @AmerMedicalAssn, the Consolidated Appropriations Act signed into law 12/27/20 included provisions that offset most of the 10.2% budget neutrality adjustment that was slated to take effect for Medicare-covered services provided as of 1/1/21.
1/ @AmerMedicalAssn led a sign-on letter with over 100 national specialty and state medical societies submitted to @DeptVetAffairs in opposition to its recent Interim Final Rule (IFR), “Authority of VA Professionals to Practice Health Care.”
2/ The @DeptVetAffairs IFR permits virtually all VHA-employed non-physician practitioners (NPPs) to practice without the clinical supervision of physicians and without regard to state scope of practice law.
3/ The IFR establishes the VA’s authority to allow virtually all NPPs to practice without the clinical supervision of a physician. In doing so, the IFR preempts state license, registration, certification, supervision, or other requirements.
Factors drive #SMB: insurers’ narrow networks, high deductibles w/disproportionate cost-sharing for OON, physicians OON d/t take-it-or-leave-it contracts, health plans’ inaccurate provider directories. Patients are surprised by #insurancefail.
@JonnyJenk 2/ In terms of increased administrative burden that the current proposal would impose:
There will be a struggle for small practices to navigate the IDR efficiently and effectively, ensuring they have the resources to stay afloat while they challenge inefficient payments.
@JonnyJenk 3/ That is why AMA is asking to remove the 90-day cooling off period in the proposal - so that practices don’t have to hold claims for three months before they can pursue sufficient payment.
1/ The “No Surprises Act” is deeply flawed. It should not advance in its current form. Work must continue to reach a meaningful remedy to “surprise medical bills” #SMB that keeps patients out of the middle and provides balance.
Here are several concerns w/ the current proposal:
2/ The proposal should require that the initial “interim payment” made by the insurer for out-of-network services be considered the plan’s offer for IDR, to incentivize the insurer to pay a fair initial reimbursement.
But, the proposal does not.
3/ The proposal should allow the IDR process to consider UCR and an independent charge-based database. Lest it be a form of price-fixing by insurers since the qualifying payment is indexed to the insurer-set in-network median rate (w/CPIU adjustment).