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.
4/ The letter:
•Strongly opposes the IFR
•Urges VA to rescind it and consider policy alternatives that prioritize physician led team-based care
•States the IFR is unlawful rulemaking because VA did not follow Administrative Procedures Act requirements
5/ “The IFR does not adequately account for the differences in education and training that exist between physicians and NPPs and thus, does not sufficiently address the lower standard of care that will ultimately be provided to veterans.”
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.
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).