SNAPShots

SNAPShots

About PA Safety Net Admin

This author has not yet filled in any details.
So far PA Safety Net Admin has created 1179 blog entries.

Study: Medicaid Denying Expensive Hepatitis C Drugs

A new study has found that state Medicaid programs are rejecting nearly 50 percent of requests to administer expensive hepatitis C drugs to patients.
According to a review of prescription data for Pennsylania, Delaware, Maryland, and New Jersey, 46 percent of requests for such treatment for Medicaid patients were denied. Only five percent of similar requests were denied for Medicare patients and 10 percent for those with private insurance.
Prescription Medication Spilling From an Open Medicine BottleThe study represents the first documentation of a concern raised when the expensive drugs first hit the market: that insurers would limit access to them.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recently sent letters to state Medicaid programs expressing concern about the possible denial of expensive prescription drugs to Medicaid patients.
For more information about access to hepatitis C medicine and the recently completed study, see this Philadelphia Inquirer article.

2015-11-20T06:00:54+00:00November 20th, 2015|Pennsylvania Medicaid policy|Comments Off on Study: Medicaid Denying Expensive Hepatitis C Drugs

OIG Reveals 2016 Plans

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has published its work plan for the 2016 fiscal year.
In 2016, the OIG will continue to examine all aspects of HHS endeavor, including Medicare, Medicaid, hospital services, public health activities, and more. In the coming year it will continue a number of hospital-focused projects while also focusing more on health care delivery, health care reform, alternative payment methodologies, and value-based purchasing initiatives.
hhsOIGAmong the OIG’s planned Medicare projects in 2016 – some of them continued from the past and some of them new, quoted directly from the work plan – are:

  • Hospitals’ use of outpatient and inpatient stays under Medicare’s two-midnight rule. We will determine how hospitals’ use of outpatient and inpatient stays changed under Medicare’s two-midnight rule, as well as how Medicare and beneficiary payments for these stays changed, by comparing claims for hospital stays in the year prior to the effective date of the two-midnight rule to stays in the year following the effective date of that rule. We will also determine the extent to which the use of outpatient and inpatient stays varied among hospitals.
  • Analysis of salaries included in hospital cost reports. We will review data from Medicare cost reports and hospitals to identify salary amounts included in operating costs reported to and reimbursed by Medicare. Employee compensation may be included in allowable provider costs only to the extent that it represents reasonable remuneration for managerial, administrative, professional, and other services related to the operation of the facility and furnished in connection with patient care.
  • Medicare oversight of provider-based status. We will determine the number of provider-based facilities that hospitals own and the extent to which CMS has methods to oversee provider-based billing. We will also determine the extent to which provider-based facilities meet requirements described in 42 CFR Sec. 413.65 and CMS Transmittal A-03-030, and whether there were any challenges associated with the provider-based attestation review process. Provider-based status allows facilities owned and operated by hospitals to bill as hospital outpatient departments. Provider-based status can result in higher Medicare payments for services furnished at provider-based facilities and may increase beneficiaries’ coinsurance liabilities. The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) has expressed concerns about the financial incentives presented by provider-based status and stated that Medicare should seek to pay similar amounts for similar services.
  • Comparison of provider-based and freestanding clinics. We will review and compare Medicare payments for physician office visits in provider-based clinics and freestanding clinics to determine the difference in payments made to the clinics for similar procedures and assess the potential impact on Medicare of hospitals’ claiming provider-based status for such facilities. Provider-based facilities often receive higher payments for some services than do freestanding clinics.
  • Review of hospital wage data used to calculate Medicare payments. We will review hospital controls over the reporting of wage data used to calculate wage indexes for Medicare payments. Prior OIG wage index work identified hundreds of millions of dollars in incorrectly reported wage data and resulted in policy changes by CMS with regard to how hospitals reported deferred compensation costs.
  • Inpatient rehabilitation facilities—adverse events in postacute care for Medicare beneficiaries. We will estimate the national incidence of adverse and temporary harm events for Medicare beneficiaries receiving postacute care in inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs). We will also identify factors contributing to these events, determine the extent to which the events were preventable, and estimate the associated costs to Medicare.
  • CMS validation of hospital-submitted quality reporting data. We will determine the extent to which CMS validated hospital inpatient quality reporting data.
  • Ambulatory surgical centers—payment system. We will review the appropriateness of Medicare’s methodology for setting ambulatory surgical center (ASC) payment rates under the revised payment system. We will also determine whether a payment disparity exists between the ASC and hospital outpatient department payment rates for similar surgical procedures provided in both settings.
  • Use of electronic health records to support care coordination through ACOs. We will review the extent to which providers participating in ACOs in the Medicare Shared Savings Program use electronic health records (EHRs) to exchange health information to achieve their care coordination goals. We will also assess providers’ use of EHRs to identify best practices and possible challenges to the exchange and use of health data, such as degree of interoperability, financial barriers, or information blocking.
  • Accountable Care Organizations: Strategies and Promising Practices. We will review ACOs that participate in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (established by section 3022 of the Affordable Care Act). We will describe their performance on the quality measures and cost savings over the first three years of the program and describe the characteristics of those ACOs that performed well on measures and achieved savings. In addition, we will identify ACOs’ strategies for and challenges to achieving quality and cost savings.

Among the Medicaid projects the OIG will undertake, again presented in language taken directly from its work plan, are:

  • Transportation services—compliance with Federal and State requirements. We will determine the appropriateness of Medicaid payments by States to providers for transportation services.
  • Health-care-acquired conditions—prohibition on Federal reimbursements. We will determine whether selected States made Medicaid payments for hospital care associated with health-care-acquired conditions and provider-preventable conditions and quantify the amount of Medicaid payments for such conditions.
  • State use of provider taxes to generate Federal funding. We will review State health-care-related taxes imposed on various Medicaid providers to determine whether the taxes comply with applicable Federal requirements. Our work will focus on the mechanism States use to raise revenue through provider taxes and determine the amount of Federal funding generated.
  • State compliance with Federal Certified Public Expenditures regulations. We will determine whether States are complying with Federal regulations for claiming Certified Public Expenditures (CPEs), which are normally generated by local governments as part of their contribution to the coverage of Medicaid services.
  • Reviews of State Medicaid Fraud Control Units. We will continue to conduct in-depth onsite reviews of the management, operations, and performance of a sample of MFCUs. We will identify effective practices and areas for improvement in MFCU management and operations.
  • Medicaid managed care reimbursement. We will review States’ managed care plan reimbursements to determine whether MCOs are appropriately and correctly reimbursed for services provided.
  • Medicaid managed care entities’ identification of fraud and abuse. We will determine whether Medicaid MCOs identified and addressed incidents of potential fraud and abuse. We will also describe how States oversee MCOs’ efforts to identify and address fraud and abuse.
  • HRSA—duplicate discounts for 340B-purchased drugs. We will assess the risk of duplicate discounts for 340B-purchased drugs paid through Medicaid MCOs and describe States’ efforts to prevent them.

To learn more about the OIG’s plans in 2016, go here to see the document Work Plan Fiscal Year 2016.

2015-11-19T06:00:09+00:00November 19th, 2015|Affordable Care Act, Health care reform|Comments Off on OIG Reveals 2016 Plans

Congress Forms New Medicaid Task Force

The U.S. House Energy & Commerce Committee has created a new task force “to strengthen and sustain the critical program for the nation’s most vulnerable citizens.”
According to a committee news release, the task force “…will examine the program to determine how to ensure the program is best serving the needs of those who rely on it.”
US Capitol DomeThe task force’s work will undoubtedly be of interest to Pennsylvania safety-net hospitals, all of which care for unusually large numbers of Medicaid patients.
For further information about the new task force, its members, and its mission, see this House Energy & Commerce Committee news release.

2015-11-18T06:00:34+00:00November 18th, 2015|Uncategorized|Comments Off on Congress Forms New Medicaid Task Force

Study Looks at Social Determinants of Health

A new issue brief from the Kaiser Family Foundation looks at the social determinants of health and health outcomes.
The issue brief “Beyond Health Care: The Role of Social Determinants in Promoting Health and Health Equity” reports that

Social determinants have a significant impact on health outcomes. Social determinants of health are “the structural determinants and conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work and age.” They include factors like socioeconomic status, education, the physical environment, employment, and social support networks, as well as access to health care (Figure 2). Based on a meta-analysis of nearly 50 studies, researchers found that social factors, including education, racial segregation, social supports, and poverty accounted for over a third of total deaths in the United States in a year. In the United States, the likelihood of premature death increases as income goes down. Similarly, lower education levels are directly correlated with lower income, higher likelihood of smoking, and shorter life expectancy. Children born to parents who have not completed high school are more likely to live in an environment that poses barriers to health. Their neighborhoods are more likely to be unsafe, have exposed garbage or litter, and have poor or dilapidated housing and vandalism. They also are less likely to have sidewalks, parks or playgrounds, recreation centers, or a library.

kaiserThe issue brief also looks at different steps that are being pursued to address such challenges through the State Innovation Models Initiative (SIM), state Medicaid programs, community health centers, health insurers, local groups, and more.
The Safety-Net Association of Pennsylvania (SNAP) has long maintained that the patients it serves are fundamentally more challenging to treat than those served by the typical community hospital because of the very factors identified in this study.
To learn more, find the Kaiser Foundation issue brief here.

2015-11-17T06:00:21+00:00November 17th, 2015|Safety-Net Association of Pennsylvania, Uncategorized|Comments Off on Study Looks at Social Determinants of Health

Report on Hospital Performance in PA

The Pennsylvania Health Care Quality Alliance has released its annual report on the performance of the state’s hospitals.
The group compared hospital performance over time on 16 process measures: three heart attack measures, two heart failure measures, three pneumonia measures, six surgical care measures, and one prevention measure. It found that hospital performance in the state improved during the July 2013 to June 2014 over previous years and that those improvements mirrored similar improvements nationally. Overall, the group found that the performance of Pennsylvania’s hospitals on these measures was better than average nationally.
pa health care quality allianceThe alliance also evaluated patient satisfaction with Pennsylvania hospitals as quantified by hospital consumer assessment of healthcare providers and systems (HCAHPS) measures. It found modestly improved performance that generally mirrored national trends.
Finally, alliance reported on the delivery of care in hospital emergency rooms and found modestly improved performance that was very similar to hospitals’ performance nation-wide.
The Pennsylvania Health Care Quality Alliance is a voluntary group of health care organizations working together to improve the quality of health care in Pennsylvania. It report State of the State: Hospital Performance in Pennsylvania, October 2015, can be found here, on the organization’s web site.

2015-11-16T06:00:08+00:00November 16th, 2015|Uncategorized|Comments Off on Report on Hospital Performance in PA

GAO: More Information Needed About Supplemental Medicaid Payments

More data is needed about the supplemental Medicaid payments states make to hospitals and how those payments are financed, according to a new report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO).
gaoAccording to the GAO, states are increasingly funding non-disproportionate share (Medicaid DSH) supplemental Medicaid payments to hospitals with funds from local governments and providers that are then matched by the federal government. In some states those supplemental payments, with the help of federal Medicaid matching funds, result in hospitals receiving reimbursement from Medicaid that exceeds the cost of the care they provide to their Medicaid patients.
Pennsylvania’s safety-net hospitals receive a number of such supplemental Medicaid payments.
In response to this concern, the GAO has urged the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to collect more and better data about how states finance their Medicaid programs and to do more to ensure that accuracy of that data. For its part, CMS maintains that its current efforts are adequate.
Learn more about this issue from the GAO report Improving Transparency and Accountability of Supplemental Payments and State Financing Methods, which can be found here.

2015-11-13T06:00:33+00:00November 13th, 2015|Medicaid supplemental payments, Pennsylvania safety-net hospitals|Comments Off on GAO: More Information Needed About Supplemental Medicaid Payments

CMS Requires States to Monitor Medicaid Access

A new federal regulation requires states to monitor access to Medicaid-covered services.
According to a new regulation issued by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), states must submit to CMS plans for monitoring Medicaid beneficiary access to care in five service areas: primary care, physician specialists, behavioral care; pre- and post-natal care; and home health services.
Bookshelf with law booksState monitoring plans must address the extent to which Medicaid is meeting beneficiaries’ needs; the availability of care; changes in service utilization; and comparisons between Medicaid rates and rates paid by other public and private payers.
Interested parties have 60 days to submit comments to CMS about the new regulation.
For a closer look at the regulation, see this CMS fact sheet and the regulation itself here, in the Federal Register.

2015-11-12T12:09:56+00:00November 12th, 2015|Uncategorized|Comments Off on CMS Requires States to Monitor Medicaid Access

Readmissions Down But Observation Status Up

New research suggests that the general decline in hospital readmissions may be leading to increased use of observation status.
According to new research in the journal Health Affairs,

Our independent analysis of Medicare data published by CMS revealed that the top 10 percent of hospitals with the largest drop (16 percent on average) in readmission rates between 2011 and 2012 also increased their use of observation status for Medicare patients returning within 30 days by an average 25 percent over the same time period.

health affairsThe practice appears to be affecting privately insured patients, too, with the report noting that

…hospitals that reduced readmissions within 30 days also increased their share of returning observation patients in private plans. The top third of hospitals with the largest six-year (2009-2014) reduction in 30 day readmissions (26 percent on average) increased their share of returning observation patients in private plans by an average of 45 percent (Figure 2). Much of that increase started in 2012, the same year that Medicare hospital readmission penalties began.

The report concludes that

Our findings suggest that at least some hospitals are substituting observation status for inpatient readmissions, both for Medicare and privately insured patients. These trends raise a number of questions. For instance, do observation patients get the same quality of care as inpatients? Further, do drops in readmission rates truly mean that hospitals are providing better quality care? Or… is it merely that some hospitals are avoiding penalties by relabeling patients they previously would have readmitted as observation patients?

Learn more about the study, its findings, and its potential implications in the article “Is Observation Status Substituting For Hospital Readmission?” here, on the Health Affairs web site.

2015-11-11T06:00:09+00:00November 11th, 2015|Medicare|Comments Off on Readmissions Down But Observation Status Up

Slight Decline in Uninsured Children in PA

The number of uninsured children in Pennsylvania fell from 147,303 in 2013 to 139,000 in 2014, according to a new study released by the Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children and the Georgetown University Center for Children and Families.
Pennsylvania State MapThe decline was driven part by the expansion of the state’s Medicaid program, which was enabled by the federal Affordable Care Act. Pennsylvania’s Medicaid expansion began in early 2014.
Learn more about uninsured children in Pennsylvania in this Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article.

2015-11-03T06:00:46+00:00November 3rd, 2015|Uncategorized|Comments Off on Slight Decline in Uninsured Children in PA

CMS Proposal Would Mandate Hospital Discharge Planning

Hospitals that participate in Medicare and Medicaid would be required to develop discharge plans for all inpatients and many outpatients under a new regulation proposed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).
According to a CMS news release,

…hospitals, including inpatient rehabilitation facilities and long-term care hospitals, critical access hospitals, and home health agencies would be required to develop a discharge plan based on the goals, preferences, and needs of each applicable patient . Under the proposed rule, hospitals and critical access hospitals would be required to develop a discharge plan within 24 hours of admission or registration and complete a discharge plan before the patient is discharged home or transferred to another facility. This would apply to all inpatients and certain types of outpatients, including patients receiving observation services, patients who are undergoing surgery or other same-day procedures where anesthesia or moderate sedation is used, and emergency department patients who have been identified by a practitioner as needing a discharge plan. In addition, hospitals, critical access hospitals, and home health agencies would have to —

  • cmsProvide discharge instructions to patients who are discharged home (proposed for hospitals and critical access hospitals only);
  • Have a medication reconciliation process with the goal of improving patient safety by enhancing medication management (proposed for hospitals and critical access hospitals only);
  • For patients who are transferred to another facility, send specific medical information to the receiving facility; and
  • Establish a post-discharge follow-up process (proposed for hospitals and critical access hospitals only).

The proposed regulation stresses the preferences and goals of patients in the development of their discharge plans, including the selection of post-acute-care providers to which they may be discharged or the home health providers that may serve them when they return home.
Significantly, from the perspective of Pennsylvania’s safety-net hospitals, the proposed regulation calls for hospitals to consider the socio-economic status of the patients for whom they are planning – although no requirements are associated with that status.
Interested parties have until January 3 to submit comments to CMS on the proposed regulation.
To learn more about what CMS is proposing and what it hopes to accomplish, see this CMS news release. Find the proposed regulation itself here.
 

2015-11-02T06:00:15+00:00November 2nd, 2015|Medicare|Comments Off on CMS Proposal Would Mandate Hospital Discharge Planning
Go to Top