Monday, August 31, 2020

Taking the Risk Out of Full-Risk Contracts

As the COVID-19 pandemic began to spread across the U.S., in North Texas, we turned to data to guide rapid decision-making. Responding to this crisis requires comprehensive, longitudinal data—and full visibility—across our healthcare system to identify who and where our patients are, what they need, and when they need it. It’s population health management 101.

But what was the real secret ingredient to effective population health in a pandemic?

An early transition to value-based care—including full global risk agreements—enabled our teams to have the necessary member insights and to respond both rapidly and flexibly while maintaining high-quality care. Withcommunity physicians and our academic and acute-care founding partners, UT Southwestern and Texas Health Resources, working side-by-side, we can track our patients from home to primary care to acute care and back again, and design interventions at appropriate points along the full continuum of care.

Within the first weeks of the pandemic arriving in the U.S., our clinically integrated network was able to care for patients and support the physicians who care for them. First, we looked at our members who were not COVID positive. We could see they were not all getting the care they needed. Emergency department visits were down for everyone except those with the virus. Data also revealed a dramatic uptick in strokes and cardiac arrests at home. The people we serve were afraid to seek care and risk exposure—even when other causes threatened their lives.

As all healthcare systems prepare for a new normal, key learnings from the COVID response of our network can guide us all forward. These actions will be vital in providing necessary and routine care until the pandemic is under control—and beyond:
  • Identify your high-risk members—making sure they get the care they need. If they are skipping necessary care, reach out to them, reassure them, and guide them safely back to their physicians.
  • Look at the rate of COVID by zip code and reach out to your members in high-prevalence neighborhoods to educate them on preventing exposure and infection.
  • Enable telehealth across your network as soon as possible. We were able to onboard approximately 500 independent practices in less than a month, keeping them informed, in compliance, and reimbursed. Soon, those doctors had over 8,000 telehealth visits each day. Our system went from less than 10% of physicians using telehealth to near 100%.
Keep in mind the social factors that increase risk. Concerned about quarantined seniors, for example, our teams delivered Care-at-Home Kits. These kits were filled with toilet paper, paper towels, hand sanitizer, healthy snacks, soap, and other essential items, helping to reduce their risk of being exposed to the virus by shopping for necessities. They also included educational materials with the dos and don’ts of staying safe in the pandemic.

Provide your hospitals and skilled nursing facilities with tip sheets for safely discharging and transitioning COVID+ patients. We also screened COVID+ patients for social barriers to full recovery, connecting them as needed to Meals on Wheels, ride-sharing, and other services.
Protect your community physicians from the economic shock of the pandemic by advancing part of the quality and incentive payments. We were able to advance our incentive payments in May rather than waiting for post reconciliation in the fall. This helped our physicians feel appreciated and fairly compensated for quality care and hard work during this health crisis.

The infrastructure that enabled these rapid responses to COVID also allows us to take on full-risk value-based agreements with payers and better support our physicians. For the fact is, our pandemic response would not have been possible under fee-for-service agreements. It would not have been possible if care management had been outsourced and disconnected from our analytics and processes.

Healthcare has been slow to assume full risk in value-based care models. The majority of VBC agreements are still shared savings and minimal risk and quality metrics, with the expectation of full-risk models stuck at “someday.” Yet, here in North Texas, taking on full risk enabled a multi-pronged, patient-centered, cost-effective response to an unprecedented crisis.

Because full risk value-based care isn’t just about taking on all the risk of the cost of care, it’s about doing the right thing for members—even in a pandemic. And when you have the visibility, the infrastructure, and the commitment to do that, the quality of care rises and the total cost of care drops.

Medical Practice Supplies


VIEW ALL



Manual Prescription Pad (Large - Yellow)


Manual Prescription Pad (Large - Pink)

Manual Prescription Pads (Bright Orange)

Manual Prescription Pads (Light Pink)

Manual Prescription Pads (Light Yellow)

Manual Prescription Pad (Large - Blue)

Manual Prescription Pad (Large - White)

VIEW ALL

Sunday, August 30, 2020

Stinging insect allergy tests evolve to improve diagnosis precision

Stinging insect allergies impact almost 16.5 million Americans1 and is one of the allergies most frequently associated with anaphylaxis in both adults and children.2 Resulting in 90 to 100 deaths per year4, anaphylaxis to stinging insects occurs in 3% of adults and can be fatal on the first reaction.3 Additionally, people who have experienced an allergic reaction to an insect sting have a 60% chance of a similar or worse reaction if stung again4; therefore, allergies to insect venom can pose a huge risk to patients if gone unchecked.

Allergy Testing Evolves


The standard for clinical management of a patient’s allergy, whether to insect venom or another cause, has evolved as allergy testing practices have become more precise. Historically, diagnosing allergies involved assessment of a patient’s symptoms and history, followed by skin prick testing and/or immunoassays of specific whole allergen immunoglobulin E (IgE). But the emerging field of molecular allergology is changing all that with innovative, enhanced methods that help healthcare providers refine the diagnosis and treatment of allergies.

Today, a routine blood test coupled with advanced diagnostics can allow healthcare providers to identify, on a molecular level and with great specificity, which component proteins a patient is sensitized to. These new specific IgE blood tests, which are also called component tests, quantify IgE antibodies to single, pure allergen components, and they can be used to help pinpoint the cause of an allergy.

Improving the diagnosis of allergies to venom from stinging insects


Recently, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) approved diagnostic specific IgE blood testing for a number of allergenic components associated with honeybees and wasps. To help refine the diagnosis, several honeybee and wasp allergens have been characterized and are now available as recombinant antigens for component-resolved diagnostics. Along with clinical history, specific IgE tests with component-resolved diagnostics can help specialists and other health care providers discriminate between true sensitization and cross reactivity. They can also help identify culprit insect(s) in patients with inconclusive patient history and guide the selection of future therapy, including prescription of venom immunotherapy.

Here are just two examples to illustrate my point: 68% of patients with a history of reactions to honeybee venom are sensitized to protein components Api m 3 or Api m 10, and 4.8% are sensitized to these components exclusively.5However, because these allergen components are under-represented or absent from standard preparations for honey bee venom immunotherapy, patients with Api m 3 or Api m 10 sensitivity exclusively may not receive treatment that is clinically relevant and as a result, it is less likely to be effective.5 Similarly, up to 50% of venom allergic patients test positive for both honey bee and wasp venom.6 For them, specific IgE blood testing with recombinant protein allergens rApi m 1, rVes v 1, and rVes v 5 can help discriminate double sensitization from cross reactivity and nonspecific sensitization related to carbohydrate determinants frequently found in Hymenoptera venom.7 As these examples show, specific IgE tests with component-resolved diagnostics using recombinant venom allergens can improve the specificity of results, leading to selection of clinically relevant venom immunotherapy.

Better diagnostics means better allergy management


This new generation of advanced component diagnostics can help clinicians provide allergy management strategies tailored to each patient’s needs. This is particularly important when it comes to diagnosing stinging insect allergies, which can be life threatening.

Combining specific IgE allergen component blood tests with whole allergen testing and a comprehensive clinical history allows specialists and other health care providers to better assess their patients’ sensitizations to stinging insects and other common allergens. This comprehensive approach allows clinicians to identify allergy triggers more precisely. Then, they can discriminate between true sensitization and cross reactivity and create optimal allergy management protocols.


References


Ludman, Sian W, and Robert J Boyle. “Stinging Insect Allergy: Current Perspectives on Venom Immunotherapy.” Journal of Asthma and Allergy, Dove Medical Press, 23 July 2015, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4517515/.

“Anaphylaxis.” ACAAI Public Website, 14 Nov. 2018, acaai.org/allergies/anaphylaxis.

Golden, David B K. “Insect Sting Anaphylaxis.” Immunology and Allergy Clinics of North America,

 U.S. National Library of Medicine, May 2007, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1961691/.
“Insect Sting Allergies: Symptoms & Treatment.” ACAAI Public Website, acaai.org/allergies/types/insect-sting-allergy.

“Component Resolution Reveals Additional Major Allergens in Patients with Honeybee Venom Allergy.” Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Mosby, 17 Jan. 2014, 
reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0091674913018502?

token=CF68A298A94EABBFDD34F82EB722FA4622B6D99DE9003426CE763C48F0897D25571DC5C5EB7A2764EA9FFE1F85FB94E0.

Jakob, Thilo, et al. “Diagnostics in Hymenoptera Venom Allergy: Current Concepts and Developments with Special Focus on Molecular Allergy Diagnostics.” Allergo Journal International, vol. 26, no. 3, Nov. 2017, pp. 93–105., doi:10.1007/s40629-017-0014-2.

Müller U, Schmid-Grendelmeier P, Hausmann O, Helbling A. IgE to recombinant allergens Api m 1, Ves v 1, and Ves v 5 distinguish double sensitization from cross reaction in venom allergy. Allergy. 2012;67:1069–1073. doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2012.02847.x.


Medical Practice Supplies


VIEW ALL



Manual Prescription Pad (Large - Yellow)


Manual Prescription Pad (Large - Pink)

Manual Prescription Pads (Bright Orange)

Manual Prescription Pads (Light Pink)

Manual Prescription Pads (Light Yellow)

Manual Prescription Pad (Large - Blue)

Manual Prescription Pad (Large - White)

VIEW ALL

Thursday, August 27, 2020

Notable recent HIPAA and coding events

A recent Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) HIPAA settlement and new guidance related to COVID-19 payments shed light on the government’s enforcement priorities.

Richard Heckert, retired chairman of DuPont, once said, “[i]f you always tell the truth, you won’t have to remember what you said.” This applies in every aspect of life, including compliance with the HIPAA Security Rule and documenting the requisite medical necessity to substantiate a particular diagnosis or treatment code. Two recent items reinforce the importance of being honest.

On July 23, 2020, the HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR) issued a statement that it had reached a settlement with a rural healthcare provider in North Carolina for repeated failures to comply with multiple aspects of the HIPAA Security Rule. Over nine (9) years ago, the entity filed a breach report regarding the impermissible disclosure of approximately 1,263 patients’ protected health information (PHI) to an unknown email account. As OCR delved deeper into its investigation, the following longstanding and systemic issues came to light:
the failure to conduct a risk analysis;
  • the failure to implement policies and procedures; and
  • the failure to provide any HIPAA training to workforce members until 2016.

As OCR Director, Roger Severino stated, “[h]ealthcare providers owe it to their patients to comply with the HIPAA Rules. When informed of potential HIPAA violations, providers owe it to their patients to quickly address problem areas to safeguard individuals’ health information.” Lying or shall I say, being less than truthful about compliance with the technical, administrative, and physical safeguard requirements of the Security Rule, as well as separate requirements of the Privacy Rule, is something that is material to government investigations. The next worse thing to lying directly to a government agent, is falsifying an annual risk analysis or failing to conduct a comprehensive one at all.

Documentation falsification in relation to medical necessity and coding, has emerged in another area – COVID-19 admissions in hospitals. On August 17, 2020, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released an update, which addresses the implementation of Section 3710 of the CARES Act for Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) hospitals “to address potential Medicare program integrity risks.” This section enabled the HHS Secretary “to increase the weighting factor of the assigned Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) by 20 percent for an individual diagnosed with COVID-19 discharged during the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency.”

So, what does this mean? Basically, failure to do what the guidance says can open a person up to either an HHS-OIG investigation and/or a False Claims Act lawsuit. As the update states,

To address potential Medicare program integrity risks, effective with admissions occurring on or after September 1, 2020, claims eligible for the 20 percent increase in the MS-DRG weighting factor will also be required to have a positive COVID-19 laboratory test documented in the patient’s medical record. Positive tests must be demonstrated using only the results of viral testing (i.e., molecular or antigen), consistent with CDC guidelines. The test may be performed either during the hospital admission or prior to the hospital admission.

In other words, be certain to have all of the medical necessity and testing documented before submitting a claim utilizing a code, which provides an extra 20 percent reimbursement.

As was stated at the beginning, when you tell the truth, you never have to remember what you said. Whether it is HIPAA compliance or submitting a claim, be accurate and honest. It can save a lot of “heartburn” in the long run.

Medical Practice Supplies


VIEW ALL



Manual Prescription Pad (Large - Yellow)


Manual Prescription Pad (Large - Pink)

Manual Prescription Pads (Bright Orange)

Manual Prescription Pads (Light Pink)

Manual Prescription Pads (Light Yellow)

Manual Prescription Pad (Large - Blue)

Manual Prescription Pad (Large - White)

VIEW ALL