Practicing Adult Primary Care Requires Time

In September of 1979, the American Board of Internal Medicine awarded me “Board Certification in Internal Medicine” after I completed their training and testing requirements. In 2002, I took the board certification exam in the newly created specialty of Geriatrics and passed it. I answer to the titles of “Doctor,” “ Geriatrician,” “physician”. However, CMS and private health insurers instead lump me, and other medical doctors, into the broad category of “provider”. The term “ provider” is both insulting and demeaning since what I do in general internal medicine/ geriatrics is different than what a physician’s assistant or nurse practitioner does and involves several more years of schooling as well as observed and critiqued training.

Insurers added insult to injury by stripping me of my internal medicine designation and lumping me in with family practitioners, pediatricians and obstetricians. Those are all unique specialties with their own rigorous training requirements and post training testing. They too deserve to be recognized by name for their accomplishments. But how they practice medicine and how I practice medicine are not one in the same.

I bring this up as an introduction to a research paper published in the Journal of Internal Medicine that performed time/work studies and determined that to perform the preventive care, chronic issue care, acute problem care and administrative duties, when caring for 2,500 patients, a physician would have to work 26.7 hour per days. If you provided that physician with qualified support staff, and created a care team, you could reduce the required time to 9.7 hours a day.

Ten-hour workdays are long by anyone’s standards and the article didn’t specify whether the primary care provider was limited to outpatient office work or included caring for their hospitalized patients as well. At best, this team-based approach ensures that the patient spends less time face to face with their actual physician which, in my opinion, is not a positive step.

The paper cited the example of vaccinations and immunizations being something best handled by lesser trained team members and, providing patients access to educational reading material. Once again, I have no problem with trained staff administering vaccinations but as you have seen with the corona virus pandemic and monkey pox outbreak, patients have many questions about materials injected into their body and they want to speak to a physician.

As an alternative to teams seeing patients, the authors mentioned “direct pay practices” which keep their patient load to 1000 or less, charge a monthly administrative fee and only accept cash for services rendered. I propose even smaller panels of 500 patients with insurers and CMS covering the costs of membership.

Studies sponsored by a large concierge medicine franchise program, have shown that they reduce their patients’ hospitalizations, meet preventive guidelines and ultimately save CMS and private insurers money. As an independent concierge medicine physician for 18 years, I have seen similar results limiting the number of patients I care for to 400 and giving them time, availability and advocacy with a focus on prevention.

By practicing in the concierge medicine model, you retain your patients long term and develop strong relationships with them. Also, you learn quickly that taking care of fewer people, and the relationships you establish with them,  is extremely satisfying and rewarding – something which will attract future doctors to these types of practices.

The current system does not work. Independent internists found a solution 20-years ago called concierge medicine. It’s time to give that model a try. It would save private insurers and CMS hundreds of millions of dollars per year resulting from a focus on prevention and reducing costly ER visits and hospitalizations.  For employers, it would reduce absenteeism and presenteeism, improve productivity and serve as a terrific health benefit.

Medicare Part D Annual Enrollment

As of October 15, 2021 traditional Medicare enrollees are encouraged to compare available prescription drug plans under the Medicare Part D program for the 2022 year. Private insurance companies administer these programs for Medicare. The drugs they cover and the amount they cover change from year to year. What was covered this month through December 31, 2021 may not be covered at all on January 1, 2022. The result may be sticker shock when you attempt to refill your normal prescription medications and are presented with a huge bill when you go to pick them up because your insurer no longer carries that medication or covers it through their formulary of medications. The open enrollment period ends December 15, 2021. A Kaiser Foundation poll and research study found that 70% of Medicare beneficiaries do not even compare plans during the October 15 – December 7th enrollment period.

If you have a computer log onto www.Medicare.gov. You will be given a choice to look at Medicare plans as an existing beneficiary or a new one. It will then ask if you wish to sign in with an account or as a guest. Either path will take you through.

You need to then choose Medicare Part D Prescription plans. It will ask for identifying information including your date of birth, initial date as a Medicare recipient and your zip code. It will request that you choose a participating pharmacy. If you use a chain pharmacy such as CVS or Walgreens, choosing any branch will do. It will then ask you to list your medications including dosage and how many you take daily and monthly. Once this task is completed it will allow you to select a plan.

Plans available in Palm Beach County, Florida are different than plans available in Dade County, Florida or even Nassau County, New York. If you wish to have a plan with no deductible the monthly premium will be more costly.

The computer program lists your current plan at the top with anticipated costs to you for 2022 if you keep your current plan. Underneath they list the best plans for you and the member ratings of those plans’ performance in previous years.

The process takes about twenty minutes but can save you hundreds of dollars and much aggravation. In my medical practice, we print out the data for our elderly patients who don’t have access to a computer or lack the skills to use the website.

Concierge Medicine and the Pandemic

Twenty years ago I practiced internal medicine and geriatrics locally in a traditional medical practice. I cared for 2700 patients seen in 15-minute visits with an annual checkup being given a full 30 minutes. The majority of my patients were over 55 years old and many had already been patients for 10-20 years. The practice office revenue was enhanced by having an in house laboratory, chest x-ray machine, pulmonary function lab and flexible sigmoidoscopy colon cancer surveillance program. If patients needed more time, we allotted more time or, more likely, we just fell behind leaving patients stranded in the waiting room wondering when they would be seen. I had a robust hospital practice made easier by the fact that the hospital was a short walk across the street and most of my hospitalized patients came from being required to cover the emergency room periodically for patients requiring admission but not having a physician.

Much changed quickly in the early 1990’s as we approached the millennium. Insurers managed care programs kidnapped our younger patients by approaching employers and guaranteeing cost savings on health insurance by demanding we provide care at a 25% discount. In addition, mandatory ER call became a nightmare because insurers would only compensate contracted physicians to care for their hospital inpatients.

My very profitable chest x-ray machine became an albatross because that $28 x-ray reimbursement was now accompanied by a fee to dispose of the developing fluid by only a certified chemical disposal firm even though the EPA said there was not enough silver in the waste to require that you do anything other than dump it down the sink. The lab closed too. Congress enacted strict testing and over site rules which made the cost of doing business too expensive and not profitable. That flexible sigmoidoscopy went the way of the Model-T Ford when the medical community enlarged to accommodate board certified gastroenterologists certified to look at the entire colon under anesthesia not just the distal colon and sigmoid.

We tried to overcome increased costs and lost revenue by seeing more patients per day. We banded together as physician owned groups owning imaging centers and common labs but the Center for Medicare Services (CMS), which runs Medicare, and private insurers plus Congressional rules on conflict of interest thwarted those ideas. We attended seminars on becoming a member of an HMO and taking full risk for a patient’s health care and cost.

The message was clear, you could make a great deal of money if you put barriers in front of patients limiting access to care and especially in patient hospital care. The ethics of that model did not sit well with many. So, we started earlier, shortened each visit and worked later and harder. As time wore on, and our loyal patients aged, we realized that we needed to spend MORE TIME with them more frequently.  Not less time!

Spending less time with patients was the primary impetus which prompted my exploration of concierge medicine when I realized I was better off emotionally, ethically and morally caring well for fewer patients. Financially, seeing a smaller panel of patients who paid a membership fee generated similar income to maintaining a large panel of patients in a capitated system or fee for service seeing more people with shorter visits.

I discuss this now because I often wonder how I would be able to care for my large panel of patients today in the midst of this COVID-19 Pandemic.

For the most part I have been able to give my patients the time and availability they need to stay safe from Coronavirus and still keep up with the prevention and surveillance testing they need periodically. The 24/7 phone, email and text message access has allowed me to stay in touch with patients – something that would have been near impossible to do in a practice with 2700 adult patients.

I applaud my colleagues who continued in the traditional practice primary care setting despite the fact that most sold their practices to local hospital systems or large investment groups who placed administrators in the care decision-making process dictating time and number of daily visits, referral patterns and products used in the care of the patients.

As an independent physician, I have been able to continue to provide services and referrals that are the best in the area using doctors and equipment I would see as a patient and proudly refer my parents, my wife and children, beloved friends and family members. I am able to guide patients based on evidence and quality of measures not only what is most cost effective. I have no contract with a health system that requires me to see a certain number of patients per day, per week, per month or face a drop in salary or dismissal. I am proud and fulfilled at the end of the day because I can look in the mirror and know that I tried my best for the patients.

I additionally have the ability to say “no” to a potential new patient that I believe would not benefit from being in my practice for numerous reasons. Providing time to meet potential new patients gives both the patient and physician an opportunity to assess whether developing a professional relationship would be a good fit for both.

During the pandemic these meetings have become tele-health virtual meetings which are far more impersonal and less educational for both the potential patient and the doctor. It is still far better than having an administrator schedule a new patient, with no questions asked, on your schedule with the only criteria being can they pay the price?

Sadly, this horrible SARS 2 Coronavirus pandemic has made concierge internal medicine and family medicine more attractive than less. Having your physician available to discuss prevention, vaccines, testing methods and locations and treatments, if infected, is much easier in these membership practices than in a traditional practice where your phone calls are routed through an automated attendant phone system, reviewed by a non-physician provider and handled usually by a nurse practitioner or physician assistant with only the most serious and complicated situations reaching the physician’s desk.

I predict that more and more patients will seek concierge care in the next few years because patients are getting tired of fighting the bureaucracy and struggling to get the attention of their health care providers when they think they need it.  But don’t blame the providers.  It’s the dysfunctional, inefficient and profit driven corporate system that has created this situation.

Influenza Vaccination in Adults

It is time once again to be thinking about taking your flu shot.   A recently published study by the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases (NFID) estimated that only 52% of US adults plan to take the flu shot.  Reasons for not being vaccinated include:

  • I do not believe it works (51%)
  • Concern it would cause an adverse effect (34%)
  • Concern that the vaccine would give them the flu (22%)

Health and Human Services Secretary Alex M. Azar II said, “Each season, flu vaccination prevents several million illnesses, tens of thousands of hospitalizations and thousands of deaths.  Over recent years, on average, flu vaccination has reduced the average adult’s chance of going to the doctor by between 30 – 60%.

A recent study performed by the northern California Kaiser Permanente Group, using seven years of flu season data, shows the immunity from the shot is near perfect for the first six weeks and then begins to wane. They estimate your post-vaccination chance of getting the flu, even if immunized, increases by 16% every 28 days after the shot but is near perfect for the first 42 days.

It is believed the Center for Disease Control (CDC) will recommend in future years that adults receive two flu shots each season. One will be administered at the beginning of the season and one six weeks later.  For the moment, the CDC acknowledges the flu season begins at different times in different regions of the country and suggests you receive your vaccination about two weeks before it arrives.

In South Florida, we typically see the arrival of the Influenza A virus after Thanksgiving. It peaks the last two weeks in January and first two weeks in February. For this reason, we suggest taking the shot later in the fall.

Vaccines are inactivated meaning they are not live and cannot give anyone the flu!

The Reality of Skilled Nursing Home Stays

The online journal Medscape published a Reuter’s article on Skilled Nursing Facilities and post hospital stays.  They discussed the often-lengthy time span between hospital discharge and the patient being seen by a physician or “an advanced care practitioner”.

Older, more infirm and cognitively impaired patients tend to be seen later than other patients. Apparently the later you are seen, the more likely it is that you will be sent back to the acute care hospital and be readmitted.  The study was conducted by Kira Ryskina of the Perlman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. The researchers looked at Medicare claims from nearly 2.4 million patients discharged from acute care hospitals. Her data indicated that when patients were seen by doctors at the facility soon after discharge they tended to recover more often not requiring acute readmission to the hospital for the same problem.

The author went on to say that most families confronted with a family member requiring post hospital rehabilitation at a skilled nursing home do not know what to expect from a skilled nursing facility (SNF).  The truth is, most doctors who practice in the inpatient setting or in surgical and medical specialties have no idea what to expect. They have never gone into one, unless it is for their own recovering family member, and they have never cared for a patient on a daily basis in one.

My first month as a private physician in 1979, my employer took me to the local facilities to meet the administrators, charge nurses and social workers at the facilities. The medical director was a young internist who had no private outpatient office or practices just a nursing home practice at five institutions he called on.  I was told that the law required me to see new patients within 24 hours of arrival, examine them and write a note and review all orders and either approve or change them.  I was surprised that facilities were staffed with only one registered nurse per 40 patients. The RN was required to pass the medications each shift, with most patients being on multiple medications so that most RNs had little time per shift to do much else but pass the medications.

When a patient had a complication or problem the nursing staff called the family member and the doctor. The volume of calls was so immense that the young facility medical director could not find any physicians who would agree to cross-cover with him on the weekends so he could get some time off.  In most cases, even if I decided the phone call related medical problem could be dealt with at the facility, the family decided otherwise and wanted their loved one transported to the ER. Those of us who cared for patients at these SNF’s joked that the protocol for caring for a problem was to call 911 and copy the chart for transfer.

It used to disturb me that EMS services were being diverted to these facilities for non-critical issues taking them away from true emergencies, and delaying response times, but they seemed to like it.  The more trips they were called on, the more evidence they could present for a larger share of the city or county budget.

At some SNFs there was always an EMS bus or ambulance sitting in the parking lot outside.  The patients were insured by Medicare guaranteeing bill payment so the receiving Emergency Department and staff were happy as well.

We were required to see the patient monthly and write a note. I saw sicker and less stable patients more often than monthly.  Progress in rehabilitation was discussed at mid-day care planning conferences that the physicians were rarely made aware of.  My goal for discharge was when the patient could safely transfer from the bed to a walker or wheel chair, get to the bathroom and on and off the toilet safely and; get in and out of a car. If the family could convert their home into a “skilled nursing facility” the patient could go home as well.  Often the patient was sent home by the facility “magically cured” when their insurance benefits ran out.

Most of the work at the facilities is performed by lower paid aides. In my area of practice most of the aides are men and women of color from the Caribbean who have little in common with the mostly Caucasian elderly population they care for. The work is hard and the pay low with the employee turnover rate extraordinarily high annually at most institutions. The patients are elderly, chronically ill, often with impaired cognition, hearing, and vision. Their family’s vision of what should be done is vastly different from what can be accomplished.  I believe most of the staff are caring and well-meaning just under staffed and under trained.  Administrations concerns about liability from medical malpractice, elder abuse and other issues is well founded based on the plethora of ads on prime time TV, newspapers and the sides of travelling public buses touting law firms seeking elder care cases.

It is now harder and harder to actually see patients at these facilities even if you wish to.  While community- based physicians with local hospital privileges were once welcomed and encouraged to attend to their patients at the facility, now the facilities require doctors to go through a lengthy credentialing process – as if you were applying for hospital staff privileges.   When you actually show up and care for your patients you rarely see a physician colleague. Most of the care is assessed and provided by nurse practitioners and physician assistants working for physicians who rarely, if ever, venture into the facilities. They may supervise the care plan on paper but rarely lay eyes or hands on the patient.

These facilities serve a vital role in the post-acute hospital care of patients. According to this study and article, Medicare spent $60 billion dollars in 2015 on this care. When a hospitalized patient has a frail spouse or no spouse at home, with no local nuclear family able to provide home care, the SNF is the only real option.

I suggest families visit the potential choices first. Speak to patients and their families about the care and services.  Review online state inspection and violations records. Ask about the transition from the hospital to the SNF. Who will be responsible for caring for them at the facility?  Meet them and talk to them. Make sure you are on the same page. If you can find a facility that has an onsite physician team with a geriatrician as the chief medical provider.  It may be the best option.

For these transitions to work and save money by stopping the revolving door form hospital to SNF to emergency room for every medical question, the SNF’s need some form of sovereign immunity from frivolous lawsuits if their services and care meet the legally required standards. The recent post- hurricane heat-related tragedy at a Hollywood, Florida nursing home underscores the need for vigilant inspection and regulation of this industry. The good homes need to be identified and need to be given the support and latitude required to care for this ever increasing portion of our American society.

Free Choice of Physicians & Fee for Service Medicine Ending?

The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission is a panel of financial, economic and health policy advisors created by Congress to advise CMS (Center for Medicare Services) and Congress how to pay physicians, health care providers and facilities for services rendered. According to an online article on MedPage they are close to eliminating fee for service payments for health care. CMS has encouraged alternative delivery methods for years. For the most part this has resulted in hospital and health care systems buying up and employing doctors, mid-level providers being substituted for more highly trained doctors and these alternative systems covering care only with their panel of providers and diagnostic and treatment centers.

However, publicized figures have shown these Medicare alternative products actually cost more per patient per year than traditional Medicare. This particular article claimed a 1-2% savings.

We all see the ads for Medicare Advantage plans which, in addition to no co-pay and no deductible, provide for dental care, vision care, eye care and exercise and gym memberships. Apparently 50% of the Medicare population is now enrolled in such a program.

As a 69 year old individual paying into the Medicare system for the last 55 years I see the benefits and cost savings for seniors when they are healthy. What happens however, when you become ill? Clearly the Centers of Excellence for many of the ailments seniors contract are geographically and contractually outside the narrow networks and panels these private insurance companies run and the Accountable Care Organization run plans provide.

If I do not have coverage for the Mayo Clinic or MD Anderson Cancer Center or the Cleveland Clinic or Dana Farber Cancer Center or Johns Hopkins Medical Center then have I wasted 55 years of payments? Do I really want a nurse practitioner in south Florida directing my care off a protocol list of contracted providers or do I want a clinician who sees a dozen cases of this disease per week calling the shots?

I prefer the latter but may not have a choice but to pay out of pocket if MEDPACs recommendations are accepted by CMS and Congress and become law.

Patient Safety and the Joint Commission

Two of my local hospitals just invested $3 – $4 million dollars in preparation for an inspection of the facilities by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals (JCAHO). The cost of the inspection runs in the $10 million dollar range after the preparation costs. The inspection is a high stress situation for the administration because if you fail, or lose your accreditation, the private insurers will void their contract with you and you won’t get paid for the work done.

Medicare through the Center for Medicare Services (CMS) is preferential to JCAHO so much so that they perform 80% of the inspections of hospitals in America. When JCAHO was initially formed it was in response to poor care in small private hospitals in non-urban nonacademic centers. They cleaned that up.

The current version uses up a great deal of money, creating a legion of hospital administrators running around with clipboards and computer tablets without making any meaningful dent in mistakes and outcome results. In a recent study published in the British Medical Journal the outcomes and re-admissions rate for the same problem within 30 days of discharge were compared at hospitals which rely on state surveys of quality and safety as opposed to the JCAHO ten million dollar survey. They found that there was no statistically significant difference.

In a related report hosted by the journal Health Affairs, a review of the 1999 report of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine entitled, “To Err is Human, Building a Safer Health System” was discussed. That controversial report claimed that 44,000 to 98,000 deaths per year occur due to medical errors. They discussed the work of Linda Aiken, PhD, RN, professor and director of the Center for Health Outcomes and Policy Research at the University of Pennsylvania. Her research looked at safety at 535 hospitals in four large states between 2005 and 2016. She called the results disappointing noting improvement based on suggestions in the 1999 report in only 21% of the hospitals surveyed and worsening in 7%. Most of her work involved the staffing and role of nurses which is critical to the quality of the care an institution provides.

Staffing or the ratio of patients cared for per nurse per shift is a critical component of safe patient care. Once a nurse on a non-critical care unit is asked to care for more than four patients the time spent at the bedside nursing diminishes. You cannot recognize problems, complications or changes in your patient’s condition if you are not spending time with them.

It seems to me as a clinician caring for patients in the outpatient and inpatient setting for 40 years that the more time nurses get to spend with patients the better the patients do. Maybe it’s time for government to separate the insurer’s ability to pay hospitals and JCAHO accreditation. Maybe the millions of dollars spent per inspection would be better spent on hiring more nurses per shift plus giving them the clerical and technical support they need to spend more time and care for their patients?

MRI Use in the Detection of Prostate Cancer

As men live longer the likelihood of them developing prostate cancer increases. Some experts estimate that if we biopsied the prostate of every male 80 years old or older, we probably would find prostate cancer present in almost all of them.

The PSA test has been shown to be less valuable than previously thought when discovered because it does not distinguish between an elevated level due to normal prostatic enlargement, infection or the presence of cancer.  When it is elevated due to cancer it cannot predict which tumors are aggressive and require aggressive treatment and which tumors are non-aggressive or indolent and can just be watched.  For this reason, CMS or Medicare and the United States Preventive Task Force are opposed to PSA use as a screening test.

To deal with these issues, Robert K. Nam MD, MSc, chairperson of genitourinary oncology and professor of surgery at Sunnybrook-Health Sciences Centre in Toronto, Canada has published a small preliminary study in the Journal of Urology on the use of MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) to predict the presence of and the aggressive status of prostate cancer disease.

They recruited men who knew they would be undergoing a PSA test, a MRI of the prostate and a prostate biopsy. Their preliminary results show that the MRI was a better predictor of the presence of prostate cancer than the PSA.  It was also felt to identify how aggressive the disease was which influenced treatment options offered. It was additionally felt to be very accurate in identifying when no prostate cancer was present.

Small numbers of patients were entered in this pilot study. A larger randomized controlled study is now in the planning stages to further clarify these initial findings.  At the same time in our community some of the urologists are now ordering MRI scans to elucidate what is causing an elevated PSA in individuals who have a non-diagnostic digital rectal exam and an elevating PSA.

Changes Coming to Medicare Soon

CMS (Center for Medicare Services) is determined to eliminate fee for service medicine. Fee for service medicine is the system where patients see a physician or “provider” for a visit or service and the “physician or provider” bills the patient or Medicare for each service provided.  CMS argues that “providers” are seeing too much volume and providing too many services thus driving up the cost of health care and the percentage of the Gross National Product that healthcare consumes.  To contain costs they have come up with the public relations mantra of the “Triple Aim.”  The triple aim includes improving the global health of the US population while improving quality and reducing overall costs.  The true emphasis is on reducing overall costs!

To reach their goals, CMS is changing the way it pays for health care and services. By 2019, less than three years from now, CMS hopes to pay one flat fee per beneficiary to large health care organizations ( think HMOs) thus fixing their costs. That large organization will then be responsible for providing total care to a local population.   Hospitals and large health care systems have been purchasing physician practices and employing the doctors in organizations known as Accountable Care Organizations (ACO’s). These health systems believe that by employing the doctors they will control their ordering and spending habits and reduce costs to the overall system. They hope to drive an aging private community physician population into early retirement or at least to stop coming to the hospitals to care for their own patients. They still want these patients to come to their hospital for care but want their employed physicians to provide the care.

If you look around the community you will notice that the major hematologic and oncology groups are now owned by Boca Raton Regional Hospital, as is the major surgical group, several cardiology groups and a host of internists and family practitioners.  The hospital has additionally partnered with its contracted emergency room physicians to open numerous walk in clinics in young population centers to capture that business. At the same time that our local regional hospital is purchasing practices and discouraging local private physicians from continuing to practice, they have introduced a residency training program in internal medicine and surgery. By the fall of 2017 we can expect 100 internal medicine physicians and up to 45 surgical physicians fresh out of medical school and beginning their training, to be serving as a cheap physician labor force for Boca Regional Hospital.  The hope is that ultimately, the Charles Schmidt College of Medicine at FAU will attract and develop a clinical faculty worthy of a university and academic medical center that will enhance medical care in our area but until then we will always wonder, as anesthesia puts us to sleep, who actually is performing our surgical procedures?   Additionally one wonders if you become ill with a serious illness, will you be permitted and covered to see the best physician at the best institution for your problem or will you be required to stay in a narrow network of local providers contracted with the local health entity?

If physicians choose not to join a large health system organization as an employee they will be required to be part of a merit based payment system.  Government administrators, employers and private insurers are certain they can define and quantitate “quality care.”  It is unclear whether there is any meaningful evidence of what “quality care” really is.   Quality care will include parameters like patient satisfaction ( if you are not given an antibiotic for your viral illness or a narcotic pain medicine for your injury appropriately based on the illness or injury will the provider be given a low patient satisfaction grade?), did you counsel an obese patient to lose weight?  Did you counsel a tobacco smoker to stop?  Did you intervene to control a patient’s blood pressure?  All the data entry will require the physician to spend time in front of the computer screen checking more boxes and less time in face-to-face patient care.  Computers will need to communicate with each other from the office to the hospital to the lab etc. but it is unclear who will pay for this? At the end of each year the doctors will be required to send all their patient care data electronically to CMS for review.

Many physicians will choose to just leave or “opt out” of the Medicare system. They will contract privately with patients and be able to order tests and studies at approved institutions but they will not be reimbursed by Medicare for their services nor will the patient be reimbursed by Medicare for the cost of those doctors’ visits and services.  In most areas of the country where the population is not overwhelmingly composed of senior citizens 65 years of age or older, doctors have stopped seeing Medicare patients for just this reason. This may become the norm rather than the exception in South Florida as well.

For the moment my concierge practice is not changing anything. We continue to participate in all the CMS quality programs such as Meaningful Use and PQRS , vaccine registry and Eforcse (a controlled substance prescribing data base) despite the cost and time involved just to leave our future options open. I remain committed to giving my patients longer quality visits and following them where possible into the hospital when they need hospital services. As patients and citizens it is urgent that you become familiar with what CMS and the Federal Government are doing with your taxes and health care options and hold them accountable to your wishes!  If you have questions about this give me a call or set up a special time to discuss this face-to face.

Medicare Will Not Pay For Bone Marrow or Umbilical Cord Blood Transplants

Treatment of blood disorders, leukemia and lymphomas today includes the use of life saving transplants of bone marrow from genetically similar donors and use of newborn childrens’ umbilical cord blood containing stem cells.  The National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP), Be the Match, is the organization which operates the national match registry and has worked for the last 30 years to find 13.6 million adult bone marrow volunteer donors and 225,000 units of fetal cord blood for use. The NDMPs relationship with similar organizations across the globe creates a pool of 24.5 million potential marrow donors and 609,000 units of cord blood.

There are people who need these vital products and cannot find a match but, fortunately, that number is declining. The real problem in men and women 65 years of age or older is that outdated Medicare reimbursement policies do not pay for these products and services and the cost is too expensive for many to bear themselves. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has created barriers to Medicare age recipients being covered for these products resulting in financial uncertainty for the patient. The actual cost is beyond the means of most working individuals to bear.

While private insurers cover more than 70 diseases and conditions, Medicare covers less than a dozen.  The US Department of Health and Human Services calculated that almost 20,000 people in the U.S. could benefit from life-saving marrow or cord blood transplant each year but do not receive them because CMS policy does not cover them.   Where Medicare covers the conditions, the rate of reimbursement is often insufficient to cover the costs.  As Baby Boomers become eligible for Medicare the problem will intensify.

Dr Fred LeMaistre, M.D., director of the Sarah Cannon Blood Cancer Network authored an editorial and appeal to the physician community to lobby for better coverage of marrow and cord blood transplants as a life saving measure.

I for one was stunned to realize just how poor the coverage has remained for these services and find it disgraceful that Sarah Palin’s predicted death panels have now materialized in the form of accepted lifesaving technology not being covered after age 65.  If you are as surprised as I am write to your Congressional representatives and demand appropriate reimbursement for bone marrow and cord blood transplants to save lives!