Cooperating for better care.

Affordable Care Act

Tag Archives

La. looks at health effects of Medicaid expansion

quarter

In New Orleans’s French Quarter.

Has Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act made people healthier? Governing magazine looks at the question. It reports:

“To overcome the spotty research that’s out there and to determine the impact of enrolling more people in Medicaid, Louisiana is putting a lot of resources into tracking the expansion’s effect. The state expanded its program last year and has implemented what it calls a Medicaid expansion dashboard. In mid-December, the dashboard was showing that under the expanded program nearly 360,000 Louisianans had obtained health coverage, more than 4,000 women had been screened for breast cancer, more than 3,600 people had received colon cancer screenings and more than 700 adults had been diagnosed with diabetes.

But not every state is willing or able to devote the resources Louisiana has to measuring the program’s impact. That’s especially true now that the future of the Affordable Care Act is up in the air with a new administration and Congress in Washington.

“What’s more, it’s really too early to definitively answer the question of whether Medicaid expansion makes people healthier in the long run. Expansions are only a few years old. But for Rebekah Gee, who is Louisiana’s health and human services secretary, the dashboard makes one thing completely clear. ‘This shows that there is a demand for care,’ she says, ‘and we do have the supply for it.”’

To read more, please hit this link.


Minn. reforms could presage ACA repeal and replacement

By MARK ZDECHIK

Via Kaiser Health News

What’s going to happen to the federal health law? The quick answer is no one knows. But in the midst of the uncertainty about the Affordable Care Act, states still must govern their insurance markets. Most have been muddling through with the 2017 status quo, but Minnesota is a special case, taking three unusual actions that are worth a closer look.

Last month, Minnesota:

  • Passed a one-time bailout for some consumers in the individual insurance market dealing with skyrocketing premiums.
  • Rejected an attempt to let insurers offer cheaper, bare-bones coverage.
  • Laid the groundwork for a sort of homegrown “public option” insurance plan.

Here’s more on each item.

The Bailout

Faced with some of the country’s highest hikes on premiums in the individual market — 50 to 67 percent, on average — Minnesota lawmakers passed a bailout for people who earn too much to qualify for the Affordable Care Act’s federal tax credit. The $300 million law will cut monthly 2017 premiums by 25 percent for about 125,000 Minnesotans.

Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton backed the measure since October when he called the ACA “no longer affordable to increasing numbers of people.” But passage wasn’t assured as both houses of Minnesota’s legislature are controlled by Republicans.

It is thought to be the second time a state has offered up state tax dollars to stabilize an insurance marketplace created by the ACA. (Alaska came up with a $55 million bailout for insurers in 2016.)

Bare-Bones Coverage

A failed amendment to the Minnesota legislation sought to strip dozens of so-called “essential benefits” from health plans with the expectation that slimmed-down coverage would cost less.

Republican State Rep. Steve Drazkowski, who offered the amendment, said he was trying to eliminate the current, “government-controlled, one-size-fits-all, dictating set of mandates.

“What we’re doing is trying to create an environment that, if and when the ACA goes away, that Minnesotans will have the freedoms they need in order to start to bring some free-market competition, some free-market ingenuity and innovation into the health insurance market,” he said.

The laundry list of benefits that consumers could choose to have covered or not under Drazkowski’s amendment included maternity care, diabetes treatment and mental health care among many others. Some items on the list are very specific: Lyme disease, prostate cancer screenings, outpatient surgery.

Dayton and other Democrats opposed the amendment and it dropped out of the final legislation.

Still, it caught the eye of Minnesota native Andy Slavitt, who is the former administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which oversee the health law marketplaces. Slavitt, who tweeted about the amendment, said it is a cautionary tale about high-deductible catastrophic

 

Still, it caught the eye of Minnesota native Andy Slavitt, who is the former administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which oversee the health law marketplaces. Slavitt, who tweeted about the amendment, said it is a cautionary tale about high-deductible catastrophic plans that cover little or no basic care.

Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton backed the measure since October when he called the ACA “no longer affordable to increasing numbers of people.” But passage wasn’t assured as both houses of Minnesota’s legislature are controlled by Republicans.

It is thought to be the second time a state has offered up state tax dollars to stabilize an insurance marketplace created by the ACA. (Alaska came up with a $55 million bailout for insurers in 2016.)

Bare-Bones Coverage

A failed amendment to the Minnesota legislation sought to strip dozens of so-called “essential benefits” from health plans with the expectation that slimmed-down coverage would cost less.

Republican State Rep. Steve Drazkowski, who offered the amendment, said he was trying to eliminate the current, “government-controlled, one-size-fits-all, dictating set of mandates.

“What we’re doing is trying to create an environment that, if and when the ACA goes away, that Minnesotans will have the freedoms they need in order to start to bring some free-market competition, some free-market ingenuity and innovation into the health insurance market,” he said.

The laundry list of benefits that consumers could choose to have covered or not under Drazkowski’s amendment included maternity care, diabetes treatment and mental health care among many others. Some items on the list are very specific: Lyme disease, prostate cancer screenings, outpatient surgery.

Dayton and other Democrats opposed the amendment and it dropped out of the final legislation.

Still, it caught the eye of Minnesota native Andy Slavitt, who is the former administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which oversee the health law marketplaces. Slavitt, who tweeted about the amendment, said it is a cautionary tale about high-deductible catastrophic plans that cover little or no basic care.


Some fearful Republicans now talk of ‘repairing’ the ACA, not ‘repealing and replacing’ it

hammer

Some Republicans, fearful of a massive voter backlash if the Affordable Care Act is repealed without a way to maintain insurance for the millions covered by it, are now talking about “repairing” the ACA instead of “repealing and replacing it,” Bloomberg reported, noting that the concept was discussed during last week’s closed GOP policy retreat in Philadelphia.

The word ‘’repair’’ “captures exactly what the large majority of the American people want,” GOP consultant and pollster Frank Luntz told Bloomberg.

In any event, the pressure is mounting on Republicans as insurers are warning that they might quit the ACA marketplaces if the GOP doesn’t offer a replacement plan before the April deadline for insurers to decide if they’ll participate in 2018.

Healthcare Dive observed: “As the flood of Republican demands to abolish the ACA slow to a more measured stream, the shift in language seems to be more of a rebranding than a signal of a new direction for the beleaguered law.’’

House Speaker Paul Ryan, for his part, told Fox News: “To repair the American healthcare system, you have to repeal and replace this law, and that’s what we’re doing.’’ So confusion and uncertainty still reign on the ACA.


4 takeways from GOP meeting on repealing ACA

 

Here are Becker’s Hospital Review’s four takeaways from what is known about the closed Republican congressional meeting last week on how to repeal the Affordable Care Act:

1. “Congressional Republicans appear to have doubts about how to fulfill their promise to dismantle the ACA without explicit guidance from President Donald Trump or his administration, according to the report.

2. “Specifically, the report states, lawmakers wrestled with a myriad of issues, including who may end up either losing coverage or paying more under a revamped system.

3. “Additionally, lawmakers expressed concerns about how to prepare a replacement plan that can be ready to launch at the time of repeal; how to avoid deep damage to the health insurance market; how to keep premiums affordable for middle-class families; how to avoid the political consequences of defunding Planned Parenthood, reports The Washington Post.

4. “‘We’d better be sure that we’re prepared to live with the market we’ve created’ with repeal, Rep. Tom McClintock, of California, said during Thursday’s meeting, according to The Washington Post. “That’s going to be called Trumpcare. Republicans will own that lock, stock and barrel, and we’ll be judged in the {mid-term} election less than two years away.”

To read more, please hit this link.


ACA repeal could kill innovative programs at hospitals

er

The Republicans’ promise to repeal the Affordable Care Act not only threatens to deprive millions of people of their health insurance; it could drive many hospitals deep into debt and destroy innovative programs created by the ACA aimed at  improving patient care.

Timothy Ferris, M.D., an internist and medical director of the Mass General Physicians Organization, told FierceHealthcare that he worries that the “progress we’ve made over the past five years would be threatened.”

He said that  includes programs through the Accountable Care Organization (ACO) at Massachusetts General Hospital, including experiments with video consultations and home hospitalization.

Dennis Keefe, head of Care New England, in Rhode Island, told NPR that he is concerned about the future for Integra, an ACO that includes primary- care physicians, specialists, urgent-care and after-hour providers, clinics, laboratories and inpatient facilities.

Hospitals and healthcare systems that have spent the last six years trying to create new value-based, patient-centered models as part of the ACA.  And so 120 organizations sent a letter to President  Trump and Vice President Pence urging them to not roll back progress they have made.

To read more, please hit this link.


Use of retail clinics rises, but…

 

clinic

A new study from the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association shows progress as insurers try to change their customers’ healthcare  use in order to cut costs.

The study found that among commercially insured BCBS plan members, visits to retail clinics nearly doubled in the past five years, from 12.2 visits per 1,000 members to 24 visits per 1,000 members.

The study says that up 29.8 percent of hospital emergency department visits could be handled at retail clinics. Emergency department visits, of course, are famously expensive. And so, insurers now cover most retail clinic visits.

But FierceHealthcare noted that the rise in use of retail clinics was not equally distributed among those with commercial BCBS plans. “For example, the rate at which women visited retail clinics was 72% higher than the rate for men in 2015.

“In addition, uptake among individually insured members has ‘lagged’ since the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, according to the BCBSA. From 2013 to 2015, the growth rate in retail clinic visits per 1,000 members in the individual market was only 2.6%, compared to a 15.5% growth rate in doctor’s office visits and 35.8% uptick in ED visits.’’

‘’In 2015, there was also a 19% lower use of retail clinics among individually insured members compared to members with employer-based plans.’’

To read the study, please hit this link.

To read FierceHealthcare’s comment on it, please hit this link.


Mass. governor confronts Medicaid cost spiral

statehouse

The Massachusetts State House.

Companies in Massachusetts that don’t offer their employees health insurance would pay a $2,000 annual assessment per full-time worker to the state under a plan that Gov. Charles Baker will offer to address rising enrollment-driven costs in the state’s Medicaid program.

The proposal would also impose growth caps on the rates that providers can charge for medical services. It’s part of a bid to control the cost of care in the commercial market and make it more affordable for employers, the State House News Service reported.

Among the other proposed changes are a moratorium on new coverage mandates and ending vision and non-emergency transportation benefits – excluding those involving mental-health and substance-abuse disorders – for members of MassHealth CarePlus program, which covers those who became eligible for subsidized insurance under the Affordable Care Act.

To read more, please hit this link.


CIGNA head touts ACOs

 

David Cordani, CEO of the giant CIGNA insuror, says its health plans under the Affordable Care Act work best when they are connected with the networks of physicians and hospitals  in Accountable Care Organizations, The Hartford Courant reported.

He wouldn’t comment on what might happen next as the Republicans start the process of killing the ACA

To read The Courant’s article, please hit this link.


Some patients fear Trump administration may use EHRs to discriminate against them

 

With the relentless hacking and infamous cybersecurity breaches becoming increasingly worrisome, patients are quite right to be leery of  having their personal information go into electronic health records. And now, with the Trump administration about to take over in Washington, there’s even more fear.

Writes Marla Durben Hirsch in Fiercehealthcare,  “{T}here is a deeper, darker reason patients might withhold information: the apparent imminent change of our society and its laws post-election.

“President-elect Donald Trump campaigned on a promise he would crack down on immigrants and Muslims. The turn of the nation to the right will likely also affect the LGBTQ community.

“Now it’s not just the fear that an EHR breach will reveal a patient’s medical information and cause financial harm or medical identity theft. Now a breach could affect a patent’s personal safety if information is used against them.

“For instance, section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act prohibits providers from discriminating against patients on the basis of sex, including sexual identity. The rule implementing this provision was just finalized. Providers are being encouraged to add to their EHRs preferred names of transgendered patients if they differ from the gender on their drivers’ licenses and include other identifying information into the systems.

“But if the Affordable Care Act is repealed and LGBTQ people lose these protections, they may face discrimination or harassment. So what happens if patients don’t tell providers that they are LGBTQ? Physicians could miss conditions that affect their patients at a higher rate, such as depression and substance abuse. A physician might miss important cancer screening tests if transgender patients don’t feel safe sharing personal information.”

To read more, please hit this link.


Tenn. insurer may presage end of ACA pre-existing condition protection

 

 

Farm Bureau Health Plans is already selling full-year policies that dispense with the pre-existing-condition part of the law.

Modern Healthcare notes that House Speaker Paul Ryan and other GOP leaders have indicated “they want to deregulate health insurance, including letting insurers screen for medical conditions if consumers don’t maintain continuous coverage. President-elect Donald Trump, however, has said he wants to keep the ACA’s ban on discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions though he’s offered no other details.”

Modern Healthcare continued:

“Some insurers have been happy to accommodate the demand for cheaper, skimpier plans by selling short-term products that can run for up to 364 days and don’t have to meet ACA rules. In October, however, the HHS issued a final rule limiting the duration of short-term plans to three months and barring insurers from renewing them, effective in 2017. It remains to be seen whether the incoming Trump administration will move to reverse that in response to lobbying pressure from insurers.”

 

To read the Modern Healthcare article, please hit this link.


Page 6 of 29First...567...Last

Contact Info

info@cmg625.com

(617) 230-4965

Wellesley, Mass