Weekend update

Congress

Weekend update

David Ermer–Congress, COVID-19–

Congress had been scheduled to be on State / district work breaks this coming week. However, after the House passed a bipartisan COVID-19 relief bill (H.R. 6201) on Friday, the Senate leadership decided to consider H.R. 6201 week. According to the Wall Street Journal, the President is ready to sign the bill into law.

The Congressional bill summary explains

This bill responds to the coronavirus outbreak by providing paid sick leave (Divisions D, E, and F) and free coronavirus testing [Division G, a new mandate on all types of health plans], expanding food assistance and unemployment benefits, and requiring employers to provide additional protections for health care workers. 

The Hill reports that

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said Sunday that it is possible it will take “a few months” before life goes “back to normal” amid the coronavirus outbreak.

“Can you try to help us understand, when will life get back to normal?” ABC’s Jonathan Karl asked Fauci on “This Week.”

“It’s going to be a matter of several weeks to a few months, for sure,” Fauci responded.

The FEHBBlog’s current read, the Great Influenza, has made him a strong believer in the social distancing principle that Dr. Fauci and many others are advocating in the face of the COVID-19 outbreak.

Weekend update

David Ermer–Congress, COVID-19–

Welcome to Daylight Savings Time! Congress remains in session on Capitol Hill this week. Federal News Network reports that the President signed into law the $8.3 billion COVID 19 funding bill (H.R. 6074) on Friday.

Notwithstanding the cancellation of the HIMSS conference

  • Modern Healthcare reports that the Trump Administration plans to release the final electronic health records interoperability and data blocking rules tomorrow, and.
  • DaVinci, “a private sector initiative that addresses the needs of the Value Based Care Community by leveraging the HL7 FHIR platform,” with the FHIR API, plans to go ahead with virtual HIMSS presentations via an online format. Thanks DaVinci.

Fierce Healthcare reports on an interesting flu vaccine study in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

The researchers said continued vaccination of seniors, particularly with high-dose vaccines, still seems appropriate, as the study results did not preclude modest effectiveness of the flu vaccine against severe outcomes.

“Our findings raise questions, however, about the overall effectiveness of a vaccination strategy that is limited to standard vaccines and focuses too much on elderly persons. Supplementary strategies, such as vaccinating children and others who are most likely to spread influenza, may also be necessary to address the high burden of influenza-related complications among older adults,” the researchers concluded.

The researchers measured hospitalization and mortality rates by month of age. Their data included 170 million episodes of care and 7.6 million deaths. Flu vaccination rates increased sharply at age 65, but there was no matching decrease in hospitalizations or death.

Midweek update

David Ermer–Congress, COVID-19–

This afternoon, the House of Representatives passed a funding bill for the COVID-19 situation (H.R. 6074) by a 415-2 vote. Fierce Healthcare breaks down the key elements of H.R. 6074 here.

Federal News Network reports on OPM’s latest “preliminary” COVID-19 guidance. The top line is that “OPM advised agencies to incorporate telework in their continuity of operations plans (COOP). Those emergency plans supersede an agency’s previous telework policies, according to OPM.”

CMS also announced agency actions to address the spread of COVID-19. The top lines are that CMS wants “health care providers across the country to ensure they are implementing their infection control procedures, which they are required to maintain at all times. Additionally, CMS is announcing that, effective immediately and, until further notice, State Survey Agencies and Accrediting Organizations will focus their facility inspections exclusively on issues related to infection control and other serious health and safety threats, like allegations of abuse – beginning with nursing homes and hospitals.”

The Journal podcast explains why this second action is quite necessary.

Healthcare Dive reports that

Uber Health is attempting to address provider gripes with its non-emergency medical transportation platform through a handful of new features that began rolling out late last year, the San Francisco-based rideshare company said Wednesday.

Providers can now select specific pickup and drop-off sites at large hospitals, similar to how the app is used in airports, and people can receive details of their ride like driver name, make and model of car and time of arrival over a landline phone, instead of just text messages.

Uber Health has grown 300% year over year since its launch in 2018 and plans to double the size of its team this year.

Lyft has a similar product.

Monday Musings

David Ermer–CDC, Congress, SCOTUS, Uncategorized–

The FEHBlog got to work this morning around 8:30 am. Before he knew it, it was past 9:30 am, the time at which the Supreme Court releases online its orders from the latest conference of the Justices. He clicked on the Adobe Acrobat PDF link to the Court’s order list — no go. Bad PDF. He tried different browsers — same result. Twitter ho and there it was “blue State victory” the Supreme Court had agreed to review the Texas v. U.S. case holding the ACA’s individual mandate unconstitutional. The political comment did not make sense to the FEHBlog because only four Justices need to approve a petition for certiorari / review and there are four Democrat appointees on the Court. However, you need five Justices for a final victory. In any event by then the FEHBlog was able to open the Court’s order list and he found the following on page 3:

CERTIORARI GRANTED

19-840 CALIFORNIA, ET AL. V. TEXAS, ET AL.

19-1019 TEXAS, ET AL. V. CALIFORNIA, ET AL.
The motion of 33 State Hospital Associations for leave to file a brief as amici curiae in No. 19-840 is granted. The petitions for writs of certiorari are granted. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument.

Case No. 19-1019??!! The FEHBlog was aware of the unmentioned Case No. 19-841 which is the House of Representative’s cert. petition. But what is Case No. 19-1019? It turns out that on Valentine’s Day the red states had filed a cross motion for review / cert with the Supreme Court. So it appears that both sides won at the first stage of the Supreme Court proceedings.

The Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the cases early in its next Term which begins on the first Monday in October 2020. There is no way the Court will decide the case before the Presidential election day on November 3. Hopefully, to avoid a political kerfuffle at the oral argument, the Court will schedule the argument for later in November.

Meanwhile the federal district court for the Northern District of Texas will hold off reconsidering the unconstitutional individual mandate’s proper degree of severance from the remainder of the massive law. The Fifth Circuit in its December order vacated the lower court’s initial decision that the remainder of the law was inseparable and therefore equally unconstitutional. The FEHBlog’s guess is that the Supreme Court took the case in order to short circuit that remand. But time will tell.

In another surprise, the FEHBlog learned along with the healthcare world today that President Trump will speak on the issue of electronic health record interoperability at the next Monday’s opening day of the monstrous HIMSS conference in Orlando, Florida. Health IT News reports that while former Presidents Clinton and Bush 43 have spoken at this conference, President Trump’s appearance will be the first by a sitting President.

Trump’s speech will touch on various aspects of interoperability, innovation and digital health. If past HIMSS conferences are any indication, his appearance may also be timed with the long-awaited final rules on information blocking and patient access from the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT.

Another probable topic of discussion will be an update on the Trump Administration’s ongoing response to the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak.

Again time will tell.

Medicare provides coverage for Americans under age 65 with end stage renal / kidney disease for Americans. However,

Medicare is the secondary payer to group health plans (GHPs) [including FEHB plan] for individuals entitled to Medicare based on ESRD for a coordination period of 30 months regardless of the number of employees and whether the coverage is based on current employment status.  Medicare is secondary to GHP coverage provided through the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA), or a retirement plan.

Given the FEHBP’s role in the early stages of this serious disease, the FEHBlog wanted to point out this Centers for Disease Control page on understanding chronic kidney disease. End stage renal disease is a later stage of chronic kidney disease. The CDC explains that

The two main causes of CKD are diabetes and high blood pressure. About 1 in 3 adults with diabetes and 1 in 5 adults with high blood pressure have CKD.

People may not feel sick or notice any symptoms until CKD is advanced. The only way people find out if they have CKD is through simple blood and urine tests. The blood test checks for creatinine (a waste product) in the blood to see how well the kidneys work. The urine test checks for protein in the urine (an early sign of kidney damage).

Here’s another reason why annual physical exams are important.

Weekend update

David Ermer–CDC, Congress–

The FEHBlog is back inside the Capitol Beltway following a weekend trip. Congress remains in session on Capitol Hill this coming week. Fierce Healthcare reports that “Leaders of the Senate Finance Committee demanded Cigna and Optum produce critical documents over the pricing of insulin, with a subpoena threat looming.”

Here are links for the Centers for Disease Controls’ U.S. situation summaries for influenza and the COVID-19 viruses. Yesterday, Leap Day, the CDC reported regrettably about

three hospitalized patients [in the State of Washington] who have tested presumptive-positive for the virus that causes COVID-19, including one patient who died.

Two of the patients are from a long-term care facility (LTCF) where one is a health care worker. Additional residents and staff of the LTCF who have not yet been tested for COVID-19 are reportedly either ill with respiratory symptoms or hospitalized with pneumonia of unknown cause.

The patient who died, a male in his 50s, was being treated at the same hospital. He was not a resident of the LTCF.

This is the first reported death in the United States from COVID-19, as well as the first reported case in a health care worker and the first possible outbreak in a LTCF. These reports from Washington follow others of community spread in Oregon and two places in California earlier this week. While there is still much to learn about the unfolding situations in California, Oregon and Washington, preliminary information raises the level of concern about the immediate threat for COVID-19 for certain communities in the United States. Most people in the United States will have little immediate risk of exposure to this virus, but some people will be at increased risk depending on their exposures. The greatest risk is to those who have been in close contact with people with COVID-19. People with suspected or confirmed exposure should reach out to their state or local public health department.

ABC News adds today that

Two new cases of coronavirus have been confirmed in Washington state, according to health officials.

The cases include a male in his 60s, who has underlying health conditions but is stable, and another man in 60s with underlying health conditions but is in critical condition.

Both cases are in King County, bringing the total number of confirmed cases in the county to six. One of those cases is a U.S. postal worker, county’s health administration stated.

It appears that this unfortunate Postal worker is the first FEHB member afflicted by the disease. Good luck to all of the COVID-19 and influenza patients. We are lucky to live in a country with excellent healthcare.

Midweek update

David Ermer–CDC, Congress, Rx coverage–

The Wall Street Journal recently published a story titled “How the Drug Lobby Lost its Mojo in Washington.” The story also is available on the Journal’s listener friendly podcast. The upshot of the story is that the bipartisan effort to enact a drug pricing law may have legs as they say on Capitol Hill.

“In the past PhRMA had a reputation for rolling the tanks against every proposal irrespective of industry impact,” says PhRMA Chief Executive Officer Stephen Ubl. “We are now taking a more proactive approach of coming to the table to offer policy makers solutions that would address patient affordability challenges.”

PhRMA’s Mr. Ubl says the drug industry could be open to a deal that combines elements of bills from Mr. Grassley, Mrs. Pelosi and House Republicans, saying there “are provisions in all three bills that have bipartisan support and could meaningfully improve affordability for patients without including price controls.” 

In the no good deed goes unpunished department, the Pharmacy Times reports that

Four FDA-approved products that face no competition may increase health care spending by as much as $20.25 billion, according to a new analysis by Vizient Inc.1

The report focused on the Unapproved Drug Initiative (UDI) and its unintended effects on the market. The UDI was an FDA mandate enacted in 2006 that required unapproved drugs in use prior to FDA review of safety and efficacy to be either approved or removed from the market. Once a previously unapproved drug receives FDA approval, the manufacturers of other unapproved versions are asked to remove their products from the market.1

Although the goal of the UDI was to remove potentially dangerous medications from the market, the report authors noted that most of the products are chemically well-defined, reuqire no research and development, and are widely used in health care settings.1

The researchers used the wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) for all calculations and then estimated and used IQVIA data for all US health care product units purchased.1

According to the authors, the UDI has resulted in $2.66 billion in increased costs already incurred, $8.75 billion in estimated cossts awaiting the UDI decision, and $17.59 billion in remaining exclusivity estimated costs.1

Hokey smokes, that’s a big bowl of wrong.

The FEHBlog who is not much of a world traveler was aware of the State Department’s international travel advisories. Today he learned about the Center for Disease Control’s travel health notices. It’s important to check both lists if you plan to travel internationally.

In the healthcare provider competition department, Fierce Healthcare reports that

The Urgent Care Association released its 2019 benchmarking report that showed the total number of centers had reached 9,616 as of November 2019, a 9.6% jump from the previous year.

The number of centers has increased steadily each year from 2013, when the total number of urgent care centers was 6,100. Both urgent care centers and retail clinics have continued to grow across the U.S. as patients look for convenience and affordability, creating competition with traditional hospital and physician practice services.

In the FEHBlog’s view, convenient access to care is great as long as the primary care provider is kept in the loop.

In the good public health news department, the Department of Health and Human Services announced today that

The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) [has] awarded approximately $117 million to expand access to HIV care, treatment, medication, and prevention services. This investment is a critical component of the Administration’s Ending the HIV Epidemic: A Plan for America (EHE) initiative, which aims to reduce the number of new HIV infections in the United States by 90 percent by 2030.

The EHE initiative and today’s awards focus on 48 counties, Washington, D.C., and San Juan, Puerto Rico, geographic areas where more than 50 percent of new HIV diagnoses occurred in 2016 and 2017, as well as the seven states with a substantial rural HIV burden.

Finally, as she is the most influential healthcare policymaker in the U.S. per Modern Healthcare, take a gander at CMS Administrator Seema Verma’s speech to the annual CMS quality conference.

Monday Musings

David Ermer–CDC, Congress, Medicare, Uncategorized–

Federal News Network offers a useful report on the President’s Fiscal Year 2021 budget priorities for the federal workforce. Particularly in an election year, the President’s budget proposal is principally a political document. Now let Congress do its job.

Coordinating benefits when group health plan members have coverage under more than one plan is complicated. Nothing is more complicated than coordinating group health plan benefits with Medicare, and FEHB plans have to do a lot of this work due to the large number of Medicare eligible annuitant members, some of whom remain employed while most are retired. The FEHBlog could go on and on. See Section 9 of your plan brochure.

About ten years ago, Congress passed a law colloquially known as Section 111 which requires group health plans, among others, to report demographic information to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) in order to facilitate coordination of benefits. Now in its infinite wisdom CMS has decided to move forward with a proposed rule to impose civil monetary penalties on Section 111 reporting entities, including FEHB plans, for certain Section 111 errors. More details are available in this CMS fact sheet.

Bear in mind that larger FEHB plans in particular are under OPM Inspector General scrutiny for the accuracy of their Medicare coordination of benefits efforts. Moreover, the carriers, not the federal government, are on the risk for the FEHBP coverage. In short, Medicare coordination of benefits creates enough headaches for FEHBP carriers without the added risk of civil monetary penalties. How about a little comity between CMS and OPM? (E.g. Because OPM does not seek to penalize CMS for its COB goofs, CMS should not penalize FEHBP for their COB goofs.) The public comment deadline on the proposed CMS rule is April 20.

In a bit of hopeful news, Health Payer Intelligence discusses a successful Horizon New Jersey Blue Cross initiative to apply value based pricing to pediatricians. “If value-based care in pediatric healthcare truly is the future of value-based care, payers need to leverage strong provider relationships to establish effective pediatric quality measures in order to improve their pediatric value-based care performance, Horizon’s executive vice president for healthcare management and transformation Allen Karp illuminated.” Yes indeed.

Finally, on the disease front, HHS reports that

U.S. hospitals saw a 40 percent increase in the rate of Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with sepsis [an extremely dangerous infection] over the past seven years, and in just 2018 had an estimated cost to Medicare of more than $41.5 billion according to an unprecedented study by researchers from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Researchers determined that the increase in sepsis was not due to the growing number of American seniors enrolling in Medicare. From 2012 through 2018, the U.S. saw a 22 percent increase in the Medicare enrollment rates but a 40 percent increase in the rate of sepsis-related hospital admissions among beneficiaries.

Most patients with sepsis arrived at the hospital with the condition, rather than developing sepsis in the hospital, a possible indicator of success for CMS efforts to reduce hospital-based cases of sepsis. However, two-thirds of these sepsis patients had a medical encounter in the week prior to hospitalization. This finding represents an opportunity for improved education and awareness among patients and healthcare providers, as well as the need for diagnostics to detect sepsis early.

Let’s get going with those efforts.

Also the FEHBlog learned that the Centers for Disease Control has issued interim guidance on COVID-19 for businesses and employers which also is probably good advice for controlling the flu. The FEHBlog appreciates the CDC’s work as should we all.

Thursday Miscellany

David Ermer–CDC, Congress–

The FEHBlog visited a large radiology practice in Washington DC today for a routine test. The desk attendant asked the FEHBlog to fill out a brief novel coronavirus questionnaire, e.g., have you travelled to China recently etc. The FEHBlog wondered why they weren’t asking about the flu. It occurred to the FEHBlog that the practice’s employees are vaccinated against the flu but not the coronavirus. In any event, Stat News, a Boston Globe service offers an interview with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about efforts to avoid the novel coronavirus spreading in the U.S.

Healthcare Dive offers a simple side by side analysis of the three bipartisan surprise billing proposals under House of Representatives consideration. Thanks.

Health Payer Intelligence discusses four Social Determinant of Health barriers that health plans are seeking to remove in order to improve access to care. The publications deems those barriers to be

the lack of behavioral and mental healthcare, difficulty in obtaining transportation to healthcare appointments, cost barriers to medication adherence, and access to medical care sites—both physical and virtual.

In a bit of related good news, the CDC reports that

The percentage of all persons who were in families having problems paying medical bills in the past 12 months decreased 4.5 percentage points from 19.7% in 2011 to 15.2% in 2015 and then decreased 1.0 percentage point from 2015 through 2018 (14.2%).

Govexec.com discusses the bipartisan effort underway in Congress to correct some oversights in the new paid family leave law for federal employees. The bill is HR 5885. That program takes effect October 1, 2020.

Midweek update

David Ermer–Congress, Uncategorized–

Today the House Ways and Means Committee passed its surprise billing proposal (H.R. 5826) by voice vote. This bipartisan bill is strongly by hospital and other healthcare provider organizations. Enough said.

The Hill reports on the state of efforts in the Senate to lower prescription drug prices. The efforts currently are up in the air according to the Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Speaking of prescription drugs, Bioworld informs us that a

New analysis from Clarivate Analytics’ Cortellis Forecast Team predicts 11 medicines set to enter the market in 2020 will reach more than $1 billion in sales by 2024. Drugs for central nervous system indications and cancer dominate the list, almost universally accelerated in their development by orphan drug status or other designation intended to speed their path to market. Most medicines are for indications in markets already crowded with competitors, meaning they’ll face substantial pressures to differentiate from existing products.

The Office of National Coordinator of Health Information Technology discusses last week’s 10th annual ONC conference in a blog post.

We heard about standards for clinical data and financial transactions, technology for matching you with your (snail) mail, and how leading innovators are using application programming interfaces and the HL7® FHIR® standard to advance access. And yet, these technologies are not always working in sync. Several new and proposed policies from HHS – including ONC’s and CMS’s proposed interoperability rules and the Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement – are set to move the nation one step closer to making these technologies work for the patient.

It can’t happen too soon, in the FEHBlog’s view.

Also this week Healthgrades issued its best U.S. hospitals list. Healthgrades explains that its ratings are “based solely on clinical quality outcomes for 32 conditions and procedures. This premier distinction rewards hospitals that consistently exhibit exceptional, comprehensive quality care.” Although none of the D.C. located hospitals are included on the list, there are several in the D.C. suburbs of Maryland and Virginia.

Tuesday Tidbits

David Ermer–ACA, Congress, Uncategorized–

Earlier today, the House Education and Labor Committee advanced its bipartisan surprise billing proposal (H.R. 5800) today by a 32-13 vote. As the FEHBlog mentioned last Friday, the House Ways and Means Committee has released the legislative text of its bipartisan surprise billing proposal (H.R. 5826). While these proposals seek to protect consumers, which is a good thing, they also will impose new administrative burdens on the health system but won’t encourage out-of-network providers to go in-network. The FEHBlog anticipates that if bipartisanship on this issue continues in the House, then it’s likely that the House bill will wind up in the Senate’s bill to lower healthcare costs (S. 1895) and eventually become law.

The Association of Community Health Plans has proposed

a certification framework for digital health care pricing tools that makes quality and pricing information accessible, understandable and actionable for consumers. Outlined in a new issue brief, ACHP offers a core set of standards for meaningful price transparency and lays out a roadmap for independent certification of these tools.

Smart move given the federal government’s push for price transparency tools.

The Wuhan or novel coronavirus has an official name. Forbes reports that

Today, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced the official new name of nCoV2019 (2019 novel coronavirus), the strain of coronavirus that has infected over 43,000 people worldwide, resulting in 1017 deaths.

COVID-19, as the virus will now be known, was decided on by the WHO, with the organization giving a number of reasons as to why it was chosen.

Evidently the FEHBlog was violating WHO guidelines by referring to this disease as the Wuhan virus. Lo siento.

Healthcare Dive reports on Change Healthcare survey of healthcare provider and payer executives. The article describes differences of opinion between payer and provider executives. Here’s one —

Their positions on social determinants of health seem to reflect one of the widest splits. Providers appear to have the edge in terms of gathering information on substance abuse among patients (71.4% of provider executives versus 52.5% of payers). However, payers are much more effective at pinning down the income data of their enrollees (45.9% versus 26.5%). They also had a 10-point advantage in focusing on health literacy (39.3% vs. 29.6%), although the numbers suggest both factions did not consider it a major issue.