Posted in Access to healthcare, CDC, Disease Prevention, Education, Evidence-based Medicine, FDA, News From Washington, outcomes, outcomes measurement, Patient Choice, Patient Safety, Uncategorized, Unsettled Science

FDA to Study Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 | MedPage Today

The drug is currently approved for malaria and also for rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus, which is its main use in the U.S. It’s therefore available to be prescribed off-label, and some clinicians have already said they’re using it on COVID-19 patients. But neither Hahn nor other task force members addressed whether enough hydroxychloroquine is on hand to treat large numbers of coronavirus cases. Convalescent plasma is another treatment the FDA is considering for COVID-19, said FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn, MD.

Convalescent plasma and the immune globulin that it contains is another possible treatment the agency is considering, Hahn added. “FDA’s been working for some time on this,” he said. “If you’ve been exposed to coronavirus and you’re better — you don’t have the virus in your blood — we could collect the blood, concentrate that and have the ability, once it’s pathogen-free, to give that to other patients, and the immune response could potentially provide a benefit to patients. That’s another thing we’re looking at; over the next couple of weeks, we’ll have information and we’re really pushing hard to try to accelerate that.” Such treatments have been effective in Ebola, for example.

Source: FDA to Study Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 | MedPage Today

Posted in Access to healthcare, advance-pricing, Economic Issues, Health Insurance, Healthcare financing, Medicaid, Medical Costs, medical inflation, Medical Practice Models, Medicare, out-of-pocket costs, Patient Choice, Price Tansparency, Quality, Uncategorized

G. Keith Smith, M.D. — Health “Coverage” as a Distraction


I think it is good to be alert to any discussions that are “downstream of a flawed premise.” Let me explain.

When I hear, for instance, that the “flat tax” is preferable to the current income tax, I think to myself that this is a discussion of the knife versus the axe, a conversation far downstream of one addressing government spending or the very legitimacy of denying someone their earnings. After all, victims don’t generally care what the mugger does with their money. They just resent being mugged and no discussion about whether the mugger used a knife or a gun will likely provide any solace.

Similarly, I would argue that arguing for everyone to have health “coverage” is far downstream of the more original problem: the cost of healthcare. To provide “coverage” for everyone in the current climate of gross overcharging primarily serves the interests of those who employ the “what can I get away with” method of medical pricing.

The fierce push back against true price transparency by the cronies in the medical industry makes more sense in this context, as price honesty denies them access to everyone’s blank checkbook as the health cronies are well aware.

Supporters of government-guaranteed “coverage” object with the following arguments.

First, coverage is equated with healthcare. While millions of Canadians streaming across the border to secure their health needs could be used to refute the idea that coverage is synonymous with care, this disconnect has become more apparent in this country. Each passing day reveals Medicaid and Medicare “coverage” to be a “black mark,” an actual obstacle to obtaining care, as these government programs and their associated rationing through price controls and hassles are creating the lines the central planners intended. Physicians are either dropping out of these programs altogether or they are limiting their exposure to patients with this “coverage.”

Another objection points to the relief from financial devastation that having “coverage” represents. Keep in mind that not only are well over half of the bankruptcies in this country medically related, but almost three quarters of those filing for medical bankruptcy have insurance. This points powerfully to cost as the root cause of medical economic ills.

Acknowledging this is a slippery slope for the objector, however, for no economic system better provides for resource allocation than the market and the cronies and their government pals know this as well as anyone.

The market is the only source of price deflation with simultaneous improvement in quality. This powerful competitive mechanism has brought affordability to countless products and services in all industries and has begun to bring rationality to health care pricing as more physicians and facilities honestly post their prices for all to see.

Rather than focus on “coverage,” which allows the cronies to continue their financial feeding frenzy, we should remain unalterably focused on cost. The competition unleashed will result in a medical price deflation the likes of which will cause even the most skeptical objector to re-evaluate the role of “coverage” in the provision of payment for health care.

This is no prediction. This is exactly what is happening here in Oklahoma where so many health professionals have embraced the same market discipline every other industry must endure. The reasonable prices and high quality of care, have had such a wide appeal that Oklahoma City has evolved into a medical tourist destination for many patients far from here, while simultaneously bringing savings in the millions of dollars to those who actually pay for healthcare, locally.

This is my answer to another objection from those who claim the inapplicability of market competition to health care.  Whether the focus on “coverage” is a deliberate distraction by the crony propaganda machine or a well-meaning but misguided attempt to provide better access to care, we must keep our eyes on the “price transparency ball.” The Oklahoma market is already harshly judging those attempting to avoid this gaze and I believe this trend will continue as long as we identify, challenge and reject conclusions downstream of their flawed premises.

Posted in Access to healthcare, advance-pricing, Direct-Pay Medicine, Direct-Pay Practice Models, Entrepreneurs, Healthcare financing, Independent Physicians, Medical Costs, Medical Practice Models, out-of-pocket costs, Patient Choice, Patient Safety, Patient-centered Care, Policy Issues, Price Tansparency, Quality, Uncategorized

Transparent Pricing for Medical Emergencies | The Emergency Center

What the status quo apologists and the naysayers said was impossible, is a reality:

Emergency services with transparent pricing and NO surprise bills!

“Always staffed with board-certified physicians, ICU- and ER-trained nurses, X-ray technologists and helpful administrative personnel, The Emergency Center offers the same comprehensive emergency care and treatment as a hospital ER, without the wait. State-of-the-art CT, ultrasound, x-ray, and lab services on-site combined with compassionate care provides an unparalleled patient experience.

The Emergency Center and OnDEC Health have partnered together to offer direct contracts for emergency room visits, urgent and primary care, plus telemedicine. OnDEC Health’s innovative direct contracting opportunities save employers significant dollars on ER claims, while offering their members 24/7, no-wait access to premier concierge style freestanding ERs and more.”

Peyton Vooletich

Director of Business Development

https://www.theemergencycenter.com/fort-worth-er/

Posted in Access to healthcare, advance-pricing, Direct-Pay Medicine, Direct-Pay Practice Models, Entrepreneurs, Healthcare financing, Independent Physicians, Medical Costs, Medical Practice Models, out-of-pocket costs, Patient Choice, Patient Safety, Patient-centered Care, Policy Issues, Price Tansparency, Quality, Uncategorized

Transparent Pricing for Medical Emergencies | The Emergency Center

What the status quo apologists and the naysayers said was impossible, is a reality:

Emergency services with transparent pricing and NO surprise bills!

“Always staffed with board-certified physicians, ICU- and ER-trained nurses, X-ray technologists and helpful administrative personnel, The Emergency Center offers the same comprehensive emergency care and treatment as a hospital ER, without the wait. State-of-the-art CT, ultrasound, x-ray, and lab services on-site combined with compassionate care provides an unparalleled patient experience.

The Emergency Center and OnDEC Health have partnered together to offer direct contracts for emergency room visits, urgent and primary care, plus telemedicine. OnDEC Health’s innovative direct contracting opportunities save employers significant dollars on ER claims, while offering their members 24/7, no-wait access to premier concierge style freestanding ERs and more.”

Peyton Vooletich

Director of Business Development

https://www.theemergencycenter.com/fort-worth-er/

Posted in Access to healthcare, Direct-Pay Medicine, Direct-Pay Practice Models, Economic Issues, Health Insurance, Healthcare financing, Independent Physicians, Medical Costs, Patient Choice, Price Tansparency, Self-Insured Companies, Uncategorized

Jay Kempton: An Unorthodox Benefits Solution – Healthcare Americana

Healthcare Americana, Chris is joined by Jay Kempton of The Kempton Group and co-founder of the Free Market Medical Association (FMMA).

Chris and Jay discuss novel ways of implementing employee benefits, why there are barriers to change, and the upcoming FMMA conference.

https://healthcareamericana.com/episode/jay-kempton-an-unorthodox-benefits-solution/

Posted in Access to healthcare, advance-pricing, Consumer-Driven Health Care, Direct-Pay Medicine, Direct-Pay Practice Models, Doctor-Patient Relationship, Economic Issues, Health Insurance, Healthcare financing, Independent Physicians, Medical Costs, Medical Practice Models, out-of-pocket costs, Patient Choice, Patient Compliance, Patient Safety, Patient-centered Care, Policy Issues, primary care, The Quadruple Aim, Third-Party Free Practices, Uncategorized, Wait times to see a doctor

More Patients Turning to ‘Direct Primary Care’ | Medscape

Christine Lehmann, MA

February 11, 2020

Having quick access to a primary care doctor 24/7 is very appealing to Mick Lowderman, 56, who is married with two children, ages 10 and 8. He pays a monthly membership fee to AtlasMD, a direct primary care practice in Wichita, KS.

Primary care is built on the long-term relationship between clinicians and patients. A 10- to 15-minute patient visit doesn’t support that relationship, Sullivan says.

When Kevin Boyd, 64, fell on his stairs in Wichita and broke three ribs, he didn’t go the emergency room. Instead, he called Umbehr, who told him to come to his office. He referred Boyd nearby for an X-ray and dispensed pain medications at his office. The total cost was $70.

In contrast, the first time Boyd fell and broke his ribs, he had Blue Cross Blue Shield and drove himself to the ER, where he saw the ER doctor, a radiologist for an MRI, and got shots for his pain. The total bill was $14,000, and he paid $2,600.

“I don’t put off care the way I used to because of the money I save,” says Boyd, who joined AtlasMD in 2015.
For his monthly membership fee of $75, Boyd gets several benefits, including unlimited 24/7 access to Umbehr by text, email, or phone, extended same- or next-day office visits, and free diagnostic tests and office procedures, such as EKGs, DEXA scans, and body fat analysis. If Boyd gets really sick and needs a house call, or if he needs a phone consult when traveling, those are also included in the fee.
Posted in Access to healthcare, Doctor-Patient Relationship, Healthcare financing, Medical Practice Models, Organizational structure, outcomes measurement, Patient Choice, Patient Safety, Policy Issues, Protocols, Uncategorized

How Chaos at Chain Pharmacies Is Putting Patients at Risk | New York Times

They struggle to fill prescriptions, give flu shots, tend the drive-through, answer phones, work the register, counsel patients and call doctors and insurance companies, they said — all the while racing to meet corporate performance metrics that they characterized as unreasonable and unsafe in an industry squeezed to do more with less.

“I am a danger to the public working for CVS,” one pharmacist wrote in an anonymous letter to the Texas State Board of Pharmacy in April.

“The amount of busywork we must do while verifying prescriptions is absolutely dangerous,” another wrote to the Pennsylvania board in February. “Mistakes are going to be made and the patients are going to be the ones suffering.”

Posted in Access to healthcare, Crony Capitalism, Economic Issues, Healthcare financing, Influence peddling, Medical Costs, Medical Practice Models, Organizational structure, Patient Choice, Patient Safety, Patient-centered Care, Policy Issues, Quality, Uncategorized

Surgeon Sues Orlando Health Over ‘Forced’ Referrals | Medpage Today

Jay Wolfson, PhD, a health policy expert at the University of South Florida in Tampa, said this case “goes to the heart of physician clinical autonomy.”

Hospitals use various methods to ensure that physicians refer patients to its own entities, including non-compete agreements that prohibit doctors from practicing medicine in a set geographic area around their place of employment during their contract, or even after termination.

A 2018 survey of 2,000 doctors in five states found that 45% of primary care physicians were bound by this sort of non-compete agreement, though hospital-based physicians are less likely to be restricted by these clauses.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/84571