User login
It’s official: COVID-19 was bad for the health care business
COVID-19 took a huge cut of clinicians’ business in March and April
In the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, health care professionals experienced sharp drops in both utilization and revenue, according to an analysis of the nation’s largest collection of private health care claims data.
For the months of March and April 2020, use of medical professional services dropped by 65% and 68%, respectively, compared with last year, and estimated revenue fell by 45% and 48%, FAIR Health, a nonprofit organization that manages a database of 31 billion claim records, said in a new report.
For the Northeast states – the epicenter of the pandemic in March and April – patient volume was down by 60% in March and 80% in April, while revenue fell by 55% in March and 79% in April, the organization said.
For this analysis, “a professional service was defined as any service provided by an individual (e.g., physician, nurse, nurse practitioner, physician assistant) instead of being billed by a facility,” FAIR Health noted. Figures for 2019 were adjusted using the Consumer Price Index.
The size of the pandemic-related decreases in utilization and income varied by specialty. Of the seven specialties included in the study, oral surgery was hit the hardest, followed by gastroenterology, cardiology, orthopedics, dermatology, adult primary care, and pediatric primary care, FAIR Health said.
After experiencing a 2% drop in utilization this January and an increase of 4% in February, compared with 2019, gastroenterology saw corresponding drops of 73% in March and 77% in April. Estimated revenue for the specialty was flat in January and rose by 10% in February, but plummeted by 75% in March and 80% in April, the FAIR Health data show.
In cardiology, patient volume from 2019 to 2020 looked like this: Down by 4% in January, up 5% in February, down by 62% in March, and down by 71% in April. The earnings numbers tell a similar story: Down by 2% in January, up by 15% in February, down by 57% in March, and down by 73% in April, the organization reported.
Dermatology did the best among the non–primary care specialties, but that was just a relative success. Utilization still dropped by 62% and 68% in March and April of 2020, compared with last year, and revenue declined by 50% in March and 59% in April, FAIR Health said.
For adult primary care, the utilization numbers were similar, but revenue took a somewhat smaller hit. Patient volume from 2019 to 2020 was fairly steady in January and February, then nosedived in March (down 60%) and April (down 68%). Earnings were up initially, rising 1% in January and 2% in February, but fell 47% in March and 54% in April, FAIR Health said.
Pediatric primary care, it appears, may have been buoyed somewhat by its younger patients. The specialty as a whole saw utilization tumble by 52% in March and 58% in April, but revenue dropped by just 32% and 35%, respectively, according to the report.
A little extra data diving showed that the figures for preventive care visits for patients aged 0-4 years in March and April were –2% and 0% for volume and –2% and 1% for revenue. Meanwhile, the volume of immunizations only dropped by 14% and 10% and vaccine-related revenue slipped by just 7% and 2%, FAIR Health noted.
“Across many specialties from January to April 2020, office or other outpatient [evaluation and management] visits became more common relative to other procedures. ... This may have been due in part to the fact that many of these E&M services could be rendered via telehealth,” FAIR Health said.
Telehealth, however, was no panacea, the report explained: “Even when medical practices have continued to function via telehealth, many have experienced lower reimbursements for telehealth visits than for in-person visits and more time educating patients on how to use the technology.”
COVID-19 took a huge cut of clinicians’ business in March and April
COVID-19 took a huge cut of clinicians’ business in March and April
In the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, health care professionals experienced sharp drops in both utilization and revenue, according to an analysis of the nation’s largest collection of private health care claims data.
For the months of March and April 2020, use of medical professional services dropped by 65% and 68%, respectively, compared with last year, and estimated revenue fell by 45% and 48%, FAIR Health, a nonprofit organization that manages a database of 31 billion claim records, said in a new report.
For the Northeast states – the epicenter of the pandemic in March and April – patient volume was down by 60% in March and 80% in April, while revenue fell by 55% in March and 79% in April, the organization said.
For this analysis, “a professional service was defined as any service provided by an individual (e.g., physician, nurse, nurse practitioner, physician assistant) instead of being billed by a facility,” FAIR Health noted. Figures for 2019 were adjusted using the Consumer Price Index.
The size of the pandemic-related decreases in utilization and income varied by specialty. Of the seven specialties included in the study, oral surgery was hit the hardest, followed by gastroenterology, cardiology, orthopedics, dermatology, adult primary care, and pediatric primary care, FAIR Health said.
After experiencing a 2% drop in utilization this January and an increase of 4% in February, compared with 2019, gastroenterology saw corresponding drops of 73% in March and 77% in April. Estimated revenue for the specialty was flat in January and rose by 10% in February, but plummeted by 75% in March and 80% in April, the FAIR Health data show.
In cardiology, patient volume from 2019 to 2020 looked like this: Down by 4% in January, up 5% in February, down by 62% in March, and down by 71% in April. The earnings numbers tell a similar story: Down by 2% in January, up by 15% in February, down by 57% in March, and down by 73% in April, the organization reported.
Dermatology did the best among the non–primary care specialties, but that was just a relative success. Utilization still dropped by 62% and 68% in March and April of 2020, compared with last year, and revenue declined by 50% in March and 59% in April, FAIR Health said.
For adult primary care, the utilization numbers were similar, but revenue took a somewhat smaller hit. Patient volume from 2019 to 2020 was fairly steady in January and February, then nosedived in March (down 60%) and April (down 68%). Earnings were up initially, rising 1% in January and 2% in February, but fell 47% in March and 54% in April, FAIR Health said.
Pediatric primary care, it appears, may have been buoyed somewhat by its younger patients. The specialty as a whole saw utilization tumble by 52% in March and 58% in April, but revenue dropped by just 32% and 35%, respectively, according to the report.
A little extra data diving showed that the figures for preventive care visits for patients aged 0-4 years in March and April were –2% and 0% for volume and –2% and 1% for revenue. Meanwhile, the volume of immunizations only dropped by 14% and 10% and vaccine-related revenue slipped by just 7% and 2%, FAIR Health noted.
“Across many specialties from January to April 2020, office or other outpatient [evaluation and management] visits became more common relative to other procedures. ... This may have been due in part to the fact that many of these E&M services could be rendered via telehealth,” FAIR Health said.
Telehealth, however, was no panacea, the report explained: “Even when medical practices have continued to function via telehealth, many have experienced lower reimbursements for telehealth visits than for in-person visits and more time educating patients on how to use the technology.”
In the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, health care professionals experienced sharp drops in both utilization and revenue, according to an analysis of the nation’s largest collection of private health care claims data.
For the months of March and April 2020, use of medical professional services dropped by 65% and 68%, respectively, compared with last year, and estimated revenue fell by 45% and 48%, FAIR Health, a nonprofit organization that manages a database of 31 billion claim records, said in a new report.
For the Northeast states – the epicenter of the pandemic in March and April – patient volume was down by 60% in March and 80% in April, while revenue fell by 55% in March and 79% in April, the organization said.
For this analysis, “a professional service was defined as any service provided by an individual (e.g., physician, nurse, nurse practitioner, physician assistant) instead of being billed by a facility,” FAIR Health noted. Figures for 2019 were adjusted using the Consumer Price Index.
The size of the pandemic-related decreases in utilization and income varied by specialty. Of the seven specialties included in the study, oral surgery was hit the hardest, followed by gastroenterology, cardiology, orthopedics, dermatology, adult primary care, and pediatric primary care, FAIR Health said.
After experiencing a 2% drop in utilization this January and an increase of 4% in February, compared with 2019, gastroenterology saw corresponding drops of 73% in March and 77% in April. Estimated revenue for the specialty was flat in January and rose by 10% in February, but plummeted by 75% in March and 80% in April, the FAIR Health data show.
In cardiology, patient volume from 2019 to 2020 looked like this: Down by 4% in January, up 5% in February, down by 62% in March, and down by 71% in April. The earnings numbers tell a similar story: Down by 2% in January, up by 15% in February, down by 57% in March, and down by 73% in April, the organization reported.
Dermatology did the best among the non–primary care specialties, but that was just a relative success. Utilization still dropped by 62% and 68% in March and April of 2020, compared with last year, and revenue declined by 50% in March and 59% in April, FAIR Health said.
For adult primary care, the utilization numbers were similar, but revenue took a somewhat smaller hit. Patient volume from 2019 to 2020 was fairly steady in January and February, then nosedived in March (down 60%) and April (down 68%). Earnings were up initially, rising 1% in January and 2% in February, but fell 47% in March and 54% in April, FAIR Health said.
Pediatric primary care, it appears, may have been buoyed somewhat by its younger patients. The specialty as a whole saw utilization tumble by 52% in March and 58% in April, but revenue dropped by just 32% and 35%, respectively, according to the report.
A little extra data diving showed that the figures for preventive care visits for patients aged 0-4 years in March and April were –2% and 0% for volume and –2% and 1% for revenue. Meanwhile, the volume of immunizations only dropped by 14% and 10% and vaccine-related revenue slipped by just 7% and 2%, FAIR Health noted.
“Across many specialties from January to April 2020, office or other outpatient [evaluation and management] visits became more common relative to other procedures. ... This may have been due in part to the fact that many of these E&M services could be rendered via telehealth,” FAIR Health said.
Telehealth, however, was no panacea, the report explained: “Even when medical practices have continued to function via telehealth, many have experienced lower reimbursements for telehealth visits than for in-person visits and more time educating patients on how to use the technology.”
Fighting COVID and police brutality, medical teams take to streets to treat protesters
Amid clouds of choking tear gas, booming flash-bang grenades and other “riot control agents,” volunteer medics plunged into street protests over the past weeks to help the injured – sometimes rushing to the front lines as soon as their hospital shifts ended.
Known as “street medics,” these unorthodox teams of nursing students, veterinarians, doctors, trauma surgeons, security guards, ski patrollers, nurses, wilderness EMTs, and off-the-clock ambulance workers poured water – not milk – into the eyes of tear-gassed protesters. They stanched bleeding wounds and plucked disoriented teenagers from clouds of gas, entering dangerous corners where on-duty emergency health responders may fear to go.
So donning cloth masks to protect against the virus – plus helmets, makeshift shields and other gear to guard against rubber bullets, projectiles and tear gas – the volunteer medics organized themselves into a web of first responders to care for people on the streets. They showed up early, set up first-aid stations, established transportation networks and covered their arms, helmets and backpacks with crosses made of red duct tape, to signify that they were medics. Some stayed late into the night past curfews until every protester had left.
Iris Butler, a 21-year-old certified nursing assistant who works in a nursing home, decided to offer her skills after seeing a man injured by a rubber bullet on her first night at the Denver protests. She showed up as a medic every night thereafter. She didn’t see it as a choice.
“I am working full time and basically being at the protest after getting straight off of work,” said Butler, who is black. That’s tiring, she added, but so is being a black woman in America.
After going out as a medic on her own, she soon met other volunteers. Together they used text-message chains to organize their efforts. One night, she responded to a man who had been shot with a rubber bullet in the chest; she said his torso had turned blue and purple from the impact. She also provided aid after a shooting near the protest left someone in critical condition.
“It’s hard, but bills need to be paid and justice needs to be served,” she said.
The street medic movement traces its roots, in part, to the 1960s protests, as well as the American Indian Movement and the Black Panther Party. Denver Action Medic Network offers a 20-hour training course that prepares them to treat patients in conflicts with police and large crowds; a four-hour session is offered to medical professionals as “bridge” training.
Since the coronavirus pandemic began, the Denver Action Medic Network has added new training guidelines: Don’t go to protests if sick or in contact with those who are infected; wear a mask; give people lots of space and use hand sanitizer. Jordan Garcia, a 39-year-old medic for over 20 years who works with the network of veteran street medics, said they also warn medics about the increased risk of transmission because of protesters coughing from tear gas, and urge them to get tested for the virus after the protests.
The number of volunteer medics swelled after George Floyd’s May 25 killing in Minneapolis. In Denver alone, at least 40 people reached out to the Denver Action Medic Network for training.
On June 3, Dr. Rupa Marya, an associate professor of medicine at the University of California,San Francisco, and the co-founder of the Do No Harm Coalition, which runs street medic training in the Bay Area, hosted a national webinar attended by over 3,000 medical professionals to provide the bridge training to be a street medic. In her online bio, Marya describes the coalition as “an organization of over 450 health workers committed to structural change” in addressing health problems.
“When we see suffering, that’s where we go,” Marya said. “And right now that suffering is happening on the streets.”
In the recent Denver protests, street medics responded to major head, face and eye injuries among protesters from what are sometimes described as “kinetic impact projectiles” or “less-than-lethal” bullets shot at protesters, along with tear-gas and flash-bang stun grenade canisters that either hit them or exploded in their faces.
Garcia, who by day works for an immigrant rights nonprofit, said that these weapons are not designed to be shot directly at people.
“We’re seeing police use these less-lethal weapons in lethal ways, and that is pretty upsetting,” Garcia said about the recent protests.
Denver police Chief Paul Pazen promised to make changes, including banning chokeholds and requiring SWAT teams to turn on their body cameras. Last week, a federal judge also issued a temporary injunction to stop Denver police from using tear gas and other less-than-lethal weapons in response to a class action lawsuit, in which a medic stated he was shot multiple times by police with pepper balls while treating patients. (Last week in North Carolina police were recorded destroying medic stations.)
Denver street medic Kevin Connell, a 30-year-old emergency room nurse, said he was hit with pepper balls in the back of his medic vest – which was clearly marked by red crosses – while treating a patient. He showed up to the Denver protests every night he did not have to work, he said, wearing a Kevlar medic vest, protective goggles and a homemade gas mask fashioned from a water bottle. As a member of the Denver Action Medic Network, Connell also served at the Standing Rock protests in North Dakota in a dispute over the building of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
“I mean, as bad as it sounds, it was only tear gas, pepper balls and rubber bullets that were being fired on us,” Connell said of his recent experience in Denver. “When I was at Standing Rock, they were using high-powered water hoses even when it was, like, freezing cold. … So I think the police here had a little bit more restraint.”
Still, first-time street medic Aj Mossman, a 31-year-old Denver emergency medical technician studying for nursing school, was shocked to be tear-gassed and struck in the back of the leg with a flash grenade while treating a protester on May 30. Mossman still has a large leg bruise.
The following night, Mossman, who uses the pronoun they, brought more protective gear, but said they are still having difficulty processing what felt like a war zone.
“I thought I understood what my black friends went through. I thought I understood what the black community went through,” said Mossman, who is white. “But I had absolutely no idea how violent the police were and how little they cared about who they hurt.”
For Butler, serving as a medic with others from various walks of life was inspiring. “They’re also out there to protect black and brown bodies. And that’s amazing,” she said. “That’s just a beautiful sight.”
This article originally appeared on Kaiser Health News, which is a nonprofit national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
Amid clouds of choking tear gas, booming flash-bang grenades and other “riot control agents,” volunteer medics plunged into street protests over the past weeks to help the injured – sometimes rushing to the front lines as soon as their hospital shifts ended.
Known as “street medics,” these unorthodox teams of nursing students, veterinarians, doctors, trauma surgeons, security guards, ski patrollers, nurses, wilderness EMTs, and off-the-clock ambulance workers poured water – not milk – into the eyes of tear-gassed protesters. They stanched bleeding wounds and plucked disoriented teenagers from clouds of gas, entering dangerous corners where on-duty emergency health responders may fear to go.
So donning cloth masks to protect against the virus – plus helmets, makeshift shields and other gear to guard against rubber bullets, projectiles and tear gas – the volunteer medics organized themselves into a web of first responders to care for people on the streets. They showed up early, set up first-aid stations, established transportation networks and covered their arms, helmets and backpacks with crosses made of red duct tape, to signify that they were medics. Some stayed late into the night past curfews until every protester had left.
Iris Butler, a 21-year-old certified nursing assistant who works in a nursing home, decided to offer her skills after seeing a man injured by a rubber bullet on her first night at the Denver protests. She showed up as a medic every night thereafter. She didn’t see it as a choice.
“I am working full time and basically being at the protest after getting straight off of work,” said Butler, who is black. That’s tiring, she added, but so is being a black woman in America.
After going out as a medic on her own, she soon met other volunteers. Together they used text-message chains to organize their efforts. One night, she responded to a man who had been shot with a rubber bullet in the chest; she said his torso had turned blue and purple from the impact. She also provided aid after a shooting near the protest left someone in critical condition.
“It’s hard, but bills need to be paid and justice needs to be served,” she said.
The street medic movement traces its roots, in part, to the 1960s protests, as well as the American Indian Movement and the Black Panther Party. Denver Action Medic Network offers a 20-hour training course that prepares them to treat patients in conflicts with police and large crowds; a four-hour session is offered to medical professionals as “bridge” training.
Since the coronavirus pandemic began, the Denver Action Medic Network has added new training guidelines: Don’t go to protests if sick or in contact with those who are infected; wear a mask; give people lots of space and use hand sanitizer. Jordan Garcia, a 39-year-old medic for over 20 years who works with the network of veteran street medics, said they also warn medics about the increased risk of transmission because of protesters coughing from tear gas, and urge them to get tested for the virus after the protests.
The number of volunteer medics swelled after George Floyd’s May 25 killing in Minneapolis. In Denver alone, at least 40 people reached out to the Denver Action Medic Network for training.
On June 3, Dr. Rupa Marya, an associate professor of medicine at the University of California,San Francisco, and the co-founder of the Do No Harm Coalition, which runs street medic training in the Bay Area, hosted a national webinar attended by over 3,000 medical professionals to provide the bridge training to be a street medic. In her online bio, Marya describes the coalition as “an organization of over 450 health workers committed to structural change” in addressing health problems.
“When we see suffering, that’s where we go,” Marya said. “And right now that suffering is happening on the streets.”
In the recent Denver protests, street medics responded to major head, face and eye injuries among protesters from what are sometimes described as “kinetic impact projectiles” or “less-than-lethal” bullets shot at protesters, along with tear-gas and flash-bang stun grenade canisters that either hit them or exploded in their faces.
Garcia, who by day works for an immigrant rights nonprofit, said that these weapons are not designed to be shot directly at people.
“We’re seeing police use these less-lethal weapons in lethal ways, and that is pretty upsetting,” Garcia said about the recent protests.
Denver police Chief Paul Pazen promised to make changes, including banning chokeholds and requiring SWAT teams to turn on their body cameras. Last week, a federal judge also issued a temporary injunction to stop Denver police from using tear gas and other less-than-lethal weapons in response to a class action lawsuit, in which a medic stated he was shot multiple times by police with pepper balls while treating patients. (Last week in North Carolina police were recorded destroying medic stations.)
Denver street medic Kevin Connell, a 30-year-old emergency room nurse, said he was hit with pepper balls in the back of his medic vest – which was clearly marked by red crosses – while treating a patient. He showed up to the Denver protests every night he did not have to work, he said, wearing a Kevlar medic vest, protective goggles and a homemade gas mask fashioned from a water bottle. As a member of the Denver Action Medic Network, Connell also served at the Standing Rock protests in North Dakota in a dispute over the building of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
“I mean, as bad as it sounds, it was only tear gas, pepper balls and rubber bullets that were being fired on us,” Connell said of his recent experience in Denver. “When I was at Standing Rock, they were using high-powered water hoses even when it was, like, freezing cold. … So I think the police here had a little bit more restraint.”
Still, first-time street medic Aj Mossman, a 31-year-old Denver emergency medical technician studying for nursing school, was shocked to be tear-gassed and struck in the back of the leg with a flash grenade while treating a protester on May 30. Mossman still has a large leg bruise.
The following night, Mossman, who uses the pronoun they, brought more protective gear, but said they are still having difficulty processing what felt like a war zone.
“I thought I understood what my black friends went through. I thought I understood what the black community went through,” said Mossman, who is white. “But I had absolutely no idea how violent the police were and how little they cared about who they hurt.”
For Butler, serving as a medic with others from various walks of life was inspiring. “They’re also out there to protect black and brown bodies. And that’s amazing,” she said. “That’s just a beautiful sight.”
This article originally appeared on Kaiser Health News, which is a nonprofit national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
Amid clouds of choking tear gas, booming flash-bang grenades and other “riot control agents,” volunteer medics plunged into street protests over the past weeks to help the injured – sometimes rushing to the front lines as soon as their hospital shifts ended.
Known as “street medics,” these unorthodox teams of nursing students, veterinarians, doctors, trauma surgeons, security guards, ski patrollers, nurses, wilderness EMTs, and off-the-clock ambulance workers poured water – not milk – into the eyes of tear-gassed protesters. They stanched bleeding wounds and plucked disoriented teenagers from clouds of gas, entering dangerous corners where on-duty emergency health responders may fear to go.
So donning cloth masks to protect against the virus – plus helmets, makeshift shields and other gear to guard against rubber bullets, projectiles and tear gas – the volunteer medics organized themselves into a web of first responders to care for people on the streets. They showed up early, set up first-aid stations, established transportation networks and covered their arms, helmets and backpacks with crosses made of red duct tape, to signify that they were medics. Some stayed late into the night past curfews until every protester had left.
Iris Butler, a 21-year-old certified nursing assistant who works in a nursing home, decided to offer her skills after seeing a man injured by a rubber bullet on her first night at the Denver protests. She showed up as a medic every night thereafter. She didn’t see it as a choice.
“I am working full time and basically being at the protest after getting straight off of work,” said Butler, who is black. That’s tiring, she added, but so is being a black woman in America.
After going out as a medic on her own, she soon met other volunteers. Together they used text-message chains to organize their efforts. One night, she responded to a man who had been shot with a rubber bullet in the chest; she said his torso had turned blue and purple from the impact. She also provided aid after a shooting near the protest left someone in critical condition.
“It’s hard, but bills need to be paid and justice needs to be served,” she said.
The street medic movement traces its roots, in part, to the 1960s protests, as well as the American Indian Movement and the Black Panther Party. Denver Action Medic Network offers a 20-hour training course that prepares them to treat patients in conflicts with police and large crowds; a four-hour session is offered to medical professionals as “bridge” training.
Since the coronavirus pandemic began, the Denver Action Medic Network has added new training guidelines: Don’t go to protests if sick or in contact with those who are infected; wear a mask; give people lots of space and use hand sanitizer. Jordan Garcia, a 39-year-old medic for over 20 years who works with the network of veteran street medics, said they also warn medics about the increased risk of transmission because of protesters coughing from tear gas, and urge them to get tested for the virus after the protests.
The number of volunteer medics swelled after George Floyd’s May 25 killing in Minneapolis. In Denver alone, at least 40 people reached out to the Denver Action Medic Network for training.
On June 3, Dr. Rupa Marya, an associate professor of medicine at the University of California,San Francisco, and the co-founder of the Do No Harm Coalition, which runs street medic training in the Bay Area, hosted a national webinar attended by over 3,000 medical professionals to provide the bridge training to be a street medic. In her online bio, Marya describes the coalition as “an organization of over 450 health workers committed to structural change” in addressing health problems.
“When we see suffering, that’s where we go,” Marya said. “And right now that suffering is happening on the streets.”
In the recent Denver protests, street medics responded to major head, face and eye injuries among protesters from what are sometimes described as “kinetic impact projectiles” or “less-than-lethal” bullets shot at protesters, along with tear-gas and flash-bang stun grenade canisters that either hit them or exploded in their faces.
Garcia, who by day works for an immigrant rights nonprofit, said that these weapons are not designed to be shot directly at people.
“We’re seeing police use these less-lethal weapons in lethal ways, and that is pretty upsetting,” Garcia said about the recent protests.
Denver police Chief Paul Pazen promised to make changes, including banning chokeholds and requiring SWAT teams to turn on their body cameras. Last week, a federal judge also issued a temporary injunction to stop Denver police from using tear gas and other less-than-lethal weapons in response to a class action lawsuit, in which a medic stated he was shot multiple times by police with pepper balls while treating patients. (Last week in North Carolina police were recorded destroying medic stations.)
Denver street medic Kevin Connell, a 30-year-old emergency room nurse, said he was hit with pepper balls in the back of his medic vest – which was clearly marked by red crosses – while treating a patient. He showed up to the Denver protests every night he did not have to work, he said, wearing a Kevlar medic vest, protective goggles and a homemade gas mask fashioned from a water bottle. As a member of the Denver Action Medic Network, Connell also served at the Standing Rock protests in North Dakota in a dispute over the building of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
“I mean, as bad as it sounds, it was only tear gas, pepper balls and rubber bullets that were being fired on us,” Connell said of his recent experience in Denver. “When I was at Standing Rock, they were using high-powered water hoses even when it was, like, freezing cold. … So I think the police here had a little bit more restraint.”
Still, first-time street medic Aj Mossman, a 31-year-old Denver emergency medical technician studying for nursing school, was shocked to be tear-gassed and struck in the back of the leg with a flash grenade while treating a protester on May 30. Mossman still has a large leg bruise.
The following night, Mossman, who uses the pronoun they, brought more protective gear, but said they are still having difficulty processing what felt like a war zone.
“I thought I understood what my black friends went through. I thought I understood what the black community went through,” said Mossman, who is white. “But I had absolutely no idea how violent the police were and how little they cared about who they hurt.”
For Butler, serving as a medic with others from various walks of life was inspiring. “They’re also out there to protect black and brown bodies. And that’s amazing,” she said. “That’s just a beautiful sight.”
This article originally appeared on Kaiser Health News, which is a nonprofit national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
Money worries during COVID-19? Six tips to keep your finances afloat
Even before Atlanta had an official shelter-in-place order, patients at the private plastic surgery practice of Nicholas Jones, MD, began canceling and rescheduled planned procedures.
After a few weeks, Dr. Jones, aged 40 years, stopped seeing patients entirely, but as a self-employed independent contractor, that means he’d lost most of his income. Dr. Jones still makes some money via a wound care job at a local nursing home, but he’s concerned that job may also be eliminated.
“I’m not hurting yet,” he said. “But I’m preparing for the worst possible scenario.”
In preparation, he and his fiancé have cut back on extraneous expenses like Uber Eats, magazine subscriptions, and streaming music services. Even though he has a 6-month emergency fund, Jones has reached out to utility companies, mortgage lenders, and student loan servicers to find out about any programs they offer to people who’ve suffered financially from the coronavirus crisis.
He’s also considered traveling to one of the COVID-19 epicenters – he has family in New Orleans and Chicago – to work in a hospital there. Jones has trauma experience and is double-boarded in general and plastic surgery.
“I could provide relief to those in need and also float through this troubled time with some financial relief,” he said.
Whereas much of the world’s attention has been on physicians who are on the front line and working around the clock in hospitals to help COVID-19 patients, thousands of other physicians are experiencing the opposite phenomenon – a slowdown or even stoppage of work (and income) altogether.
Even among those practices that remain open, the number of patients has declined as people avoid going to the office unless they absolutely have to.
At the same time, doctors in two-income households may have a spouse experiencing a job loss or income decline. Nearly 10 million Americans applied for unemployment benefits in the last 2 weeks of March, the largest number on record.
Still, while there’s uncertainty around how long the coronavirus crisis will last, experts agree that at some point America will return to a “new normal” and business operations will begin to reopen. For physicians experiencing a reduction in income who, like Jones, have an emergency fund with a few months’ worth of expenses, now’s the time to tap into it. (Or if you still have income, now’s the time to focus on growing that emergency fund to give yourself an even bigger safety net.)
If you’re among the more than half of Americans with less than 6 months of expenses saved for a rainy day, here’s how to stay afloat in the near term:
Cut back on expenses
Some household spending has naturally tapered off for many families because social distancing restrictions reduce spending on eating out, travel, and other leisure activities. But this is also an opportunity to look for other ways to reduce spending. Look through your credit card bills to see whether there are recurring payments you can cut, such as a payment to a gym that’s temporarily closed or a monthly subscription box that you don’t need.
Some gyms are not allowing membership termination right now, but it pays to ask. If a service you’re not using won’t facilitate the cancellation, call your credit card company to dispute and stop the charges, and report them to the Better Business Bureau.
You should also stop contributing to nonemergency savings accounts such as your retirement fund or your children’s college funds.
“A lot of people are hesitant to stop their automatic savings if they’ve been maxing out their 401(k) contribution or 529 accounts,” says Andrew Musbach, a certified financial planner and cofounder of MD Wealth Management in Chelsea, Mich. “But if you’re thinking long term, the reality is that missing a couple of months won’t make or break a plan. Cutting back on the amount you’re saving in the short term will increase your cash flow and is a good way to make ends meet.”
Take advantage of regulatory changes
Although many physicians won’t qualify for direct payments via the Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act (the $1,200 payments to individuals start phasing out once income hits $75,000 and disappear entirely for those making more than $99,000), there are other provisions in the stimulus bill that may help physicians. The bill, for example, boosts state unemployment payments by $600 per week for the next 4 months, meaning qualified workers could receive an average of nearly $1,000 per week, depending on their state, and there are new provisions providing unemployment payments to self-employed and contract workers.
The CARES Act also includes a break for federal student loan holders. Under that rule, you can skip your payments through September without incurring additional interest. Physicians in the loan forgiveness program will still get credit for payments skipped during this program.
Separately, the IRS has extended the tax deadline from April 15 to July 15, which means not only do you not have to file your taxes until then, you also don’t have to pay any taxes you owe until mid-July. The deadline for first quarter estimated tax payments has also moved to July 15. (If you’re expecting a refund, however, you should file ASAP, since the IRS will typically issue those within a few weeks of receiving your returns.)
Tap your home equity – if you’re planning to stay put
If you have good credit and still have some income, you might consider refinancing your home mortgage or opening a home equity line of credit. Interest rates have fallen recently amid economic turbulence, so if you haven’t refinanced recently you may be able to shave your monthly payment. If you need cash, a cash-out refinance, home equity line of credit, or a reverse mortgage (available if you’re over age 62) are among the lowest-cost ways to borrow.
“With interest rates so low, there can be a lot of benefit to refinancing and leveraging your house, especially if you’re planning to stay there,” says Jamie Hopkins, a director at the Carson Group. “The challenge is if you’re planning to move in the next few years. There’s a real risk that the housing market could go down in the next couple of years, and if you’re planning to sell, there’s a risk that you might not get back what you borrowed.”
Communicate early with your bank or landlord
If you don’t have the income to refinance, and you think you’re going to run into trouble making your housing payment, you should let your bank or landlord know as soon as possible. The CARES Act allows homeowners with federally backed mortgages to obtain a 180-day postponement of mortgage payments because of COVID-19 financial hardship, with the potential to extend for another 180 days. It also bans eviction by landlords with federal mortgages for 120 days.
Even if you don’t have a federally backed mortgage, you should still get in touch with your lender. Many mortgage servicers have their own forbearance programs for borrowers who can prove a temporary financial hardship. (Some banks are also waiving fees on early withdrawals on CDs and giving cardholders a reprieve on credit card payments.) Commercial landlords are also working with struggling tenants, so you may also be able to get some relief on your office lease as well.
“All of the lenders are setting up helplines for people affected,” says Amy Guerich, a partner with Stepp & Rothwell, a Kansas City–based financial planning firm. “The best thing you can do is contact them right away if you think that you’re going to have a problem vs. just letting the bills go.”
Consider retirement account withdrawals
Standard personal finance advice holds that you should exhaust all other options before pulling money out of your retirement account because of the high penalties for early withdrawals and because money removed from retirement accounts is no longer compounding over time.
Still, the CARES act has provisions making it less financially onerous to pull money from your retirement accounts. Under the new law, you can take a distribution of up to $100,000 from your IRA or 401(k) without having to pay the 10% early withdrawal penalty. You’ll owe ordinary income taxes on the withdrawal, but you have 3 years to pay them or to return the money to your retirement account.
“That’s a great relief provision, especially for higher-income physicians who might have a higher 401(k) balance,” said Jamie Hopkins.
Be smart about credit cards
Although using credit cards that you can’t pay off every month is typically an expensive way to access money, getting a new card with a low or zero percent introductory rate is a short-term strategy to consider when you’ve exhausted other options. If you have good credit, you may be able to qualify for a credit card with a 0% introductory interest rate on new transactions. Pay close attention to the fine print, including the cap on the balance you can carry without interest and whether you’ll be required to make minimum payments.
The average 0% credit card offer is for 11 months, but there are some cards that can extend the offer for up to a year-and-a-half. If you choose to use this strategy, you’ll need a plan to pay off the entire balance before the introductory period ends. If there’s a balance remaining once the rate resets, you may end up owing deferred interest on it.
The financial ramifications of the coronavirus can feel overwhelming, but it’s important not to panic. While it remains unclear how long the current crisis will last, making some smart money moves to preserve your cash in the meantime can help you stay afloat.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
Even before Atlanta had an official shelter-in-place order, patients at the private plastic surgery practice of Nicholas Jones, MD, began canceling and rescheduled planned procedures.
After a few weeks, Dr. Jones, aged 40 years, stopped seeing patients entirely, but as a self-employed independent contractor, that means he’d lost most of his income. Dr. Jones still makes some money via a wound care job at a local nursing home, but he’s concerned that job may also be eliminated.
“I’m not hurting yet,” he said. “But I’m preparing for the worst possible scenario.”
In preparation, he and his fiancé have cut back on extraneous expenses like Uber Eats, magazine subscriptions, and streaming music services. Even though he has a 6-month emergency fund, Jones has reached out to utility companies, mortgage lenders, and student loan servicers to find out about any programs they offer to people who’ve suffered financially from the coronavirus crisis.
He’s also considered traveling to one of the COVID-19 epicenters – he has family in New Orleans and Chicago – to work in a hospital there. Jones has trauma experience and is double-boarded in general and plastic surgery.
“I could provide relief to those in need and also float through this troubled time with some financial relief,” he said.
Whereas much of the world’s attention has been on physicians who are on the front line and working around the clock in hospitals to help COVID-19 patients, thousands of other physicians are experiencing the opposite phenomenon – a slowdown or even stoppage of work (and income) altogether.
Even among those practices that remain open, the number of patients has declined as people avoid going to the office unless they absolutely have to.
At the same time, doctors in two-income households may have a spouse experiencing a job loss or income decline. Nearly 10 million Americans applied for unemployment benefits in the last 2 weeks of March, the largest number on record.
Still, while there’s uncertainty around how long the coronavirus crisis will last, experts agree that at some point America will return to a “new normal” and business operations will begin to reopen. For physicians experiencing a reduction in income who, like Jones, have an emergency fund with a few months’ worth of expenses, now’s the time to tap into it. (Or if you still have income, now’s the time to focus on growing that emergency fund to give yourself an even bigger safety net.)
If you’re among the more than half of Americans with less than 6 months of expenses saved for a rainy day, here’s how to stay afloat in the near term:
Cut back on expenses
Some household spending has naturally tapered off for many families because social distancing restrictions reduce spending on eating out, travel, and other leisure activities. But this is also an opportunity to look for other ways to reduce spending. Look through your credit card bills to see whether there are recurring payments you can cut, such as a payment to a gym that’s temporarily closed or a monthly subscription box that you don’t need.
Some gyms are not allowing membership termination right now, but it pays to ask. If a service you’re not using won’t facilitate the cancellation, call your credit card company to dispute and stop the charges, and report them to the Better Business Bureau.
You should also stop contributing to nonemergency savings accounts such as your retirement fund or your children’s college funds.
“A lot of people are hesitant to stop their automatic savings if they’ve been maxing out their 401(k) contribution or 529 accounts,” says Andrew Musbach, a certified financial planner and cofounder of MD Wealth Management in Chelsea, Mich. “But if you’re thinking long term, the reality is that missing a couple of months won’t make or break a plan. Cutting back on the amount you’re saving in the short term will increase your cash flow and is a good way to make ends meet.”
Take advantage of regulatory changes
Although many physicians won’t qualify for direct payments via the Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act (the $1,200 payments to individuals start phasing out once income hits $75,000 and disappear entirely for those making more than $99,000), there are other provisions in the stimulus bill that may help physicians. The bill, for example, boosts state unemployment payments by $600 per week for the next 4 months, meaning qualified workers could receive an average of nearly $1,000 per week, depending on their state, and there are new provisions providing unemployment payments to self-employed and contract workers.
The CARES Act also includes a break for federal student loan holders. Under that rule, you can skip your payments through September without incurring additional interest. Physicians in the loan forgiveness program will still get credit for payments skipped during this program.
Separately, the IRS has extended the tax deadline from April 15 to July 15, which means not only do you not have to file your taxes until then, you also don’t have to pay any taxes you owe until mid-July. The deadline for first quarter estimated tax payments has also moved to July 15. (If you’re expecting a refund, however, you should file ASAP, since the IRS will typically issue those within a few weeks of receiving your returns.)
Tap your home equity – if you’re planning to stay put
If you have good credit and still have some income, you might consider refinancing your home mortgage or opening a home equity line of credit. Interest rates have fallen recently amid economic turbulence, so if you haven’t refinanced recently you may be able to shave your monthly payment. If you need cash, a cash-out refinance, home equity line of credit, or a reverse mortgage (available if you’re over age 62) are among the lowest-cost ways to borrow.
“With interest rates so low, there can be a lot of benefit to refinancing and leveraging your house, especially if you’re planning to stay there,” says Jamie Hopkins, a director at the Carson Group. “The challenge is if you’re planning to move in the next few years. There’s a real risk that the housing market could go down in the next couple of years, and if you’re planning to sell, there’s a risk that you might not get back what you borrowed.”
Communicate early with your bank or landlord
If you don’t have the income to refinance, and you think you’re going to run into trouble making your housing payment, you should let your bank or landlord know as soon as possible. The CARES Act allows homeowners with federally backed mortgages to obtain a 180-day postponement of mortgage payments because of COVID-19 financial hardship, with the potential to extend for another 180 days. It also bans eviction by landlords with federal mortgages for 120 days.
Even if you don’t have a federally backed mortgage, you should still get in touch with your lender. Many mortgage servicers have their own forbearance programs for borrowers who can prove a temporary financial hardship. (Some banks are also waiving fees on early withdrawals on CDs and giving cardholders a reprieve on credit card payments.) Commercial landlords are also working with struggling tenants, so you may also be able to get some relief on your office lease as well.
“All of the lenders are setting up helplines for people affected,” says Amy Guerich, a partner with Stepp & Rothwell, a Kansas City–based financial planning firm. “The best thing you can do is contact them right away if you think that you’re going to have a problem vs. just letting the bills go.”
Consider retirement account withdrawals
Standard personal finance advice holds that you should exhaust all other options before pulling money out of your retirement account because of the high penalties for early withdrawals and because money removed from retirement accounts is no longer compounding over time.
Still, the CARES act has provisions making it less financially onerous to pull money from your retirement accounts. Under the new law, you can take a distribution of up to $100,000 from your IRA or 401(k) without having to pay the 10% early withdrawal penalty. You’ll owe ordinary income taxes on the withdrawal, but you have 3 years to pay them or to return the money to your retirement account.
“That’s a great relief provision, especially for higher-income physicians who might have a higher 401(k) balance,” said Jamie Hopkins.
Be smart about credit cards
Although using credit cards that you can’t pay off every month is typically an expensive way to access money, getting a new card with a low or zero percent introductory rate is a short-term strategy to consider when you’ve exhausted other options. If you have good credit, you may be able to qualify for a credit card with a 0% introductory interest rate on new transactions. Pay close attention to the fine print, including the cap on the balance you can carry without interest and whether you’ll be required to make minimum payments.
The average 0% credit card offer is for 11 months, but there are some cards that can extend the offer for up to a year-and-a-half. If you choose to use this strategy, you’ll need a plan to pay off the entire balance before the introductory period ends. If there’s a balance remaining once the rate resets, you may end up owing deferred interest on it.
The financial ramifications of the coronavirus can feel overwhelming, but it’s important not to panic. While it remains unclear how long the current crisis will last, making some smart money moves to preserve your cash in the meantime can help you stay afloat.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
Even before Atlanta had an official shelter-in-place order, patients at the private plastic surgery practice of Nicholas Jones, MD, began canceling and rescheduled planned procedures.
After a few weeks, Dr. Jones, aged 40 years, stopped seeing patients entirely, but as a self-employed independent contractor, that means he’d lost most of his income. Dr. Jones still makes some money via a wound care job at a local nursing home, but he’s concerned that job may also be eliminated.
“I’m not hurting yet,” he said. “But I’m preparing for the worst possible scenario.”
In preparation, he and his fiancé have cut back on extraneous expenses like Uber Eats, magazine subscriptions, and streaming music services. Even though he has a 6-month emergency fund, Jones has reached out to utility companies, mortgage lenders, and student loan servicers to find out about any programs they offer to people who’ve suffered financially from the coronavirus crisis.
He’s also considered traveling to one of the COVID-19 epicenters – he has family in New Orleans and Chicago – to work in a hospital there. Jones has trauma experience and is double-boarded in general and plastic surgery.
“I could provide relief to those in need and also float through this troubled time with some financial relief,” he said.
Whereas much of the world’s attention has been on physicians who are on the front line and working around the clock in hospitals to help COVID-19 patients, thousands of other physicians are experiencing the opposite phenomenon – a slowdown or even stoppage of work (and income) altogether.
Even among those practices that remain open, the number of patients has declined as people avoid going to the office unless they absolutely have to.
At the same time, doctors in two-income households may have a spouse experiencing a job loss or income decline. Nearly 10 million Americans applied for unemployment benefits in the last 2 weeks of March, the largest number on record.
Still, while there’s uncertainty around how long the coronavirus crisis will last, experts agree that at some point America will return to a “new normal” and business operations will begin to reopen. For physicians experiencing a reduction in income who, like Jones, have an emergency fund with a few months’ worth of expenses, now’s the time to tap into it. (Or if you still have income, now’s the time to focus on growing that emergency fund to give yourself an even bigger safety net.)
If you’re among the more than half of Americans with less than 6 months of expenses saved for a rainy day, here’s how to stay afloat in the near term:
Cut back on expenses
Some household spending has naturally tapered off for many families because social distancing restrictions reduce spending on eating out, travel, and other leisure activities. But this is also an opportunity to look for other ways to reduce spending. Look through your credit card bills to see whether there are recurring payments you can cut, such as a payment to a gym that’s temporarily closed or a monthly subscription box that you don’t need.
Some gyms are not allowing membership termination right now, but it pays to ask. If a service you’re not using won’t facilitate the cancellation, call your credit card company to dispute and stop the charges, and report them to the Better Business Bureau.
You should also stop contributing to nonemergency savings accounts such as your retirement fund or your children’s college funds.
“A lot of people are hesitant to stop their automatic savings if they’ve been maxing out their 401(k) contribution or 529 accounts,” says Andrew Musbach, a certified financial planner and cofounder of MD Wealth Management in Chelsea, Mich. “But if you’re thinking long term, the reality is that missing a couple of months won’t make or break a plan. Cutting back on the amount you’re saving in the short term will increase your cash flow and is a good way to make ends meet.”
Take advantage of regulatory changes
Although many physicians won’t qualify for direct payments via the Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act (the $1,200 payments to individuals start phasing out once income hits $75,000 and disappear entirely for those making more than $99,000), there are other provisions in the stimulus bill that may help physicians. The bill, for example, boosts state unemployment payments by $600 per week for the next 4 months, meaning qualified workers could receive an average of nearly $1,000 per week, depending on their state, and there are new provisions providing unemployment payments to self-employed and contract workers.
The CARES Act also includes a break for federal student loan holders. Under that rule, you can skip your payments through September without incurring additional interest. Physicians in the loan forgiveness program will still get credit for payments skipped during this program.
Separately, the IRS has extended the tax deadline from April 15 to July 15, which means not only do you not have to file your taxes until then, you also don’t have to pay any taxes you owe until mid-July. The deadline for first quarter estimated tax payments has also moved to July 15. (If you’re expecting a refund, however, you should file ASAP, since the IRS will typically issue those within a few weeks of receiving your returns.)
Tap your home equity – if you’re planning to stay put
If you have good credit and still have some income, you might consider refinancing your home mortgage or opening a home equity line of credit. Interest rates have fallen recently amid economic turbulence, so if you haven’t refinanced recently you may be able to shave your monthly payment. If you need cash, a cash-out refinance, home equity line of credit, or a reverse mortgage (available if you’re over age 62) are among the lowest-cost ways to borrow.
“With interest rates so low, there can be a lot of benefit to refinancing and leveraging your house, especially if you’re planning to stay there,” says Jamie Hopkins, a director at the Carson Group. “The challenge is if you’re planning to move in the next few years. There’s a real risk that the housing market could go down in the next couple of years, and if you’re planning to sell, there’s a risk that you might not get back what you borrowed.”
Communicate early with your bank or landlord
If you don’t have the income to refinance, and you think you’re going to run into trouble making your housing payment, you should let your bank or landlord know as soon as possible. The CARES Act allows homeowners with federally backed mortgages to obtain a 180-day postponement of mortgage payments because of COVID-19 financial hardship, with the potential to extend for another 180 days. It also bans eviction by landlords with federal mortgages for 120 days.
Even if you don’t have a federally backed mortgage, you should still get in touch with your lender. Many mortgage servicers have their own forbearance programs for borrowers who can prove a temporary financial hardship. (Some banks are also waiving fees on early withdrawals on CDs and giving cardholders a reprieve on credit card payments.) Commercial landlords are also working with struggling tenants, so you may also be able to get some relief on your office lease as well.
“All of the lenders are setting up helplines for people affected,” says Amy Guerich, a partner with Stepp & Rothwell, a Kansas City–based financial planning firm. “The best thing you can do is contact them right away if you think that you’re going to have a problem vs. just letting the bills go.”
Consider retirement account withdrawals
Standard personal finance advice holds that you should exhaust all other options before pulling money out of your retirement account because of the high penalties for early withdrawals and because money removed from retirement accounts is no longer compounding over time.
Still, the CARES act has provisions making it less financially onerous to pull money from your retirement accounts. Under the new law, you can take a distribution of up to $100,000 from your IRA or 401(k) without having to pay the 10% early withdrawal penalty. You’ll owe ordinary income taxes on the withdrawal, but you have 3 years to pay them or to return the money to your retirement account.
“That’s a great relief provision, especially for higher-income physicians who might have a higher 401(k) balance,” said Jamie Hopkins.
Be smart about credit cards
Although using credit cards that you can’t pay off every month is typically an expensive way to access money, getting a new card with a low or zero percent introductory rate is a short-term strategy to consider when you’ve exhausted other options. If you have good credit, you may be able to qualify for a credit card with a 0% introductory interest rate on new transactions. Pay close attention to the fine print, including the cap on the balance you can carry without interest and whether you’ll be required to make minimum payments.
The average 0% credit card offer is for 11 months, but there are some cards that can extend the offer for up to a year-and-a-half. If you choose to use this strategy, you’ll need a plan to pay off the entire balance before the introductory period ends. If there’s a balance remaining once the rate resets, you may end up owing deferred interest on it.
The financial ramifications of the coronavirus can feel overwhelming, but it’s important not to panic. While it remains unclear how long the current crisis will last, making some smart money moves to preserve your cash in the meantime can help you stay afloat.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
Rapid changes to health system spurred by COVID might be here to stay
The U.S. health care system is famously resistant to government-imposed change. It took decades to create Medicare and Medicaid, mostly because of opposition from the medical-industrial complex. Then it was nearly another half-century before the passage of the Affordable Care Act.
“Health care is never going back to the way it was before,” said Gail Wilensky, a health economist who ran the Medicare and Medicaid programs for President George H.W. Bush in the early 1990s.
Ms. Wilensky is far from the only longtime observer of the American health care system to marvel at the speed of some long-sought changes. But experts warn that the breakthroughs may not all make the health system work better or make it less expensive.
That said, here are three trends that seem likely to continue.
Telehealth for all
Telehealth is not new; medical professionals have used it to reach patients in rural or remote settings since the late 1980s.
But even while technology has made video visits easier, it has failed to reach critical mass, largely because of political fights. Licensing has been one main obstacle – determining how a doctor in one state can legally treat a patient in a state where the doctor is not licensed.
The other obstacle, not surprisingly, is payment. Should a video visit be reimbursed at the same rate as an in-person visit? Will making it easier for doctors and other medical professionals to use telehealth encourage unnecessary care, thus driving up the nation’s $3.6 trillion health tab even more? Or could it replace care once provided free by phone?
Still, the pandemic has pushed aside those sticking points. Almost overnight, by necessity, every health care provider who can is delivering telemedicine. A new survey from Gallup found the number of patients reporting “virtual” medical visits more than doubled, from 12% to 27%, from late March to mid-May. That is attributable, at least in part, to Medicare having made it easier for doctors to bill for virtual visits.
It’s easy to see why many patients like video visits – there’s no parking to find and pay for, and it takes far less time out of a workday than going to an office.
Doctors and other practitioners seem more ambivalent. On one hand, it can be harder to examine a patient over video and some services just can’t be done via a digital connection. On the other hand, they can see more patients in the same amount of time and may need less support staff and possibly smaller offices if more visits are conducted virtually.
Of course, telemedicine doesn’t work for everyone. Many areas and patients don’t have reliable or robust broadband connections that make video visits work. And some patients, particularly the oldest seniors, lack the technological skills needed to connect.
Primary care doctors in peril
Another trend that has suddenly accelerated is worry over the nation’s dwindling supply of primary care doctors. The exodus of practitioners performing primary care has been a concern over the past several years, as baby boomer doctors retire and others have grown weary of more and more bureaucracy from government and private payers. Having faced a difficult financial crisis during the pandemic, more family physicians may move into retirement or seek other professional options.
At the same time, fewer current medical students are choosing specialties in primary care.
“I’ve been trying to raise the alarm about the kind of perilous future of primary care,” said Farzad Mostashari, MD, a top Department of Health & Human Services official in the Obama administration. Dr. Mostashari runs Aledade, a company that helps primary care doctors make the transition from fee-for-service medicine to new payment models.
The American Academy of Family Physicians reports that 70% of primary care physicians are reporting declines in patient volume of 50% or more since March, and 40% have laid off or furloughed staff. The AAFP has joined other primary care and insurance groups in asking HHS for an infusion of cash.
“This is absolutely essential to effectively treat patients today and to maintain their ongoing operations until we overcome this public health emergency,” the groups wrote.
One easy way to help keep primary care doctors afloat would be to pay them not according to what they do, but in a lump sum to keep patients healthy. This move from fee-for-service to what’s known as capitation or value-based care has unfolded gradually and was championed in the Affordable Care Act.
But some experts argue it needs to happen more quickly and they predict that the coronavirus pandemic could finally mark the beginning of the end for doctors who still charge for each service individually. Dr. Mostashari, who spends his time helping doctors make the transition, said in times like these, it would make more sense for primary care doctors to have “a steady monthly revenue stream, and [the doctor] can decide the best way to deliver that care: unlimited texts, phone calls, video calls. The goal is to give you satisfactory outcomes and a great patient experience.”
Still, many physicians, particularly those in solo or small practices, worry about the potential financial risk – especially the possibility of getting paid less if they don’t meet certain benchmarks that the doctors may not be able to directly control.
But with many practices now ground to a halt, or just starting to reopen, those physicians who get paid per patient rather than per service are in a much better position to stay afloat. That model may gain traction as doctors ponder the next pandemic, or the next wave of this one.
Hospitals on the decline?
The pandemic also might lead to less emphasis on hospital-based care. While hospitals in many parts of the country have obviously been full of very sick COVID patients, they have closed down other nonemergency services to preserve supplies and resources to fight the pandemic. People with other ailments have stayed away in droves even when services were available, for fear of catching something worse than what they already have.
Many experts predict that care won’t just snap back when the current emergency wanes. Mark Smith, MD, former president of the California Health Care Foundation, said among consumers, a switch has been flipped. “Overnight it seems we’ve gone from high-touch to no-touch.”
Which is not great for hospitals that have spent millions trying to attract patients to their labor-and-delivery units, orthopedic centers, and other parts of the facility that once generated lots of income.
Even more concerning is that hospitals’ ability to weather the current financial shock varies widely. Those most in danger of closing are in rural and underserved areas, where patients could wind up with even less access to care that is scarce already.
All of which underscores the point that not all these changes will necessarily be good for the health system or society. Financial pressures could end up driving more consolidation, which could push up prices as large groups of hospitals and doctors gain more bargaining clout.
But the changes are definitely happening at a pace few have ever seen, said Ms. Wilensky, “When you’re forced to find different ways of doing things, and you find out they are easier and more efficient, it’s going to be hard to go back to the old way.”
A version of this article originally appeared on Kaiser Health News, which is a nonprofit national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
The U.S. health care system is famously resistant to government-imposed change. It took decades to create Medicare and Medicaid, mostly because of opposition from the medical-industrial complex. Then it was nearly another half-century before the passage of the Affordable Care Act.
“Health care is never going back to the way it was before,” said Gail Wilensky, a health economist who ran the Medicare and Medicaid programs for President George H.W. Bush in the early 1990s.
Ms. Wilensky is far from the only longtime observer of the American health care system to marvel at the speed of some long-sought changes. But experts warn that the breakthroughs may not all make the health system work better or make it less expensive.
That said, here are three trends that seem likely to continue.
Telehealth for all
Telehealth is not new; medical professionals have used it to reach patients in rural or remote settings since the late 1980s.
But even while technology has made video visits easier, it has failed to reach critical mass, largely because of political fights. Licensing has been one main obstacle – determining how a doctor in one state can legally treat a patient in a state where the doctor is not licensed.
The other obstacle, not surprisingly, is payment. Should a video visit be reimbursed at the same rate as an in-person visit? Will making it easier for doctors and other medical professionals to use telehealth encourage unnecessary care, thus driving up the nation’s $3.6 trillion health tab even more? Or could it replace care once provided free by phone?
Still, the pandemic has pushed aside those sticking points. Almost overnight, by necessity, every health care provider who can is delivering telemedicine. A new survey from Gallup found the number of patients reporting “virtual” medical visits more than doubled, from 12% to 27%, from late March to mid-May. That is attributable, at least in part, to Medicare having made it easier for doctors to bill for virtual visits.
It’s easy to see why many patients like video visits – there’s no parking to find and pay for, and it takes far less time out of a workday than going to an office.
Doctors and other practitioners seem more ambivalent. On one hand, it can be harder to examine a patient over video and some services just can’t be done via a digital connection. On the other hand, they can see more patients in the same amount of time and may need less support staff and possibly smaller offices if more visits are conducted virtually.
Of course, telemedicine doesn’t work for everyone. Many areas and patients don’t have reliable or robust broadband connections that make video visits work. And some patients, particularly the oldest seniors, lack the technological skills needed to connect.
Primary care doctors in peril
Another trend that has suddenly accelerated is worry over the nation’s dwindling supply of primary care doctors. The exodus of practitioners performing primary care has been a concern over the past several years, as baby boomer doctors retire and others have grown weary of more and more bureaucracy from government and private payers. Having faced a difficult financial crisis during the pandemic, more family physicians may move into retirement or seek other professional options.
At the same time, fewer current medical students are choosing specialties in primary care.
“I’ve been trying to raise the alarm about the kind of perilous future of primary care,” said Farzad Mostashari, MD, a top Department of Health & Human Services official in the Obama administration. Dr. Mostashari runs Aledade, a company that helps primary care doctors make the transition from fee-for-service medicine to new payment models.
The American Academy of Family Physicians reports that 70% of primary care physicians are reporting declines in patient volume of 50% or more since March, and 40% have laid off or furloughed staff. The AAFP has joined other primary care and insurance groups in asking HHS for an infusion of cash.
“This is absolutely essential to effectively treat patients today and to maintain their ongoing operations until we overcome this public health emergency,” the groups wrote.
One easy way to help keep primary care doctors afloat would be to pay them not according to what they do, but in a lump sum to keep patients healthy. This move from fee-for-service to what’s known as capitation or value-based care has unfolded gradually and was championed in the Affordable Care Act.
But some experts argue it needs to happen more quickly and they predict that the coronavirus pandemic could finally mark the beginning of the end for doctors who still charge for each service individually. Dr. Mostashari, who spends his time helping doctors make the transition, said in times like these, it would make more sense for primary care doctors to have “a steady monthly revenue stream, and [the doctor] can decide the best way to deliver that care: unlimited texts, phone calls, video calls. The goal is to give you satisfactory outcomes and a great patient experience.”
Still, many physicians, particularly those in solo or small practices, worry about the potential financial risk – especially the possibility of getting paid less if they don’t meet certain benchmarks that the doctors may not be able to directly control.
But with many practices now ground to a halt, or just starting to reopen, those physicians who get paid per patient rather than per service are in a much better position to stay afloat. That model may gain traction as doctors ponder the next pandemic, or the next wave of this one.
Hospitals on the decline?
The pandemic also might lead to less emphasis on hospital-based care. While hospitals in many parts of the country have obviously been full of very sick COVID patients, they have closed down other nonemergency services to preserve supplies and resources to fight the pandemic. People with other ailments have stayed away in droves even when services were available, for fear of catching something worse than what they already have.
Many experts predict that care won’t just snap back when the current emergency wanes. Mark Smith, MD, former president of the California Health Care Foundation, said among consumers, a switch has been flipped. “Overnight it seems we’ve gone from high-touch to no-touch.”
Which is not great for hospitals that have spent millions trying to attract patients to their labor-and-delivery units, orthopedic centers, and other parts of the facility that once generated lots of income.
Even more concerning is that hospitals’ ability to weather the current financial shock varies widely. Those most in danger of closing are in rural and underserved areas, where patients could wind up with even less access to care that is scarce already.
All of which underscores the point that not all these changes will necessarily be good for the health system or society. Financial pressures could end up driving more consolidation, which could push up prices as large groups of hospitals and doctors gain more bargaining clout.
But the changes are definitely happening at a pace few have ever seen, said Ms. Wilensky, “When you’re forced to find different ways of doing things, and you find out they are easier and more efficient, it’s going to be hard to go back to the old way.”
A version of this article originally appeared on Kaiser Health News, which is a nonprofit national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
The U.S. health care system is famously resistant to government-imposed change. It took decades to create Medicare and Medicaid, mostly because of opposition from the medical-industrial complex. Then it was nearly another half-century before the passage of the Affordable Care Act.
“Health care is never going back to the way it was before,” said Gail Wilensky, a health economist who ran the Medicare and Medicaid programs for President George H.W. Bush in the early 1990s.
Ms. Wilensky is far from the only longtime observer of the American health care system to marvel at the speed of some long-sought changes. But experts warn that the breakthroughs may not all make the health system work better or make it less expensive.
That said, here are three trends that seem likely to continue.
Telehealth for all
Telehealth is not new; medical professionals have used it to reach patients in rural or remote settings since the late 1980s.
But even while technology has made video visits easier, it has failed to reach critical mass, largely because of political fights. Licensing has been one main obstacle – determining how a doctor in one state can legally treat a patient in a state where the doctor is not licensed.
The other obstacle, not surprisingly, is payment. Should a video visit be reimbursed at the same rate as an in-person visit? Will making it easier for doctors and other medical professionals to use telehealth encourage unnecessary care, thus driving up the nation’s $3.6 trillion health tab even more? Or could it replace care once provided free by phone?
Still, the pandemic has pushed aside those sticking points. Almost overnight, by necessity, every health care provider who can is delivering telemedicine. A new survey from Gallup found the number of patients reporting “virtual” medical visits more than doubled, from 12% to 27%, from late March to mid-May. That is attributable, at least in part, to Medicare having made it easier for doctors to bill for virtual visits.
It’s easy to see why many patients like video visits – there’s no parking to find and pay for, and it takes far less time out of a workday than going to an office.
Doctors and other practitioners seem more ambivalent. On one hand, it can be harder to examine a patient over video and some services just can’t be done via a digital connection. On the other hand, they can see more patients in the same amount of time and may need less support staff and possibly smaller offices if more visits are conducted virtually.
Of course, telemedicine doesn’t work for everyone. Many areas and patients don’t have reliable or robust broadband connections that make video visits work. And some patients, particularly the oldest seniors, lack the technological skills needed to connect.
Primary care doctors in peril
Another trend that has suddenly accelerated is worry over the nation’s dwindling supply of primary care doctors. The exodus of practitioners performing primary care has been a concern over the past several years, as baby boomer doctors retire and others have grown weary of more and more bureaucracy from government and private payers. Having faced a difficult financial crisis during the pandemic, more family physicians may move into retirement or seek other professional options.
At the same time, fewer current medical students are choosing specialties in primary care.
“I’ve been trying to raise the alarm about the kind of perilous future of primary care,” said Farzad Mostashari, MD, a top Department of Health & Human Services official in the Obama administration. Dr. Mostashari runs Aledade, a company that helps primary care doctors make the transition from fee-for-service medicine to new payment models.
The American Academy of Family Physicians reports that 70% of primary care physicians are reporting declines in patient volume of 50% or more since March, and 40% have laid off or furloughed staff. The AAFP has joined other primary care and insurance groups in asking HHS for an infusion of cash.
“This is absolutely essential to effectively treat patients today and to maintain their ongoing operations until we overcome this public health emergency,” the groups wrote.
One easy way to help keep primary care doctors afloat would be to pay them not according to what they do, but in a lump sum to keep patients healthy. This move from fee-for-service to what’s known as capitation or value-based care has unfolded gradually and was championed in the Affordable Care Act.
But some experts argue it needs to happen more quickly and they predict that the coronavirus pandemic could finally mark the beginning of the end for doctors who still charge for each service individually. Dr. Mostashari, who spends his time helping doctors make the transition, said in times like these, it would make more sense for primary care doctors to have “a steady monthly revenue stream, and [the doctor] can decide the best way to deliver that care: unlimited texts, phone calls, video calls. The goal is to give you satisfactory outcomes and a great patient experience.”
Still, many physicians, particularly those in solo or small practices, worry about the potential financial risk – especially the possibility of getting paid less if they don’t meet certain benchmarks that the doctors may not be able to directly control.
But with many practices now ground to a halt, or just starting to reopen, those physicians who get paid per patient rather than per service are in a much better position to stay afloat. That model may gain traction as doctors ponder the next pandemic, or the next wave of this one.
Hospitals on the decline?
The pandemic also might lead to less emphasis on hospital-based care. While hospitals in many parts of the country have obviously been full of very sick COVID patients, they have closed down other nonemergency services to preserve supplies and resources to fight the pandemic. People with other ailments have stayed away in droves even when services were available, for fear of catching something worse than what they already have.
Many experts predict that care won’t just snap back when the current emergency wanes. Mark Smith, MD, former president of the California Health Care Foundation, said among consumers, a switch has been flipped. “Overnight it seems we’ve gone from high-touch to no-touch.”
Which is not great for hospitals that have spent millions trying to attract patients to their labor-and-delivery units, orthopedic centers, and other parts of the facility that once generated lots of income.
Even more concerning is that hospitals’ ability to weather the current financial shock varies widely. Those most in danger of closing are in rural and underserved areas, where patients could wind up with even less access to care that is scarce already.
All of which underscores the point that not all these changes will necessarily be good for the health system or society. Financial pressures could end up driving more consolidation, which could push up prices as large groups of hospitals and doctors gain more bargaining clout.
But the changes are definitely happening at a pace few have ever seen, said Ms. Wilensky, “When you’re forced to find different ways of doing things, and you find out they are easier and more efficient, it’s going to be hard to go back to the old way.”
A version of this article originally appeared on Kaiser Health News, which is a nonprofit national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
Can an app guide cancer treatment decisions during the pandemic?
Deciding which cancer patients need immediate treatment and who can safely wait is an uncomfortable assessment for cancer clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic.
In early April, as the COVID-19 surge was bearing down on New York City, those treatment decisions were “a juggling act every single day,” Jonathan Yang, MD, PhD, a radiation oncologist from New York’s Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, told Medscape Medical News.
Eventually, a glut of guidelines, recommendations, and expert opinions aimed at helping oncologists emerged. The tools help navigate the complicated risk-benefit analysis of their patient’s risk of infection by SARS-CoV-2 and delaying therapy.
Now, a new tool, which appears to be the first of its kind, quantifies that risk-benefit analysis. But its presence immediately raises the question: can it help?
Three-Tier Systems Are Not Very Sophisticated
OncCOVID, a free tool that was launched May 26 by the University of Michigan, allows physicians to individualize risk estimates for delaying treatment of up to 25 early- to late-stage cancers. It includes more than 45 patient characteristics, such as age, location, cancer type, cancer stage, treatment plan, underlying medical conditions, and proposed length of delay in care.
Combining these personal details with data from the National Cancer Institute’s SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) registry and the National Cancer Database, the Michigan app then estimates a patient’s 5- or 10-year survival with immediate vs delayed treatment and weighs that against their risk for COVID-19 using data from the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center.
“We thought, isn’t it better to at least provide some evidence-based quantification, rather than a back-of-the-envelope three-tier system that is just sort of ‘made up’?“ explained one of the developers, Daniel Spratt, MD, associate professor of radiation oncology at Michigan Medicine.
Spratt explained that almost every organization, professional society, and government has created something like a three-tier system. Tier 1 represents urgent cases and patients who need immediate treatment. For tier 2, treatment can be delayed weeks or a month, and with tier 3, it can be delayed until the pandemic is over or it’s deemed safe.
“[This system] sounds good at first glance, but in cancer, we’re always talking about personalized medicine, and it’s mind-blowing that these tier systems are only based on urgency and prognosis,” he told Medscape Medical News.
Spratt offered an example. Consider a patient with a very aggressive brain tumor ― that patient is in tier 1 and should undergo treatment immediately. But will the treatment actually help? And how helpful would the procedure be if, say, the patient is 80 years old and, if infected, would have a 30% to 50% chance of dying from the coronavirus?
“If the model says this guy has a 5% harm and this one has 30% harm, you can use that to help prioritize,” summarized Spratt.
The app can generate risk estimates for patients living anywhere in the world and has already been accessed by people from 37 countries. However, Spratt cautions that it is primarily “designed and calibrated for the US.
“The estimates are based on very large US registries, and though it’s probably somewhat similar across much of the world, there’s probably certain cancer types that are more region specific ― especially something like stomach cancer or certain types of head and neck cancer in parts of Asia, for example,” he said.
Although the app’s COVID-19 data are specific to the county level in the United States, elsewhere in the world, it is only country specific.
“We’re using the best data we have for coronavirus, but everyone knows we still have large data gaps,” he acknowledged.
How Accurate?
Asked to comment on the app, Richard Bleicher, MD, leader of the Breast Cancer Program at Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, praised the effort and the goal but had some concerns.
“Several questions arise, most important of which is, How accurate is this, and how has this been validated, if at all ― especially as it is too soon to see the outcomes of patients affected in this pandemic?” he told Medscape Medical News.
“We are imposing delays on a broad scale because of the coronavirus, and we are getting continuously changing data as we test more patients. But both situations are novel and may not be accurately represented by the data being pulled, because the datasets use patients from a few years ago, and confounders in these datasets may not apply to this situation,” Bleicher continued.
Although acknowledging the “value in delineating the risk of dying from cancer vs the risk of dying from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic,” Bleicher urged caution in using the tool to make individual patient decisions.
“We need to remember that the best of modeling ... can be wildly inaccurate and needs to be validated using patients having the circumstances in question. ... This won’t be possible until long after the pandemic is completed, and so the model’s accuracy remains unknown.”
That sentiment was echoed by Giampaolo Bianchini, MD, head of the Breast Cancer Group, Department of Medical Oncology, Ospedale San Raffaele, in Milan, Italy.
“Arbitrarily postponing and modifying treatment strategies including surgery, radiation therapy, and medical therapy without properly balancing the risk/benefit ratio may lead to significantly worse cancer-related outcomes, which largely exceed the actual risks for COVID,” he wrote in an email.
“The OncCOVID app is a remarkable attempt to fill the gap between perception and estimation,” he said. The app provides side by side the COVID-19 risk estimation and the consequences of arbitrary deviation from the standard of care, observed Bianchini.
However, he pointed out weaknesses, including the fact that the “data generated in literature are not always of high quality and do not take into consideration relevant characteristics of the disease and treatment benefit. It should for sure be used, but then also interpreted with caution.”
Another Italian group responded more positively.
“In our opinion, it could be a useful tool for clinicians,” wrote colleagues Alessio Cortelinni and Giampiero Porzio, both medical oncologists at San Salvatore Hospital and the University of L’Aquila, in Italy. “This Web app might assist clinicians in balancing the risk/benefit ratio of being treated and/or access to the outpatient cancer center for each kind of patient (both early and advanced stages), in order to make a more tailored counseling,” they wrote in an email. “Importantly, the Web app might help those clinicians who work ‘alone,’ in peripheral centers, without resources, colleagues, and multidisciplinary tumor boards on whom they can rely.”
Bleicher, who was involved in the COVID-19 Breast Cancer Consortium’s recommendations for prioritizing breast cancer treatment, summarized that the app “may end up being close or accurate, but we won’t know except in hindsight.”
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Deciding which cancer patients need immediate treatment and who can safely wait is an uncomfortable assessment for cancer clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic.
In early April, as the COVID-19 surge was bearing down on New York City, those treatment decisions were “a juggling act every single day,” Jonathan Yang, MD, PhD, a radiation oncologist from New York’s Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, told Medscape Medical News.
Eventually, a glut of guidelines, recommendations, and expert opinions aimed at helping oncologists emerged. The tools help navigate the complicated risk-benefit analysis of their patient’s risk of infection by SARS-CoV-2 and delaying therapy.
Now, a new tool, which appears to be the first of its kind, quantifies that risk-benefit analysis. But its presence immediately raises the question: can it help?
Three-Tier Systems Are Not Very Sophisticated
OncCOVID, a free tool that was launched May 26 by the University of Michigan, allows physicians to individualize risk estimates for delaying treatment of up to 25 early- to late-stage cancers. It includes more than 45 patient characteristics, such as age, location, cancer type, cancer stage, treatment plan, underlying medical conditions, and proposed length of delay in care.
Combining these personal details with data from the National Cancer Institute’s SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) registry and the National Cancer Database, the Michigan app then estimates a patient’s 5- or 10-year survival with immediate vs delayed treatment and weighs that against their risk for COVID-19 using data from the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center.
“We thought, isn’t it better to at least provide some evidence-based quantification, rather than a back-of-the-envelope three-tier system that is just sort of ‘made up’?“ explained one of the developers, Daniel Spratt, MD, associate professor of radiation oncology at Michigan Medicine.
Spratt explained that almost every organization, professional society, and government has created something like a three-tier system. Tier 1 represents urgent cases and patients who need immediate treatment. For tier 2, treatment can be delayed weeks or a month, and with tier 3, it can be delayed until the pandemic is over or it’s deemed safe.
“[This system] sounds good at first glance, but in cancer, we’re always talking about personalized medicine, and it’s mind-blowing that these tier systems are only based on urgency and prognosis,” he told Medscape Medical News.
Spratt offered an example. Consider a patient with a very aggressive brain tumor ― that patient is in tier 1 and should undergo treatment immediately. But will the treatment actually help? And how helpful would the procedure be if, say, the patient is 80 years old and, if infected, would have a 30% to 50% chance of dying from the coronavirus?
“If the model says this guy has a 5% harm and this one has 30% harm, you can use that to help prioritize,” summarized Spratt.
The app can generate risk estimates for patients living anywhere in the world and has already been accessed by people from 37 countries. However, Spratt cautions that it is primarily “designed and calibrated for the US.
“The estimates are based on very large US registries, and though it’s probably somewhat similar across much of the world, there’s probably certain cancer types that are more region specific ― especially something like stomach cancer or certain types of head and neck cancer in parts of Asia, for example,” he said.
Although the app’s COVID-19 data are specific to the county level in the United States, elsewhere in the world, it is only country specific.
“We’re using the best data we have for coronavirus, but everyone knows we still have large data gaps,” he acknowledged.
How Accurate?
Asked to comment on the app, Richard Bleicher, MD, leader of the Breast Cancer Program at Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, praised the effort and the goal but had some concerns.
“Several questions arise, most important of which is, How accurate is this, and how has this been validated, if at all ― especially as it is too soon to see the outcomes of patients affected in this pandemic?” he told Medscape Medical News.
“We are imposing delays on a broad scale because of the coronavirus, and we are getting continuously changing data as we test more patients. But both situations are novel and may not be accurately represented by the data being pulled, because the datasets use patients from a few years ago, and confounders in these datasets may not apply to this situation,” Bleicher continued.
Although acknowledging the “value in delineating the risk of dying from cancer vs the risk of dying from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic,” Bleicher urged caution in using the tool to make individual patient decisions.
“We need to remember that the best of modeling ... can be wildly inaccurate and needs to be validated using patients having the circumstances in question. ... This won’t be possible until long after the pandemic is completed, and so the model’s accuracy remains unknown.”
That sentiment was echoed by Giampaolo Bianchini, MD, head of the Breast Cancer Group, Department of Medical Oncology, Ospedale San Raffaele, in Milan, Italy.
“Arbitrarily postponing and modifying treatment strategies including surgery, radiation therapy, and medical therapy without properly balancing the risk/benefit ratio may lead to significantly worse cancer-related outcomes, which largely exceed the actual risks for COVID,” he wrote in an email.
“The OncCOVID app is a remarkable attempt to fill the gap between perception and estimation,” he said. The app provides side by side the COVID-19 risk estimation and the consequences of arbitrary deviation from the standard of care, observed Bianchini.
However, he pointed out weaknesses, including the fact that the “data generated in literature are not always of high quality and do not take into consideration relevant characteristics of the disease and treatment benefit. It should for sure be used, but then also interpreted with caution.”
Another Italian group responded more positively.
“In our opinion, it could be a useful tool for clinicians,” wrote colleagues Alessio Cortelinni and Giampiero Porzio, both medical oncologists at San Salvatore Hospital and the University of L’Aquila, in Italy. “This Web app might assist clinicians in balancing the risk/benefit ratio of being treated and/or access to the outpatient cancer center for each kind of patient (both early and advanced stages), in order to make a more tailored counseling,” they wrote in an email. “Importantly, the Web app might help those clinicians who work ‘alone,’ in peripheral centers, without resources, colleagues, and multidisciplinary tumor boards on whom they can rely.”
Bleicher, who was involved in the COVID-19 Breast Cancer Consortium’s recommendations for prioritizing breast cancer treatment, summarized that the app “may end up being close or accurate, but we won’t know except in hindsight.”
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Deciding which cancer patients need immediate treatment and who can safely wait is an uncomfortable assessment for cancer clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic.
In early April, as the COVID-19 surge was bearing down on New York City, those treatment decisions were “a juggling act every single day,” Jonathan Yang, MD, PhD, a radiation oncologist from New York’s Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, told Medscape Medical News.
Eventually, a glut of guidelines, recommendations, and expert opinions aimed at helping oncologists emerged. The tools help navigate the complicated risk-benefit analysis of their patient’s risk of infection by SARS-CoV-2 and delaying therapy.
Now, a new tool, which appears to be the first of its kind, quantifies that risk-benefit analysis. But its presence immediately raises the question: can it help?
Three-Tier Systems Are Not Very Sophisticated
OncCOVID, a free tool that was launched May 26 by the University of Michigan, allows physicians to individualize risk estimates for delaying treatment of up to 25 early- to late-stage cancers. It includes more than 45 patient characteristics, such as age, location, cancer type, cancer stage, treatment plan, underlying medical conditions, and proposed length of delay in care.
Combining these personal details with data from the National Cancer Institute’s SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) registry and the National Cancer Database, the Michigan app then estimates a patient’s 5- or 10-year survival with immediate vs delayed treatment and weighs that against their risk for COVID-19 using data from the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center.
“We thought, isn’t it better to at least provide some evidence-based quantification, rather than a back-of-the-envelope three-tier system that is just sort of ‘made up’?“ explained one of the developers, Daniel Spratt, MD, associate professor of radiation oncology at Michigan Medicine.
Spratt explained that almost every organization, professional society, and government has created something like a three-tier system. Tier 1 represents urgent cases and patients who need immediate treatment. For tier 2, treatment can be delayed weeks or a month, and with tier 3, it can be delayed until the pandemic is over or it’s deemed safe.
“[This system] sounds good at first glance, but in cancer, we’re always talking about personalized medicine, and it’s mind-blowing that these tier systems are only based on urgency and prognosis,” he told Medscape Medical News.
Spratt offered an example. Consider a patient with a very aggressive brain tumor ― that patient is in tier 1 and should undergo treatment immediately. But will the treatment actually help? And how helpful would the procedure be if, say, the patient is 80 years old and, if infected, would have a 30% to 50% chance of dying from the coronavirus?
“If the model says this guy has a 5% harm and this one has 30% harm, you can use that to help prioritize,” summarized Spratt.
The app can generate risk estimates for patients living anywhere in the world and has already been accessed by people from 37 countries. However, Spratt cautions that it is primarily “designed and calibrated for the US.
“The estimates are based on very large US registries, and though it’s probably somewhat similar across much of the world, there’s probably certain cancer types that are more region specific ― especially something like stomach cancer or certain types of head and neck cancer in parts of Asia, for example,” he said.
Although the app’s COVID-19 data are specific to the county level in the United States, elsewhere in the world, it is only country specific.
“We’re using the best data we have for coronavirus, but everyone knows we still have large data gaps,” he acknowledged.
How Accurate?
Asked to comment on the app, Richard Bleicher, MD, leader of the Breast Cancer Program at Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, praised the effort and the goal but had some concerns.
“Several questions arise, most important of which is, How accurate is this, and how has this been validated, if at all ― especially as it is too soon to see the outcomes of patients affected in this pandemic?” he told Medscape Medical News.
“We are imposing delays on a broad scale because of the coronavirus, and we are getting continuously changing data as we test more patients. But both situations are novel and may not be accurately represented by the data being pulled, because the datasets use patients from a few years ago, and confounders in these datasets may not apply to this situation,” Bleicher continued.
Although acknowledging the “value in delineating the risk of dying from cancer vs the risk of dying from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic,” Bleicher urged caution in using the tool to make individual patient decisions.
“We need to remember that the best of modeling ... can be wildly inaccurate and needs to be validated using patients having the circumstances in question. ... This won’t be possible until long after the pandemic is completed, and so the model’s accuracy remains unknown.”
That sentiment was echoed by Giampaolo Bianchini, MD, head of the Breast Cancer Group, Department of Medical Oncology, Ospedale San Raffaele, in Milan, Italy.
“Arbitrarily postponing and modifying treatment strategies including surgery, radiation therapy, and medical therapy without properly balancing the risk/benefit ratio may lead to significantly worse cancer-related outcomes, which largely exceed the actual risks for COVID,” he wrote in an email.
“The OncCOVID app is a remarkable attempt to fill the gap between perception and estimation,” he said. The app provides side by side the COVID-19 risk estimation and the consequences of arbitrary deviation from the standard of care, observed Bianchini.
However, he pointed out weaknesses, including the fact that the “data generated in literature are not always of high quality and do not take into consideration relevant characteristics of the disease and treatment benefit. It should for sure be used, but then also interpreted with caution.”
Another Italian group responded more positively.
“In our opinion, it could be a useful tool for clinicians,” wrote colleagues Alessio Cortelinni and Giampiero Porzio, both medical oncologists at San Salvatore Hospital and the University of L’Aquila, in Italy. “This Web app might assist clinicians in balancing the risk/benefit ratio of being treated and/or access to the outpatient cancer center for each kind of patient (both early and advanced stages), in order to make a more tailored counseling,” they wrote in an email. “Importantly, the Web app might help those clinicians who work ‘alone,’ in peripheral centers, without resources, colleagues, and multidisciplinary tumor boards on whom they can rely.”
Bleicher, who was involved in the COVID-19 Breast Cancer Consortium’s recommendations for prioritizing breast cancer treatment, summarized that the app “may end up being close or accurate, but we won’t know except in hindsight.”
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Doctors’ top telehealth coding questions answered
The coding expert answers your questions
Betsy Nicoletti, MS, a nationally recognized coding expert, will take your coding questions via email and provide guidance on how to code properly to maximize reimbursement. Have a question about coding? Send it here.
Telehealth: Frequently asked questions
Since the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) expanded use of telehealth during the COVID-19 emergency, I’ve seen various follow-up questions coming from physicians. Here are the most common ones received and some guidance.
Q: How long can we continue using telehealth?
A: Private payers will set their own rules for the end date. For Medicare, telehealth is allowed until the end of the public health emergency. Department of Health & Human Services Secretary Alex M. Azar II renewed the status of the public health emergency, effective April 26, 2020, for an additional 90 days.
Q: Can I bill Medicare annual wellness visits via telehealth?
A: Yes, you can bill the initial and subsequent Medicare wellness visits (G0438, G0439) via telehealth, but the Welcome to Medicare visit (G0402) is not on the list of telehealth services.
In fact, the wellness visits mentioned above may be billed with audio-only communications because of the expansion of telehealth services, although these visits require height, weight, BMI calculation, and blood pressure, and CMS has not issued guidance about whether the patient’s self-reported measurements are sufficient or whether they can be deferred.
Q: Can I bill an office visit via telehealth?
A: Yes, you may bill new and established patient visits 99201-99215 via telehealth, but for Medicare, these still require the use of real-time, audio-visual communications equipment.
Q: Can I bill an office visit conducted via telephone only?
A: For Medicare patients, you may not bill office visit codes for audio only communication. If there is audio only, use phone call codes 99441-99443. In order to bill an office visit, with codes 99201-99215 to a Medicare patient, audio and visual, real time communication is required. Some state Medicaid programs and private insurers allow office visits to be billed with audio equipment only, so check your state requirements.
Q: How do I select a level of office visit?
A: CMS’s announcement on March 31 relaxed the rules for practitioners to select a level of service for office and other patient services (99201-99215). CMS stated that clinicians could use either total time or medical decision-making to select a code.
If using time, count the practitioner’s total time for the visit, both face to face and non–face to face. It does not need to be greater than 50% in counseling. If using medical decision-making, history and exam are not needed to select the level of service. Medical decision-making alone can be used to select the code.
Q: Can I count the time it takes my medical assistant to set up the audio-visual communication with a patient?
A: No, you cannot count staff time in coding and billing a patient visit in this manner.
Q: Is there a code for a registered nurse to use for making phone calls with patients?
A: No, unfortunately.
Q: How do I know if a service can be billed with phone only?
A: These are indicated as “yes” on CMS’s list of covered telehealth services as allowed via audio only.
Providing mental health services during COVID-19
Q: I am a mental health provider who finds himself trying to provide the best care for my patients during this pandemic. How do I bill for behavioral health services if I am not able to conduct in-person visits?
A: Psychiatrists and behavioral health professionals can perform psychiatric diagnostic evaluations and psychotherapy over the phone during the public health emergency.
The use of real-time, audio-visual communication equipment is not required. This is one of the many changes CMS made in its interim final rule regarding COVID-19, released April 30.
Not only did CMS update the list of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes that could be reported via real-time, audio-visual communication, but it also added a column to guidance on covered telehealth services: “Can Audio-only Interaction Meet the Requirements?” The codes for psychiatric diagnostic evaluations and psychotherapy are indicated as “yes.”
In addition to psychiatric diagnostic evaluations and time-based psychotherapy codes, psychotherapy for crisis, family, and group psychotherapy can be done with audio-only technology.
CMS has issued multiple waivers and two major rules that greatly expand the ability of medical practices to treat patients without requiring an in-person visit. This latest change, allowing some services to be performed with audio equipment only, is remarkable.
For Medicare patients, report the place of service that would have been used if the patient was seen in person. This could be office (POS 11), outpatient department (POS 19, 21), or community mental health center (POS 53).
Some private payers require the place of service for telehealth (02). The lack of consistency between payers is difficult for practices. Append modifier 95 to the CPT code for all payers. The definition of modifier 95 is “synchronous telemedicine service using audio and visual communication.” However, as CMS added these services to the telehealth list, use modifier 95.
Have a coding question? Send it in and it may be answered in a future column. (Please be sure to note your specialty in the text of the question.)
Betsy Nicoletti, MS, is a consultant, author, and speaker, as well as the founder of CodingIntel.com, a library of medical practice coding resources.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
The coding expert answers your questions
Betsy Nicoletti, MS, a nationally recognized coding expert, will take your coding questions via email and provide guidance on how to code properly to maximize reimbursement. Have a question about coding? Send it here.
Telehealth: Frequently asked questions
Since the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) expanded use of telehealth during the COVID-19 emergency, I’ve seen various follow-up questions coming from physicians. Here are the most common ones received and some guidance.
Q: How long can we continue using telehealth?
A: Private payers will set their own rules for the end date. For Medicare, telehealth is allowed until the end of the public health emergency. Department of Health & Human Services Secretary Alex M. Azar II renewed the status of the public health emergency, effective April 26, 2020, for an additional 90 days.
Q: Can I bill Medicare annual wellness visits via telehealth?
A: Yes, you can bill the initial and subsequent Medicare wellness visits (G0438, G0439) via telehealth, but the Welcome to Medicare visit (G0402) is not on the list of telehealth services.
In fact, the wellness visits mentioned above may be billed with audio-only communications because of the expansion of telehealth services, although these visits require height, weight, BMI calculation, and blood pressure, and CMS has not issued guidance about whether the patient’s self-reported measurements are sufficient or whether they can be deferred.
Q: Can I bill an office visit via telehealth?
A: Yes, you may bill new and established patient visits 99201-99215 via telehealth, but for Medicare, these still require the use of real-time, audio-visual communications equipment.
Q: Can I bill an office visit conducted via telephone only?
A: For Medicare patients, you may not bill office visit codes for audio only communication. If there is audio only, use phone call codes 99441-99443. In order to bill an office visit, with codes 99201-99215 to a Medicare patient, audio and visual, real time communication is required. Some state Medicaid programs and private insurers allow office visits to be billed with audio equipment only, so check your state requirements.
Q: How do I select a level of office visit?
A: CMS’s announcement on March 31 relaxed the rules for practitioners to select a level of service for office and other patient services (99201-99215). CMS stated that clinicians could use either total time or medical decision-making to select a code.
If using time, count the practitioner’s total time for the visit, both face to face and non–face to face. It does not need to be greater than 50% in counseling. If using medical decision-making, history and exam are not needed to select the level of service. Medical decision-making alone can be used to select the code.
Q: Can I count the time it takes my medical assistant to set up the audio-visual communication with a patient?
A: No, you cannot count staff time in coding and billing a patient visit in this manner.
Q: Is there a code for a registered nurse to use for making phone calls with patients?
A: No, unfortunately.
Q: How do I know if a service can be billed with phone only?
A: These are indicated as “yes” on CMS’s list of covered telehealth services as allowed via audio only.
Providing mental health services during COVID-19
Q: I am a mental health provider who finds himself trying to provide the best care for my patients during this pandemic. How do I bill for behavioral health services if I am not able to conduct in-person visits?
A: Psychiatrists and behavioral health professionals can perform psychiatric diagnostic evaluations and psychotherapy over the phone during the public health emergency.
The use of real-time, audio-visual communication equipment is not required. This is one of the many changes CMS made in its interim final rule regarding COVID-19, released April 30.
Not only did CMS update the list of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes that could be reported via real-time, audio-visual communication, but it also added a column to guidance on covered telehealth services: “Can Audio-only Interaction Meet the Requirements?” The codes for psychiatric diagnostic evaluations and psychotherapy are indicated as “yes.”
In addition to psychiatric diagnostic evaluations and time-based psychotherapy codes, psychotherapy for crisis, family, and group psychotherapy can be done with audio-only technology.
CMS has issued multiple waivers and two major rules that greatly expand the ability of medical practices to treat patients without requiring an in-person visit. This latest change, allowing some services to be performed with audio equipment only, is remarkable.
For Medicare patients, report the place of service that would have been used if the patient was seen in person. This could be office (POS 11), outpatient department (POS 19, 21), or community mental health center (POS 53).
Some private payers require the place of service for telehealth (02). The lack of consistency between payers is difficult for practices. Append modifier 95 to the CPT code for all payers. The definition of modifier 95 is “synchronous telemedicine service using audio and visual communication.” However, as CMS added these services to the telehealth list, use modifier 95.
Have a coding question? Send it in and it may be answered in a future column. (Please be sure to note your specialty in the text of the question.)
Betsy Nicoletti, MS, is a consultant, author, and speaker, as well as the founder of CodingIntel.com, a library of medical practice coding resources.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
The coding expert answers your questions
Betsy Nicoletti, MS, a nationally recognized coding expert, will take your coding questions via email and provide guidance on how to code properly to maximize reimbursement. Have a question about coding? Send it here.
Telehealth: Frequently asked questions
Since the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) expanded use of telehealth during the COVID-19 emergency, I’ve seen various follow-up questions coming from physicians. Here are the most common ones received and some guidance.
Q: How long can we continue using telehealth?
A: Private payers will set their own rules for the end date. For Medicare, telehealth is allowed until the end of the public health emergency. Department of Health & Human Services Secretary Alex M. Azar II renewed the status of the public health emergency, effective April 26, 2020, for an additional 90 days.
Q: Can I bill Medicare annual wellness visits via telehealth?
A: Yes, you can bill the initial and subsequent Medicare wellness visits (G0438, G0439) via telehealth, but the Welcome to Medicare visit (G0402) is not on the list of telehealth services.
In fact, the wellness visits mentioned above may be billed with audio-only communications because of the expansion of telehealth services, although these visits require height, weight, BMI calculation, and blood pressure, and CMS has not issued guidance about whether the patient’s self-reported measurements are sufficient or whether they can be deferred.
Q: Can I bill an office visit via telehealth?
A: Yes, you may bill new and established patient visits 99201-99215 via telehealth, but for Medicare, these still require the use of real-time, audio-visual communications equipment.
Q: Can I bill an office visit conducted via telephone only?
A: For Medicare patients, you may not bill office visit codes for audio only communication. If there is audio only, use phone call codes 99441-99443. In order to bill an office visit, with codes 99201-99215 to a Medicare patient, audio and visual, real time communication is required. Some state Medicaid programs and private insurers allow office visits to be billed with audio equipment only, so check your state requirements.
Q: How do I select a level of office visit?
A: CMS’s announcement on March 31 relaxed the rules for practitioners to select a level of service for office and other patient services (99201-99215). CMS stated that clinicians could use either total time or medical decision-making to select a code.
If using time, count the practitioner’s total time for the visit, both face to face and non–face to face. It does not need to be greater than 50% in counseling. If using medical decision-making, history and exam are not needed to select the level of service. Medical decision-making alone can be used to select the code.
Q: Can I count the time it takes my medical assistant to set up the audio-visual communication with a patient?
A: No, you cannot count staff time in coding and billing a patient visit in this manner.
Q: Is there a code for a registered nurse to use for making phone calls with patients?
A: No, unfortunately.
Q: How do I know if a service can be billed with phone only?
A: These are indicated as “yes” on CMS’s list of covered telehealth services as allowed via audio only.
Providing mental health services during COVID-19
Q: I am a mental health provider who finds himself trying to provide the best care for my patients during this pandemic. How do I bill for behavioral health services if I am not able to conduct in-person visits?
A: Psychiatrists and behavioral health professionals can perform psychiatric diagnostic evaluations and psychotherapy over the phone during the public health emergency.
The use of real-time, audio-visual communication equipment is not required. This is one of the many changes CMS made in its interim final rule regarding COVID-19, released April 30.
Not only did CMS update the list of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes that could be reported via real-time, audio-visual communication, but it also added a column to guidance on covered telehealth services: “Can Audio-only Interaction Meet the Requirements?” The codes for psychiatric diagnostic evaluations and psychotherapy are indicated as “yes.”
In addition to psychiatric diagnostic evaluations and time-based psychotherapy codes, psychotherapy for crisis, family, and group psychotherapy can be done with audio-only technology.
CMS has issued multiple waivers and two major rules that greatly expand the ability of medical practices to treat patients without requiring an in-person visit. This latest change, allowing some services to be performed with audio equipment only, is remarkable.
For Medicare patients, report the place of service that would have been used if the patient was seen in person. This could be office (POS 11), outpatient department (POS 19, 21), or community mental health center (POS 53).
Some private payers require the place of service for telehealth (02). The lack of consistency between payers is difficult for practices. Append modifier 95 to the CPT code for all payers. The definition of modifier 95 is “synchronous telemedicine service using audio and visual communication.” However, as CMS added these services to the telehealth list, use modifier 95.
Have a coding question? Send it in and it may be answered in a future column. (Please be sure to note your specialty in the text of the question.)
Betsy Nicoletti, MS, is a consultant, author, and speaker, as well as the founder of CodingIntel.com, a library of medical practice coding resources.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
#WhiteCoats4BlackLives: A ‘platform for good’
like those on vivid display during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Sporadic protests – with participants in scrubs or white coats kneeling for 8 minutes and 46 seconds in memory of George Floyd – have quickly grown into organized, ongoing, large-scale events at hospitals, medical campuses, and city centers in New York, Indianapolis, Atlanta, Austin, Houston, Boston, Miami, Portland, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Albuquerque, among others.
The group WhiteCoats4BlackLives began with a “die-in” protest in 2014, and the medical student–run organization continues to organize, with a large number of protests scheduled to occur simultaneously on June 5 at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time.
“It’s important to use our platform for good,” said Danielle Verghese, MD, a first-year internal medicine resident at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia, who helped recruit a small group of students, residents, and pharmacy school students to take part in a kneel-in on May 31 in the city’s Washington Square Park.
“As a doctor, most people in society regard me with a certain amount of respect and may listen if I say something,” Dr. Verghese said.
Crystal Nnenne Azu, MD, a third-year internal medicine resident at Indiana University, who has long worked on increasing diversity in medicine, said she helped organize a march and kneel-in at the school’s Eskenazi Hospital campus on June 3 to educate and show support.
Some 500-1,000 health care providers in scrubs and white coats turned out, tweeted one observer.
“Racism is a public health crisis,” Dr. Azu said. “This COVID epidemic has definitely raised that awareness even more for many of our colleagues.”
Disproportionate death rates in blacks and Latinos are “not just related to individual choices but also systemic racism,” she said.
The march also called out police brutality and the “angst” that many people feel about it, said Dr. Azu. “People want an avenue to express their discomfort, to raise awareness, and also show their solidarity and support for peaceful protests,” she said.
A June 4 protest and “die-in” – held to honor black and indigenous lives at the University of New Mexico Health Sciences campus in Albuquerque – was personal for Jaron Kee, MD, a first-year family medicine resident. He was raised on the Navajo reservation in Crystal, New Mexico, and has watched COVID-19 devastate the tribe, adding insult to years of health disparities, police brutality, and neglect of thousands of missing and murdered indigenous women, he said.
Participating is a means of reassuring the community that “we’re allies and that their suffering and their livelihood is something that we don’t underrecognize,” Dr. Kee said. These values spurred him to enter medicine, he said.
Eileen Barrett, MD, MPH, a hospitalist and assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine, who also attended the “die-in,” said she hopes that peers, in particular people of color, see that they have allies at work “who are committed to being anti-racist.”
It’s also “a statement to the community at large that physicians and other healthcare workers strive to be anti-racist and do our best to support our African American and indigenous peers, students, patients, and community members,” she said.
Now is different
Some residents said they felt particularly moved to act now – as the country entered a second week of protests in response to George Floyd’s death and as the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the devastating toll of health disparities.
“This protest feels different to me,” said Ian Fields, MD, a urogynecology fellow at Oregon Health Sciences University (OHSU) School of Medicine. “The events over the last couple of weeks were just a big catalyst for this to explode,” he said.
“I was very intent, as a white male physician, just coming to acknowledge the privilege that I have, and to do something,” Dr. Fields said, adding that as an obstetrician-gynecologist, he sees the results of health disparities daily. He took part in a kneel-in and demonstration with OHSU colleagues on June 2 at Portland’s Pioneer Courthouse Square.
It’s okay to be sad and mourn, Dr. Fields said, but, he added, “nobody needs our tears necessarily right now. They need us to show up and to speak up about what we see going on.”
“It feels like it’s a national conversation,” said Dr. Verghese. The White Coats movement is “not an issue that’s confined to the black community – this is not an issue that’s a ‘black thing’ – this is a humanitarian thing,” she said.
Dr. Verghese, an Indian American who said that no one would mistake her for being white, said she still wants to acknowledge that she has privilege, as well as biases. All the patients in the COVID-19 unit where she works are African American, but she said she hadn’t initially noticed.
“What’s shocking is that I didn’t think about it,” she said. “I do have to recognize my own biases.”
Protesting During a Pandemic
Despite the demands of treating COVID-19 patients, healthcare professionals have made the White Coat protests a priority, they said. Most – but not all – of the White Coats protests have been on medical campuses, allowing health care professionals to quickly assemble and get back to work. Plus, all of the protests have called on attendees to march and gather safely – with masks and distancing.
“Seeing that we are working in the hospital, it’s important for us to be wearing our masks, to be social distancing,” Dr. Azu said. Organizers asked attendees to ensure that they protested in a way that kept them “from worsening the COVID epidemic,” said Dr. Azu.
Unlike many others, the first protest in Portland was in conjunction with a larger group that assembles every evening in the square, said Dr. Fields. The physician protesters were wearing masks and maintaining distance from each other, especially when they kneeled, he said.
The protests have provided an escape from the futility of not being able to do anything for COVID-19 patients except to provide support, said Dr. Verghese. “In so many ways, we find ourselves powerless,” she said.
Protesting, Dr. Verghese added, was “one tiny moment where I got to regain my sense of agency, that I could actually do something about this.”
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
like those on vivid display during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Sporadic protests – with participants in scrubs or white coats kneeling for 8 minutes and 46 seconds in memory of George Floyd – have quickly grown into organized, ongoing, large-scale events at hospitals, medical campuses, and city centers in New York, Indianapolis, Atlanta, Austin, Houston, Boston, Miami, Portland, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Albuquerque, among others.
The group WhiteCoats4BlackLives began with a “die-in” protest in 2014, and the medical student–run organization continues to organize, with a large number of protests scheduled to occur simultaneously on June 5 at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time.
“It’s important to use our platform for good,” said Danielle Verghese, MD, a first-year internal medicine resident at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia, who helped recruit a small group of students, residents, and pharmacy school students to take part in a kneel-in on May 31 in the city’s Washington Square Park.
“As a doctor, most people in society regard me with a certain amount of respect and may listen if I say something,” Dr. Verghese said.
Crystal Nnenne Azu, MD, a third-year internal medicine resident at Indiana University, who has long worked on increasing diversity in medicine, said she helped organize a march and kneel-in at the school’s Eskenazi Hospital campus on June 3 to educate and show support.
Some 500-1,000 health care providers in scrubs and white coats turned out, tweeted one observer.
“Racism is a public health crisis,” Dr. Azu said. “This COVID epidemic has definitely raised that awareness even more for many of our colleagues.”
Disproportionate death rates in blacks and Latinos are “not just related to individual choices but also systemic racism,” she said.
The march also called out police brutality and the “angst” that many people feel about it, said Dr. Azu. “People want an avenue to express their discomfort, to raise awareness, and also show their solidarity and support for peaceful protests,” she said.
A June 4 protest and “die-in” – held to honor black and indigenous lives at the University of New Mexico Health Sciences campus in Albuquerque – was personal for Jaron Kee, MD, a first-year family medicine resident. He was raised on the Navajo reservation in Crystal, New Mexico, and has watched COVID-19 devastate the tribe, adding insult to years of health disparities, police brutality, and neglect of thousands of missing and murdered indigenous women, he said.
Participating is a means of reassuring the community that “we’re allies and that their suffering and their livelihood is something that we don’t underrecognize,” Dr. Kee said. These values spurred him to enter medicine, he said.
Eileen Barrett, MD, MPH, a hospitalist and assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine, who also attended the “die-in,” said she hopes that peers, in particular people of color, see that they have allies at work “who are committed to being anti-racist.”
It’s also “a statement to the community at large that physicians and other healthcare workers strive to be anti-racist and do our best to support our African American and indigenous peers, students, patients, and community members,” she said.
Now is different
Some residents said they felt particularly moved to act now – as the country entered a second week of protests in response to George Floyd’s death and as the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the devastating toll of health disparities.
“This protest feels different to me,” said Ian Fields, MD, a urogynecology fellow at Oregon Health Sciences University (OHSU) School of Medicine. “The events over the last couple of weeks were just a big catalyst for this to explode,” he said.
“I was very intent, as a white male physician, just coming to acknowledge the privilege that I have, and to do something,” Dr. Fields said, adding that as an obstetrician-gynecologist, he sees the results of health disparities daily. He took part in a kneel-in and demonstration with OHSU colleagues on June 2 at Portland’s Pioneer Courthouse Square.
It’s okay to be sad and mourn, Dr. Fields said, but, he added, “nobody needs our tears necessarily right now. They need us to show up and to speak up about what we see going on.”
“It feels like it’s a national conversation,” said Dr. Verghese. The White Coats movement is “not an issue that’s confined to the black community – this is not an issue that’s a ‘black thing’ – this is a humanitarian thing,” she said.
Dr. Verghese, an Indian American who said that no one would mistake her for being white, said she still wants to acknowledge that she has privilege, as well as biases. All the patients in the COVID-19 unit where she works are African American, but she said she hadn’t initially noticed.
“What’s shocking is that I didn’t think about it,” she said. “I do have to recognize my own biases.”
Protesting During a Pandemic
Despite the demands of treating COVID-19 patients, healthcare professionals have made the White Coat protests a priority, they said. Most – but not all – of the White Coats protests have been on medical campuses, allowing health care professionals to quickly assemble and get back to work. Plus, all of the protests have called on attendees to march and gather safely – with masks and distancing.
“Seeing that we are working in the hospital, it’s important for us to be wearing our masks, to be social distancing,” Dr. Azu said. Organizers asked attendees to ensure that they protested in a way that kept them “from worsening the COVID epidemic,” said Dr. Azu.
Unlike many others, the first protest in Portland was in conjunction with a larger group that assembles every evening in the square, said Dr. Fields. The physician protesters were wearing masks and maintaining distance from each other, especially when they kneeled, he said.
The protests have provided an escape from the futility of not being able to do anything for COVID-19 patients except to provide support, said Dr. Verghese. “In so many ways, we find ourselves powerless,” she said.
Protesting, Dr. Verghese added, was “one tiny moment where I got to regain my sense of agency, that I could actually do something about this.”
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
like those on vivid display during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Sporadic protests – with participants in scrubs or white coats kneeling for 8 minutes and 46 seconds in memory of George Floyd – have quickly grown into organized, ongoing, large-scale events at hospitals, medical campuses, and city centers in New York, Indianapolis, Atlanta, Austin, Houston, Boston, Miami, Portland, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Albuquerque, among others.
The group WhiteCoats4BlackLives began with a “die-in” protest in 2014, and the medical student–run organization continues to organize, with a large number of protests scheduled to occur simultaneously on June 5 at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time.
“It’s important to use our platform for good,” said Danielle Verghese, MD, a first-year internal medicine resident at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia, who helped recruit a small group of students, residents, and pharmacy school students to take part in a kneel-in on May 31 in the city’s Washington Square Park.
“As a doctor, most people in society regard me with a certain amount of respect and may listen if I say something,” Dr. Verghese said.
Crystal Nnenne Azu, MD, a third-year internal medicine resident at Indiana University, who has long worked on increasing diversity in medicine, said she helped organize a march and kneel-in at the school’s Eskenazi Hospital campus on June 3 to educate and show support.
Some 500-1,000 health care providers in scrubs and white coats turned out, tweeted one observer.
“Racism is a public health crisis,” Dr. Azu said. “This COVID epidemic has definitely raised that awareness even more for many of our colleagues.”
Disproportionate death rates in blacks and Latinos are “not just related to individual choices but also systemic racism,” she said.
The march also called out police brutality and the “angst” that many people feel about it, said Dr. Azu. “People want an avenue to express their discomfort, to raise awareness, and also show their solidarity and support for peaceful protests,” she said.
A June 4 protest and “die-in” – held to honor black and indigenous lives at the University of New Mexico Health Sciences campus in Albuquerque – was personal for Jaron Kee, MD, a first-year family medicine resident. He was raised on the Navajo reservation in Crystal, New Mexico, and has watched COVID-19 devastate the tribe, adding insult to years of health disparities, police brutality, and neglect of thousands of missing and murdered indigenous women, he said.
Participating is a means of reassuring the community that “we’re allies and that their suffering and their livelihood is something that we don’t underrecognize,” Dr. Kee said. These values spurred him to enter medicine, he said.
Eileen Barrett, MD, MPH, a hospitalist and assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine, who also attended the “die-in,” said she hopes that peers, in particular people of color, see that they have allies at work “who are committed to being anti-racist.”
It’s also “a statement to the community at large that physicians and other healthcare workers strive to be anti-racist and do our best to support our African American and indigenous peers, students, patients, and community members,” she said.
Now is different
Some residents said they felt particularly moved to act now – as the country entered a second week of protests in response to George Floyd’s death and as the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the devastating toll of health disparities.
“This protest feels different to me,” said Ian Fields, MD, a urogynecology fellow at Oregon Health Sciences University (OHSU) School of Medicine. “The events over the last couple of weeks were just a big catalyst for this to explode,” he said.
“I was very intent, as a white male physician, just coming to acknowledge the privilege that I have, and to do something,” Dr. Fields said, adding that as an obstetrician-gynecologist, he sees the results of health disparities daily. He took part in a kneel-in and demonstration with OHSU colleagues on June 2 at Portland’s Pioneer Courthouse Square.
It’s okay to be sad and mourn, Dr. Fields said, but, he added, “nobody needs our tears necessarily right now. They need us to show up and to speak up about what we see going on.”
“It feels like it’s a national conversation,” said Dr. Verghese. The White Coats movement is “not an issue that’s confined to the black community – this is not an issue that’s a ‘black thing’ – this is a humanitarian thing,” she said.
Dr. Verghese, an Indian American who said that no one would mistake her for being white, said she still wants to acknowledge that she has privilege, as well as biases. All the patients in the COVID-19 unit where she works are African American, but she said she hadn’t initially noticed.
“What’s shocking is that I didn’t think about it,” she said. “I do have to recognize my own biases.”
Protesting During a Pandemic
Despite the demands of treating COVID-19 patients, healthcare professionals have made the White Coat protests a priority, they said. Most – but not all – of the White Coats protests have been on medical campuses, allowing health care professionals to quickly assemble and get back to work. Plus, all of the protests have called on attendees to march and gather safely – with masks and distancing.
“Seeing that we are working in the hospital, it’s important for us to be wearing our masks, to be social distancing,” Dr. Azu said. Organizers asked attendees to ensure that they protested in a way that kept them “from worsening the COVID epidemic,” said Dr. Azu.
Unlike many others, the first protest in Portland was in conjunction with a larger group that assembles every evening in the square, said Dr. Fields. The physician protesters were wearing masks and maintaining distance from each other, especially when they kneeled, he said.
The protests have provided an escape from the futility of not being able to do anything for COVID-19 patients except to provide support, said Dr. Verghese. “In so many ways, we find ourselves powerless,” she said.
Protesting, Dr. Verghese added, was “one tiny moment where I got to regain my sense of agency, that I could actually do something about this.”
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A bumpy virtual #ASCO20; Returning to Chicago in 2021?
Called ‘incredibly boring,’ Praised as ‘special’
CYBERSPACE – Hope Rugo, MD, was one of the would-be attendees of the American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meeting who could not access the online event on its first day, Friday, May 29.
“Such a shame – virtual ASCO is nonexistent,” tweeted Rugo, who is from the University of California, San Francisco.
The breast cancer specialist tried for more than hour before finally gaining entry in the late morning.
Not everyone was as successful.
That same day, Arjun Balar, MD, of NYU Langone Health in New York announced on Twitter that he’d quit for the day. “I give up @ASCO. Time for a cocktail.”
Don Dizon, MD, of Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, tried repeatedly to join the meeting as a live broadcast, using his desktop and laptop computers as well as an iPad. Nothing worked. Limited to seeing data and discussions “after the fact,” Dizon looked to next year, tweeting hopefully: “... fingers crossed for an inperson #ASCO21.”
ASCO did not respond to a request for further information about the technical difficulties of the meeting’s first day.
This year’s meeting, which involved 40,000-plus attendees, was shortened to 3 days and limited to scientific presentations because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Education sessions will be held online August 8-10.
Despite those technical glitches, dozens of virtual meeting attendees praised the online effort, which was assembled in just a few months, and called out virtues such as the quick availability of video transcripts as well as the obvious benefits of low cost, zero travel, and overall convenience. But one sentiment was nearly universal: there’s nothing like the real thing.
At the same time, a Medscape Oncology online meeting poll indicated that nearly half (48%) of the 335 respondents said “no,” they do not envision themselves in person at the real thing in Chicago in 2021. About one fifth (21%) said, “yes, if there is a vaccine.” Roughly 15% said “yes,” and another 15% said “not sure right now.”
What did oncologists miss most with virtual ASCO?
Many said face-to-face (F2F) interactions. Collaboration, networking, and catching up with old friends were some of the stock F2F moments cited as losses.
Others described more idiosyncratic disappointments, including Riyaz Shah, MD, of the Kent Oncology Centre in the UK, who dismissed a future with exclusively virtual meetings.
He tweeted: “Not sustainable. We need to meet F2F. Oncology is an odd one. Exposed to human distress daily (if not hourly). [Very] few people understand what we do, fewer would do it. There aren’t many people we can talk to. I love chewing the cud with my colleagues who are close friends.”
The virtual meeting inspired more social media engagement, but fewer oncologists participated, according to data from social media analytics firm Symplur. This year, 1K users identified as oncologists generated 17.75K tweets. In 2019, 1.3K oncologists put out 15.2K tweets.
Virtual meeting ‘like homework’
George Sledge, MD, of Stanford University, California, asked his 1700 Twitter followers to discuss the virtual ASCO experience, including the spotty functionality of presenter videos (a con) and eating dinner between talks (a pro).
One of his criticisms struck a nerve – that the online meeting was “like homework.”
“ ‘Feels like homework’ is the best expression I [have] read so far!” tweeted Gustavo Gössling, MD, from the Kaplan Oncology Institute in Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Yes, it feels “like studying alone,” agreed Stanford’s Lidia Schapira, MD, in a tweet.
“It’s incredibly boring – let’s bring back F2F next year,” tweeted Ioannis Gounaris, MD, Merck Group, Cambridge, UK, in response to Sledge’s request.
Sledge joined many others in saying that, ultimately, the future should include – and will demand – both virtual and in-person meetings.
What will happen with ASCO next year?
Medscape Medical News asked some virtual attendees whether they envisioned going in person to the ASCO meeting next year in Chicago.
“Counting on it,” said Harold Burstein, MD, PhD, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston. “But I also recognize that it fully depends on what happens between now and then. Vaccines. Safety of travel. Safety of large, indoor, crowded spaces.”
Despite acknowledging the uncertainty of how things will “play out,” Burstein advised: “Put it on your calendar and make reservations, and make sure the reservations are fully refundable.”
Ahmad Tarhini, MD, from the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida, sounded similarly optimistic: “Hopefully we will have a vaccine by then. I expect the ASCO annual meeting will happen in person in 2021.”
Moffitt colleague Michelle Echevarria Colon, MD, said, “I could see myself attending ... in Chicago in 2021.” And she added: “I think we’ll get to a point where it could happen.”
Others were uncertain.
Ishwaria Subbiah, MD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, said: “If someone told us 6 months ago that our ‘new normal’ would be in this near-total virtual existence, most of us would not have believed them. So it is hard to imagine what our reality will be in a year from now at ASCO 2021.”
Jack West, MD, from City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Duarte, California, thinks the meeting will be changed for a long time, even if 2021 is a live event.
“While I think that there MIGHT be a live conference, I think it will be many years, if ever, before we see it return to its prior magnitude,” he wrote in an email, echoing remarks previously made by other healthcare professionals about medical meetings in any post–COVID-19 world.
A year from now, said West, “I strongly suspect that we will still be contending with risk of exposure” and that means clinician attendees might, in turn, expose their cancer patients back home.
Despite his wistful “fingers crossed” tweet during ASCO 2020, Brown’s Dizon also recently commented on Medscape that “I wonder whether I will ever sit in a crowded auditorium at an ASCO annual meeting again.”
Sagar Sardesai, MBBS, Ohio State Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, responded: “Unless we have a vaccine that is successful or we can demonstrate enough herd immunity in the United States, I can’t imagine that such large gatherings are a real possibility. We need to protect our vulnerable populations.”
City of Hope’s Cary Presant, MD, acknowledged he is one of those vulnerable people. “In 2021, if the environment is safe for oncologists of my age, I will be in Chicago,” he said. “But with COVID-19 still a threat, I might have to attend only virtually.”
“This year was special”
On social media, MD Anderson’s Vivek Subbiah, MD, did not speculate about next year’s meeting but observed the uniqueness of the current moment.
He tweeted: “The last 8 years of @asco are a blur in my memory. This year #ASCO was special, and I’m sure we will all remember where we were for this year’s meeting.”
Other oncologists praised the accessibility of the virtual meeting.
“The power of a virtual meeting is it creates an unlimited number of seats at the oncology research table. Anyone globally can be involved and that is really special,” said Suneel Kamath, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio.
“Virtual ASCO levels the playing field for oncologists everywhere,” says Bishal Gyawali, MD, PhD, from Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada. In a Medscape Commentary, he notes that “attending a typical ASCO meeting is astonishingly cost-prohibitive, especially for colleagues from low- and middle-income countries ... now everybody has the same access to the meeting.”
ASCO made the best out of a bad situation with the expanded virtual meeting, suggested David Henry, MD, Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia, host of MDEdge’s Blood and Cancer podcast, part of the Medscape Professional Network. In an interview with ASCO president Skip Burris, MD, before the meeting, Henry said: “Making lemonade out of lemons. It’ll give us something new and different. What an amazing turn of events.”
With additional reporting by Zosia Chustecka , Liz Neporent, Neil Osterweil, and Jennifer Smith. This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Called ‘incredibly boring,’ Praised as ‘special’
Called ‘incredibly boring,’ Praised as ‘special’
CYBERSPACE – Hope Rugo, MD, was one of the would-be attendees of the American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meeting who could not access the online event on its first day, Friday, May 29.
“Such a shame – virtual ASCO is nonexistent,” tweeted Rugo, who is from the University of California, San Francisco.
The breast cancer specialist tried for more than hour before finally gaining entry in the late morning.
Not everyone was as successful.
That same day, Arjun Balar, MD, of NYU Langone Health in New York announced on Twitter that he’d quit for the day. “I give up @ASCO. Time for a cocktail.”
Don Dizon, MD, of Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, tried repeatedly to join the meeting as a live broadcast, using his desktop and laptop computers as well as an iPad. Nothing worked. Limited to seeing data and discussions “after the fact,” Dizon looked to next year, tweeting hopefully: “... fingers crossed for an inperson #ASCO21.”
ASCO did not respond to a request for further information about the technical difficulties of the meeting’s first day.
This year’s meeting, which involved 40,000-plus attendees, was shortened to 3 days and limited to scientific presentations because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Education sessions will be held online August 8-10.
Despite those technical glitches, dozens of virtual meeting attendees praised the online effort, which was assembled in just a few months, and called out virtues such as the quick availability of video transcripts as well as the obvious benefits of low cost, zero travel, and overall convenience. But one sentiment was nearly universal: there’s nothing like the real thing.
At the same time, a Medscape Oncology online meeting poll indicated that nearly half (48%) of the 335 respondents said “no,” they do not envision themselves in person at the real thing in Chicago in 2021. About one fifth (21%) said, “yes, if there is a vaccine.” Roughly 15% said “yes,” and another 15% said “not sure right now.”
What did oncologists miss most with virtual ASCO?
Many said face-to-face (F2F) interactions. Collaboration, networking, and catching up with old friends were some of the stock F2F moments cited as losses.
Others described more idiosyncratic disappointments, including Riyaz Shah, MD, of the Kent Oncology Centre in the UK, who dismissed a future with exclusively virtual meetings.
He tweeted: “Not sustainable. We need to meet F2F. Oncology is an odd one. Exposed to human distress daily (if not hourly). [Very] few people understand what we do, fewer would do it. There aren’t many people we can talk to. I love chewing the cud with my colleagues who are close friends.”
The virtual meeting inspired more social media engagement, but fewer oncologists participated, according to data from social media analytics firm Symplur. This year, 1K users identified as oncologists generated 17.75K tweets. In 2019, 1.3K oncologists put out 15.2K tweets.
Virtual meeting ‘like homework’
George Sledge, MD, of Stanford University, California, asked his 1700 Twitter followers to discuss the virtual ASCO experience, including the spotty functionality of presenter videos (a con) and eating dinner between talks (a pro).
One of his criticisms struck a nerve – that the online meeting was “like homework.”
“ ‘Feels like homework’ is the best expression I [have] read so far!” tweeted Gustavo Gössling, MD, from the Kaplan Oncology Institute in Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Yes, it feels “like studying alone,” agreed Stanford’s Lidia Schapira, MD, in a tweet.
“It’s incredibly boring – let’s bring back F2F next year,” tweeted Ioannis Gounaris, MD, Merck Group, Cambridge, UK, in response to Sledge’s request.
Sledge joined many others in saying that, ultimately, the future should include – and will demand – both virtual and in-person meetings.
What will happen with ASCO next year?
Medscape Medical News asked some virtual attendees whether they envisioned going in person to the ASCO meeting next year in Chicago.
“Counting on it,” said Harold Burstein, MD, PhD, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston. “But I also recognize that it fully depends on what happens between now and then. Vaccines. Safety of travel. Safety of large, indoor, crowded spaces.”
Despite acknowledging the uncertainty of how things will “play out,” Burstein advised: “Put it on your calendar and make reservations, and make sure the reservations are fully refundable.”
Ahmad Tarhini, MD, from the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida, sounded similarly optimistic: “Hopefully we will have a vaccine by then. I expect the ASCO annual meeting will happen in person in 2021.”
Moffitt colleague Michelle Echevarria Colon, MD, said, “I could see myself attending ... in Chicago in 2021.” And she added: “I think we’ll get to a point where it could happen.”
Others were uncertain.
Ishwaria Subbiah, MD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, said: “If someone told us 6 months ago that our ‘new normal’ would be in this near-total virtual existence, most of us would not have believed them. So it is hard to imagine what our reality will be in a year from now at ASCO 2021.”
Jack West, MD, from City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Duarte, California, thinks the meeting will be changed for a long time, even if 2021 is a live event.
“While I think that there MIGHT be a live conference, I think it will be many years, if ever, before we see it return to its prior magnitude,” he wrote in an email, echoing remarks previously made by other healthcare professionals about medical meetings in any post–COVID-19 world.
A year from now, said West, “I strongly suspect that we will still be contending with risk of exposure” and that means clinician attendees might, in turn, expose their cancer patients back home.
Despite his wistful “fingers crossed” tweet during ASCO 2020, Brown’s Dizon also recently commented on Medscape that “I wonder whether I will ever sit in a crowded auditorium at an ASCO annual meeting again.”
Sagar Sardesai, MBBS, Ohio State Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, responded: “Unless we have a vaccine that is successful or we can demonstrate enough herd immunity in the United States, I can’t imagine that such large gatherings are a real possibility. We need to protect our vulnerable populations.”
City of Hope’s Cary Presant, MD, acknowledged he is one of those vulnerable people. “In 2021, if the environment is safe for oncologists of my age, I will be in Chicago,” he said. “But with COVID-19 still a threat, I might have to attend only virtually.”
“This year was special”
On social media, MD Anderson’s Vivek Subbiah, MD, did not speculate about next year’s meeting but observed the uniqueness of the current moment.
He tweeted: “The last 8 years of @asco are a blur in my memory. This year #ASCO was special, and I’m sure we will all remember where we were for this year’s meeting.”
Other oncologists praised the accessibility of the virtual meeting.
“The power of a virtual meeting is it creates an unlimited number of seats at the oncology research table. Anyone globally can be involved and that is really special,” said Suneel Kamath, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio.
“Virtual ASCO levels the playing field for oncologists everywhere,” says Bishal Gyawali, MD, PhD, from Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada. In a Medscape Commentary, he notes that “attending a typical ASCO meeting is astonishingly cost-prohibitive, especially for colleagues from low- and middle-income countries ... now everybody has the same access to the meeting.”
ASCO made the best out of a bad situation with the expanded virtual meeting, suggested David Henry, MD, Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia, host of MDEdge’s Blood and Cancer podcast, part of the Medscape Professional Network. In an interview with ASCO president Skip Burris, MD, before the meeting, Henry said: “Making lemonade out of lemons. It’ll give us something new and different. What an amazing turn of events.”
With additional reporting by Zosia Chustecka , Liz Neporent, Neil Osterweil, and Jennifer Smith. This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
CYBERSPACE – Hope Rugo, MD, was one of the would-be attendees of the American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meeting who could not access the online event on its first day, Friday, May 29.
“Such a shame – virtual ASCO is nonexistent,” tweeted Rugo, who is from the University of California, San Francisco.
The breast cancer specialist tried for more than hour before finally gaining entry in the late morning.
Not everyone was as successful.
That same day, Arjun Balar, MD, of NYU Langone Health in New York announced on Twitter that he’d quit for the day. “I give up @ASCO. Time for a cocktail.”
Don Dizon, MD, of Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, tried repeatedly to join the meeting as a live broadcast, using his desktop and laptop computers as well as an iPad. Nothing worked. Limited to seeing data and discussions “after the fact,” Dizon looked to next year, tweeting hopefully: “... fingers crossed for an inperson #ASCO21.”
ASCO did not respond to a request for further information about the technical difficulties of the meeting’s first day.
This year’s meeting, which involved 40,000-plus attendees, was shortened to 3 days and limited to scientific presentations because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Education sessions will be held online August 8-10.
Despite those technical glitches, dozens of virtual meeting attendees praised the online effort, which was assembled in just a few months, and called out virtues such as the quick availability of video transcripts as well as the obvious benefits of low cost, zero travel, and overall convenience. But one sentiment was nearly universal: there’s nothing like the real thing.
At the same time, a Medscape Oncology online meeting poll indicated that nearly half (48%) of the 335 respondents said “no,” they do not envision themselves in person at the real thing in Chicago in 2021. About one fifth (21%) said, “yes, if there is a vaccine.” Roughly 15% said “yes,” and another 15% said “not sure right now.”
What did oncologists miss most with virtual ASCO?
Many said face-to-face (F2F) interactions. Collaboration, networking, and catching up with old friends were some of the stock F2F moments cited as losses.
Others described more idiosyncratic disappointments, including Riyaz Shah, MD, of the Kent Oncology Centre in the UK, who dismissed a future with exclusively virtual meetings.
He tweeted: “Not sustainable. We need to meet F2F. Oncology is an odd one. Exposed to human distress daily (if not hourly). [Very] few people understand what we do, fewer would do it. There aren’t many people we can talk to. I love chewing the cud with my colleagues who are close friends.”
The virtual meeting inspired more social media engagement, but fewer oncologists participated, according to data from social media analytics firm Symplur. This year, 1K users identified as oncologists generated 17.75K tweets. In 2019, 1.3K oncologists put out 15.2K tweets.
Virtual meeting ‘like homework’
George Sledge, MD, of Stanford University, California, asked his 1700 Twitter followers to discuss the virtual ASCO experience, including the spotty functionality of presenter videos (a con) and eating dinner between talks (a pro).
One of his criticisms struck a nerve – that the online meeting was “like homework.”
“ ‘Feels like homework’ is the best expression I [have] read so far!” tweeted Gustavo Gössling, MD, from the Kaplan Oncology Institute in Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Yes, it feels “like studying alone,” agreed Stanford’s Lidia Schapira, MD, in a tweet.
“It’s incredibly boring – let’s bring back F2F next year,” tweeted Ioannis Gounaris, MD, Merck Group, Cambridge, UK, in response to Sledge’s request.
Sledge joined many others in saying that, ultimately, the future should include – and will demand – both virtual and in-person meetings.
What will happen with ASCO next year?
Medscape Medical News asked some virtual attendees whether they envisioned going in person to the ASCO meeting next year in Chicago.
“Counting on it,” said Harold Burstein, MD, PhD, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston. “But I also recognize that it fully depends on what happens between now and then. Vaccines. Safety of travel. Safety of large, indoor, crowded spaces.”
Despite acknowledging the uncertainty of how things will “play out,” Burstein advised: “Put it on your calendar and make reservations, and make sure the reservations are fully refundable.”
Ahmad Tarhini, MD, from the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida, sounded similarly optimistic: “Hopefully we will have a vaccine by then. I expect the ASCO annual meeting will happen in person in 2021.”
Moffitt colleague Michelle Echevarria Colon, MD, said, “I could see myself attending ... in Chicago in 2021.” And she added: “I think we’ll get to a point where it could happen.”
Others were uncertain.
Ishwaria Subbiah, MD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, said: “If someone told us 6 months ago that our ‘new normal’ would be in this near-total virtual existence, most of us would not have believed them. So it is hard to imagine what our reality will be in a year from now at ASCO 2021.”
Jack West, MD, from City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Duarte, California, thinks the meeting will be changed for a long time, even if 2021 is a live event.
“While I think that there MIGHT be a live conference, I think it will be many years, if ever, before we see it return to its prior magnitude,” he wrote in an email, echoing remarks previously made by other healthcare professionals about medical meetings in any post–COVID-19 world.
A year from now, said West, “I strongly suspect that we will still be contending with risk of exposure” and that means clinician attendees might, in turn, expose their cancer patients back home.
Despite his wistful “fingers crossed” tweet during ASCO 2020, Brown’s Dizon also recently commented on Medscape that “I wonder whether I will ever sit in a crowded auditorium at an ASCO annual meeting again.”
Sagar Sardesai, MBBS, Ohio State Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, responded: “Unless we have a vaccine that is successful or we can demonstrate enough herd immunity in the United States, I can’t imagine that such large gatherings are a real possibility. We need to protect our vulnerable populations.”
City of Hope’s Cary Presant, MD, acknowledged he is one of those vulnerable people. “In 2021, if the environment is safe for oncologists of my age, I will be in Chicago,” he said. “But with COVID-19 still a threat, I might have to attend only virtually.”
“This year was special”
On social media, MD Anderson’s Vivek Subbiah, MD, did not speculate about next year’s meeting but observed the uniqueness of the current moment.
He tweeted: “The last 8 years of @asco are a blur in my memory. This year #ASCO was special, and I’m sure we will all remember where we were for this year’s meeting.”
Other oncologists praised the accessibility of the virtual meeting.
“The power of a virtual meeting is it creates an unlimited number of seats at the oncology research table. Anyone globally can be involved and that is really special,” said Suneel Kamath, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio.
“Virtual ASCO levels the playing field for oncologists everywhere,” says Bishal Gyawali, MD, PhD, from Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada. In a Medscape Commentary, he notes that “attending a typical ASCO meeting is astonishingly cost-prohibitive, especially for colleagues from low- and middle-income countries ... now everybody has the same access to the meeting.”
ASCO made the best out of a bad situation with the expanded virtual meeting, suggested David Henry, MD, Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia, host of MDEdge’s Blood and Cancer podcast, part of the Medscape Professional Network. In an interview with ASCO president Skip Burris, MD, before the meeting, Henry said: “Making lemonade out of lemons. It’ll give us something new and different. What an amazing turn of events.”
With additional reporting by Zosia Chustecka , Liz Neporent, Neil Osterweil, and Jennifer Smith. This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM ASCO 2020
Telemedicine: Common hurdles and proper coding for ObGyns
Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, many significant changes have occurred that have made the implementation of telemedicine easier and more attractive for gynecologic practices. In the first article in this series, we discussed the benefits of telemedicine to physicians and patients, how to get started using telemedicine, and implementing a workflow. This article will discuss the common hurdles in the process and the proper coding to use to insure reimbursement for services rendered.
Barriers to implementing telemedicine
Incorrect assumptions
Latecomers to telemedicine often assume that patients prefer face-to-face visits when, in fact, many may prefer the convenience of virtual visits. More than 50% of patients who are surveyed about their experience with telemedicine say that online tools have helped improve their relationship with their providers.1 Telemedicine has grown astronomically during the COVID-19 pandemic to the point where many patients now expect their health care providers to be able to conduct virtual visits. Practices that do not offer telemedicine may find their patients seeking services elsewhere. Nearly two-thirds of health care professionals expect their commitment to telemedicine to increase significantly in the next 3 years.2 Of those providers who have not yet adopted the practice, nearly 85% expect to implement telemedicine in the near future.3 COVID-19 has motivated the increased use of telemedicine to enhance the communication with patients, making it possible for patients to have enhanced access to health care during this pandemic while minimizing infectious transmission of COVID-19 to physicians and their staff.4
Admittedly, telemedicine is not appropriate for all patients. In general, situations that do not lend themselves to telemedicine are those for which an in-person visit is required to evaluate the patient via a physical examination, to perform a protocol-driven procedure, or provide an aggressive intervention. Additional patients for whom telemedicine may be inappropriate include those with cognitive disorders, those with language barriers, those with emergency situations that warrant an office visit or a visit to the emergency department, and patients who do not have access to the technology to conduct a virtual visit.
Cost and complexity
The process of implementing electronic health records (EHRs) left a bitter taste in the mouths of many health care professionals. But EHRs are complicated and expensive. Implementation often resulted in lost productivity. Because the learning curve was so steep, many physicians had to decrease the number of patients they saw before becoming comfortable with the conversion from paper charts to an EHR.
Telemedicine implementation is much less onerous and expensive. Telemedicine is available as a cloud-based platform, which requires less information technology (IT) support and less hardware and software. The technology required for patients to participate in telemedicine is nearly ubiquitous. According to the Pew Research Center, 96% of Americans own a cell phone (81% have a smart phone), and more than half (52%) own a tablet, so the basic equipment to connect patients to providers is already in place.5
On the provider side, the basic equipment required for a telemedicine program is a computer with video and audio capabilities and a broadband connection that is fast enough to show video in real time and to provide high-quality viewing of any images to be reviewed.
The growth in telemedicine means that telemedicine options are now more diverse, with many more affordable solutions. However, most telemedicine programs do require the purchase and set-up of new technology and equipment and the training of staff—some of which may be outside the budgets of health care providers in smaller independent practices. Many gynecologists have technology budgets that are already stretched thin. And for patients who do not have access to a smartphone or computer with Internet access, real-time telemedicine may be out of reach.
But with new guidelines put forth by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in March 2020, connectivity can take place inexpensively using free platforms such as Google Hangouts, Skype, Facetime, and Facebook Messenger. If a non‒HIPAA-compliant platform is used initially, conversion to a HIPAA-compliant platform is recommended.6 These platforms do not require the purchase of, or subscription to, any expensive hardware or software. The disadvantages of these programs are the lack of documentation, the failure to be Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant, and the lack of encryption; however, these disadvantages are no longer an issue after the new CMS guidelines.
Depending on the magnitude of the program, IT assistance may be needed to get started. It is imperative that the telemedicine program is interoperable with the EHR and the billing program. Otherwise, double and triple entry will erase the efficiency provided by conducting a virtual visit.
Continue to: Licensing...
Licensing
Another concern or barrier is a license to participate in telemedicine. The March 15, 2020, approval of telemedicine states that physicians who are licensed in the state where the patient is located do not require any additional license or permission to conduct virtual visits.7 CMS has temporarily waived the requirement that out-of-state providers be licensed in the state where they are providing services when they are licensed in another state. For questions regarding licensure, contact your State Board of Medicine or Department of Health for information on requirements for licenses across state lines (see “Resources,” at the end of the article).
Informed consent
Just like with any other aspect of providing care for patients, obtaining informed consent is paramount. Not only is getting informed patient consent a recommended best practice of the American Telemedicine Association (ATA), but it is actually a legal requirement in many states and could be a condition of getting paid, depending on the payer. To check the requirements regarding patient consent in your state, look at The National Telehealth Policy Resource Center’s state map (see “Resources.")
Some states do not have any requirements regarding consent for a virtual visit. Others require verbal consent. Even if it is not a legal requirement in your state, consider making it a part of your practice’s policy to obtain written or verbal consent and to document in the patient’s record that consent was obtained prior to the virtual visit so that you are protected when using this new technology.
Because telemedicine is a new way of receiving care for many patients, it is important to let them know how it works including how patient confidentiality and privacy are handled, what technical equipment is required, and what they should expect in terms of scheduling, cancellations, and billing policies. A sample consent form for telemedicine use is shown in FIGURE 1.
Liability insurance
Another hurdle that must be considered is liability insurance for conducting virtual visits with patients. Gynecologists who are going to offer telemedicine care to patients should request proof in writing that their liability insurance policy covers telemedicine malpractice and that the coverage extends to other states should the patient be in another state from the state in which the gynecologist holds a license. Additionally, gynecologists who provide telemedicine care should check with liability insurers regarding any requirements or limitations to conducting a virtual visit with their patients and should document them. For example, the policy may require that the physician keep a written or recorded record of the visit in the EHR. If that is the case, then using Skype, Facebook, or Google for the virtual visit, which do not include documentation, would be less desirable.
Privacy
Certainly, there is concern about privacy, and HIPAA compliance is critical to telemedicine success. Because of the COVID-19 emergency, as of March 1, 2020, physicians may now communicate with patients, and provide telehealth services, through remote communications without penalties.8 With these changes in the HIPAA requirements, physicians may use applications that allow for video chats, including Apple FaceTime, Facebook Messenger video chat, Google Hangouts video, and Skype, to provide telehealth without risk that the Office for Civil Rights will impose a penalty for noncompliance with HIPAA rules. The consent for patients should mention that these “public” applications potentially introduce privacy risks. This is a motivation for gynecologists to consider one of the programs that promises encryption, privacy, and HIPAA compliance, such as Updox, Doxy.me, and Amazon Chime. It is also important to recognize that a virtual visit could result in colleagues (if the patient is in an office setting) or family members (if the patient is in the home environment) overhearing conversations between the health care professional and the patient. Therefore, we suggest that patients conduct virtual visits in locations in which they feel assured of some semblance of privacy.
Continue to: Compensation for telemedicine...
Compensation for telemedicine
Perhaps the biggest barrier to virtual health adoption has been compensation for telemedicine visits. Both commercial payers and CMS have been slow to enact formal policies for telemedicine reimbursement. Because of this, the common misconceptions (that providers cannot be reimbursed for telemedicine appointments or that compensation occurs at a reduced rate) have persisted, making telemedicine economically unappealing.
The good news is that this is changing; legislation in most states is quickly embracing virtual health visits as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.9 In fact, as of January 1, 2020, telemedicine services are no longer considered “optional” coverage in Medicare Advantage plans.10 Nor are they required to have an additional fee. Instead, CMS now allows telemedicine as a standard, covered benefit in all plans, enabling beneficiaries to seek care from their homes rather than requiring them to go to a health care facility.11 In the past, telemedicine was restricted for use in rural areas or when patients resided a great distance from their health care providers. Starting March 6, 2020, and for the duration of the COVID-19 public health emergency, Medicare will make payment for professional services furnished to beneficiaries in all areas of the country in all settings regardless of location or distance between the patient and the health care provider.12
In addition, since March 15, 2020, CMS has expanded access to telemedicine services for all Medicare beneficiaries—not just those who have been diagnosed with COVID-19.13 The expanded access also applies to pre-COVID-19 coverage from physician offices, skilled nursing facilities, and hospitals. This means that Medicare will now make payments to physicians for telemedicine services provided in any health care facility or in a patient’s home, so that patients do not need to go to the physician’s office.
The facts are that there are parity laws and that commercial payers and CMS are required by state law to reimburse for telemedicine—often at the same rate as that for a comparable in-person visit. On the commercial side, there has been an increase in commercial parity legislation that requires health plans to cover virtual visits in the same way they cover face-to-face services. With the new guidelines for reimbursement, every state and Washington DC has parity laws in place. (To stay abreast of state-by-state changes in virtual health reimbursement, the Center for Connected Health Policy and the Advisory Board Primer are valuable resources. See “Resources.”) As long as the provider performs and documents the elements of history and decision-making, including the time spent counseling, and documents the visit as if a face-to-face visit occurred, then clinicians have a billable evaluation and management (E&M) visit.
Continue to: Virtual services for Medicare patients...
Virtual services for Medicare patients
There are 3 main types of virtual services gynecologists can provide to Medicare patients: Medicare telehealth visits, virtual check-ins, and e-visits.
Medicare telehealth visits. Largely because of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medicare patients may now use telecommunication technology for any services that previously occurred in an in-person communication. The gynecologist must use an interactive audio and video telecommunications system that permits real-time communication between the physician and the patient, and the patient should have a prior established relationship with the gynecologist with whom the telemedicine visit is taking place. The new guidelines indicate that the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will not conduct audits to ensure that such a prior relationship exists for claims submitted during this public health emergency.14
The Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for virtual visits using synchronous audio/visual communication are:
- 99201-99295, Office visit for a new patient
- 99211-99215, Office visit for an established patient.
Important modifiers for telemedicine visits include:
- modifier 02 for POS (place of service) for telehealth Medicare
- modifier 95 for commercial payers.
(A list of all available CPT codes for telehealth services from CMS can be found in “Resources.”)
Virtual check-ins. Established Medicare patients may have a brief communication with gynecologists the traditional way using a telephone or via live video. These brief virtual services, usually 5 to 10 minutes in duration, are initiated by the patient. The purpose of the virtual check-in is to determine if an office visit or a test or procedure is indicated.
Medicare pays for these “virtual check-ins” (or brief communication technology-based services) for patients to communicate with their physicians and avoid unnecessary trips to the office. These brief virtual check-ins are only for established patients. If an existing patient contacts the gynecologist’s office to ask a question or determine if an office visit is necessary, the gynecologist may bill for it using code G2012.
E-visits. Established Medicare patients may have non–face-to-face patient-initiated communications with their gynecologists without going to the physician’s office. These services can be billed only when the physician has an established relationship with the patient. The services may be billed using CPT codes 99421 to 99423. Coding for these visits is determined by the length of time the gynecologist spends online with the patient:
- 99421: Online digital evaluation and management service, for an established patient 5 to 10 minutes spent on the virtual visit
- 99422: 11 to 20 minutes
- 99423: ≥ 21 minutes.
Many clinicians want to immediately start the communication process with their patients. Many will avail themselves of the free video communication offered by Google Hangouts, Skype, Facetime, and Facebook Messenger. Since the March 15, 2020, relaxation of the HIPAA restrictions for telemedicine, it is now possible to have a virtual visit with a patient using one of the free, non–HIPAA-compliant connections. This type of visit is no different than a telephone call but with an added video component. Using these free technologies, a gynecologist can have an asynchronous visit with a patient (referred to as the store and forward method of sending information or medical images), which means that the service takes place in one direction with no opportunity for interaction with the patient. Asynchronous visits are akin to video text messages left for the patient. By contrast, a synchronous or real-time video visit with a patient is a 2-way communication that provides medical care without examining the patient.
Using triangulation
There are some downsides to telemedicine visits. First, virtual visits on Skype, FaceTime, and other non–HIPAA-compliant methods are not conducted on an encrypted website. Second, no documentation is created for the doctor-patient encounter. Finally, unless the physician keeps a record of these virtual visits and submits the interactions to the practice coders, there will be no billing and no reimbursement for the visits. In this scenario, physicians are legally responsible for their decision-making, prescription writing, and medical advice, but do not receive compensation for their efforts.
This can be remedied by using “triangulation,” which involves: 1. the physician, 2. the patient, and 3. a scribe or medical assistant who will record the visit. Before initiating the virtual visit using triangulation, it is imperative to ask the patient for permission if your medical assistant (or any other person in the office who functions as a scribe) will be listening to the conversation. It is important to explain that the person is there to take accurate notes and ascertain that the notes are entered into the EHR. Also, the scribe or assistant will record the time, date, and duration of the visit, which is a requirement for billing purposes. The scribe may also ascertain that the visit is properly coded and entered into the practice management system, and that a bill is submitted to the insurance company. By using triangulation, you have documentation that consent was obtained, that the visit took place, that notes were taken, and that the patient’s insurance company will be billed for the visit (see FIGURE 2 for a sample documentation form).
Continue to: Which CPT codes should I use?...
Which CPT codes should I use?
The answer depends on a number of factors, but a good rule of thumb is to use the same codes that you would use for an in-person appointment (CPT codes 99211-99215 for an established patient visit and 99201-99205 for a new patient visit). These are the most common CPT codes for outpatient gynecologic office visits whether they take place face-to-face or as a synchronous virtual visit (via a real-time interactive audio and video telecommunications system).
For example, the reimbursement for code 99213 has a range from $73 to $100. You may wonder how you can achieve the complexity requirements for a level-3 office visit without a physical examination. Whether as a face-to-face or virtual visit, documentation for these encounters requires 2 of 3 of the following components:
- expanded problem-focused history
- expanded problem-focused exam (not accomplished with telemedicine)
- low-complexity medical decision-making OR
- at least 15 minutes spent face to face with the patient if coding is based on time.
If a gynecologist reviews the results of a recent lab test for an estrogen-deficient patient and adjusts the estrogen dosage, writes a prescription, and spends 15 minutes communicating with the patient, he/she has met the complexity requirements for a code 99213. Because Level 3 and 4 visits (99214 and 99215) require a comprehensive physical examination, it is necessary to document the time spent with the patient (code 99214 requires 25 to 39 minutes of consultation and code 99215 requires ≥ 40 minutes).
Some final billing and coding advice
Always confirm telemedicine billing guidelines before beginning to conduct telemedicine visits. Consider starting a phone call to a payer armed with the fact that the payer is required by law to offer parity between telemedicine and face-to-face visits. Then ask which specific billing codes should be used.
Until you and your practice become comfortable with the process of, and the coding and billing for, telemedicine, consider using a telemedicine platform that has a built-in rules engine that offers recommendations for each telemedicine visit based on past claims data. These systems help gynecologists determine which CPT code to use and which modifiers are appropriate for the various insurance companies. In other words, the rules engine helps you submit a clean claim that is less likely to be denied and very likely to be paid. There are some vendors who are so confident that their rules engine will match the service with the proper CPT code and modifier that they guarantee full private payer reimbursement for telemedicine visits, or the vendor will reimburse the claim.
Watch for the third and final installment in this series, which was written with the assistance of 2 attorneys. It will review the legal guidelines for implementing telemedicine in a gynecologic practice and discuss the future of the technology. ●
- COVID-19 and Telehealth Coding Options as of March 20, 2020. https://www.ismanet.org/pdf/COVID-19andTelehealthcodes3-20-2020Updates.pdf.
- Federation of State Medical Boards. US States and Territories Modifying Licensure Requirements for Physicians in Response to COVID-19. Last updated May 26, 2020. https://www.fsmb.org/siteassets/advocacy/pdf/state-emergency-declarations-licensures-requirementscovid-19.pdf.
- Center for Connected Health Policy. Current State Laws and Reimbursement Policies https://www.cchpca.org/telehealth-policy/current-state-laws-and-reimbursement-policies.
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. List of Telehealth Services. Updated April 30, 2020. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-General-Information/Telehealth/Telehealth-Codes.
- American Medical Association. AMA quick guide to telemedicinein practice. Updated May 22, 2020. https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/digital/ama-quick-guide-telemedicine-practice.
- Eddy N. Patients increasingly trusting of remote care technology. Healthcare IT News. October 22, 2019. https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/patients-increasingly-trusting-remote-care-technology-says-new-report. Accessed May 26, 2020.
- Welch BM, Harvey J, O’Connell NS, et al. Patient preferences for direct-to-consumer telemedicine services: a nationwide survey. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17:784.
- Tsai JM, Cheng MJ, Tsai HH, et al. Acceptance and resistance of telehealth: the perspective of dual-factor concepts in technology adoption. Int J Inform Manag. 2019;49:34-44.
- Hollander J, Carr BG. Virtually perfect? Telemedicine for COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:1679-1681.
- Pew Research Center. Internet and Technology. Mobile Fact Sheet. June 12, 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org /internet/fact-sheet/mobile/. Accessed May 18, 2020.
- American Medical Association. AMA quick guide to telemedicine in practice. https://www.ama-assn.org/ practice-management/digital/ama-quick-guide-telemedicine- practice. Accessed March 20, 2020.
- Center for Connected Health Policy. Federal and state regulation updates. https://www.cchpca.org. Accessed March 20, 2020.
- The White House. Proclamation on declaring a national emergency concerning the novel coronavirus disease (Covid-19) outbreak. March 13, 2020. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-declaring-national-emergency-concerning-novel-coronavirus-disease-covid-19-outbreak/. Accessed May 18, 2020.
- Center for Connected Health Policy. Quick glance state telehealth actions in response to COVID-19. https://www.cchpca.org/sites/default/files/2020-05/STATE%20TELEHEALTH%20ACTIONS%20IN%20RESPONSE%20TO%20COVID%20
OVERVIEW%205.5.2020_0.pdf. AccessedMay 13, 2020. - Medicare.gov. https://www.medicare.gov/sign-up-change -plans/types-of-medicare-health-plans/medicare-advantage-plans/how-do-medicare-advantage-plans-work. Accessed May 13, 2020.
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. CMS finalizes policies to bring innovative telehealth benefit to Medicare Advantage. April 5, 2019. https://www.cms.gov/newsroom /press-releases/cms-finalizes-policies-bring-innovative-telehealth-benefit-medicare-advantage. Accessed May 18,2020.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare telemedicine health care provider fact sheet. https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/fact-sheets/medicare-telemedicine-health-care-provider-fact-sheet. Accessed May 30, 2020.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare telehealth frequently asked questions. https://www.cms.gov/files/document/medicare-telehealth-frequently-asked-questions-faqs-31720.pdf.
- American Hospital Association. Coronavirus update: CMS broadens access to telehealth during Covid-19 public health emergency. https://www.aha.org/advisory/2020-03-17-coronavirus-update-cms-broadens-access-telehealth-during-covid-19-public-health. Accessed May 18, 2020.
Dr. Karram is Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati, and Director of Urogynecology, The Christ Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Dr. Baum is Professor of Clinical Urology, Tulane Medical School, New Orleans, Louisiana.
The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.
Dr. Karram is Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati, and Director of Urogynecology, The Christ Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Dr. Baum is Professor of Clinical Urology, Tulane Medical School, New Orleans, Louisiana.
The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.
Dr. Karram is Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati, and Director of Urogynecology, The Christ Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Dr. Baum is Professor of Clinical Urology, Tulane Medical School, New Orleans, Louisiana.
The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.
Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, many significant changes have occurred that have made the implementation of telemedicine easier and more attractive for gynecologic practices. In the first article in this series, we discussed the benefits of telemedicine to physicians and patients, how to get started using telemedicine, and implementing a workflow. This article will discuss the common hurdles in the process and the proper coding to use to insure reimbursement for services rendered.
Barriers to implementing telemedicine
Incorrect assumptions
Latecomers to telemedicine often assume that patients prefer face-to-face visits when, in fact, many may prefer the convenience of virtual visits. More than 50% of patients who are surveyed about their experience with telemedicine say that online tools have helped improve their relationship with their providers.1 Telemedicine has grown astronomically during the COVID-19 pandemic to the point where many patients now expect their health care providers to be able to conduct virtual visits. Practices that do not offer telemedicine may find their patients seeking services elsewhere. Nearly two-thirds of health care professionals expect their commitment to telemedicine to increase significantly in the next 3 years.2 Of those providers who have not yet adopted the practice, nearly 85% expect to implement telemedicine in the near future.3 COVID-19 has motivated the increased use of telemedicine to enhance the communication with patients, making it possible for patients to have enhanced access to health care during this pandemic while minimizing infectious transmission of COVID-19 to physicians and their staff.4
Admittedly, telemedicine is not appropriate for all patients. In general, situations that do not lend themselves to telemedicine are those for which an in-person visit is required to evaluate the patient via a physical examination, to perform a protocol-driven procedure, or provide an aggressive intervention. Additional patients for whom telemedicine may be inappropriate include those with cognitive disorders, those with language barriers, those with emergency situations that warrant an office visit or a visit to the emergency department, and patients who do not have access to the technology to conduct a virtual visit.
Cost and complexity
The process of implementing electronic health records (EHRs) left a bitter taste in the mouths of many health care professionals. But EHRs are complicated and expensive. Implementation often resulted in lost productivity. Because the learning curve was so steep, many physicians had to decrease the number of patients they saw before becoming comfortable with the conversion from paper charts to an EHR.
Telemedicine implementation is much less onerous and expensive. Telemedicine is available as a cloud-based platform, which requires less information technology (IT) support and less hardware and software. The technology required for patients to participate in telemedicine is nearly ubiquitous. According to the Pew Research Center, 96% of Americans own a cell phone (81% have a smart phone), and more than half (52%) own a tablet, so the basic equipment to connect patients to providers is already in place.5
On the provider side, the basic equipment required for a telemedicine program is a computer with video and audio capabilities and a broadband connection that is fast enough to show video in real time and to provide high-quality viewing of any images to be reviewed.
The growth in telemedicine means that telemedicine options are now more diverse, with many more affordable solutions. However, most telemedicine programs do require the purchase and set-up of new technology and equipment and the training of staff—some of which may be outside the budgets of health care providers in smaller independent practices. Many gynecologists have technology budgets that are already stretched thin. And for patients who do not have access to a smartphone or computer with Internet access, real-time telemedicine may be out of reach.
But with new guidelines put forth by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in March 2020, connectivity can take place inexpensively using free platforms such as Google Hangouts, Skype, Facetime, and Facebook Messenger. If a non‒HIPAA-compliant platform is used initially, conversion to a HIPAA-compliant platform is recommended.6 These platforms do not require the purchase of, or subscription to, any expensive hardware or software. The disadvantages of these programs are the lack of documentation, the failure to be Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant, and the lack of encryption; however, these disadvantages are no longer an issue after the new CMS guidelines.
Depending on the magnitude of the program, IT assistance may be needed to get started. It is imperative that the telemedicine program is interoperable with the EHR and the billing program. Otherwise, double and triple entry will erase the efficiency provided by conducting a virtual visit.
Continue to: Licensing...
Licensing
Another concern or barrier is a license to participate in telemedicine. The March 15, 2020, approval of telemedicine states that physicians who are licensed in the state where the patient is located do not require any additional license or permission to conduct virtual visits.7 CMS has temporarily waived the requirement that out-of-state providers be licensed in the state where they are providing services when they are licensed in another state. For questions regarding licensure, contact your State Board of Medicine or Department of Health for information on requirements for licenses across state lines (see “Resources,” at the end of the article).
Informed consent
Just like with any other aspect of providing care for patients, obtaining informed consent is paramount. Not only is getting informed patient consent a recommended best practice of the American Telemedicine Association (ATA), but it is actually a legal requirement in many states and could be a condition of getting paid, depending on the payer. To check the requirements regarding patient consent in your state, look at The National Telehealth Policy Resource Center’s state map (see “Resources.")
Some states do not have any requirements regarding consent for a virtual visit. Others require verbal consent. Even if it is not a legal requirement in your state, consider making it a part of your practice’s policy to obtain written or verbal consent and to document in the patient’s record that consent was obtained prior to the virtual visit so that you are protected when using this new technology.
Because telemedicine is a new way of receiving care for many patients, it is important to let them know how it works including how patient confidentiality and privacy are handled, what technical equipment is required, and what they should expect in terms of scheduling, cancellations, and billing policies. A sample consent form for telemedicine use is shown in FIGURE 1.
Liability insurance
Another hurdle that must be considered is liability insurance for conducting virtual visits with patients. Gynecologists who are going to offer telemedicine care to patients should request proof in writing that their liability insurance policy covers telemedicine malpractice and that the coverage extends to other states should the patient be in another state from the state in which the gynecologist holds a license. Additionally, gynecologists who provide telemedicine care should check with liability insurers regarding any requirements or limitations to conducting a virtual visit with their patients and should document them. For example, the policy may require that the physician keep a written or recorded record of the visit in the EHR. If that is the case, then using Skype, Facebook, or Google for the virtual visit, which do not include documentation, would be less desirable.
Privacy
Certainly, there is concern about privacy, and HIPAA compliance is critical to telemedicine success. Because of the COVID-19 emergency, as of March 1, 2020, physicians may now communicate with patients, and provide telehealth services, through remote communications without penalties.8 With these changes in the HIPAA requirements, physicians may use applications that allow for video chats, including Apple FaceTime, Facebook Messenger video chat, Google Hangouts video, and Skype, to provide telehealth without risk that the Office for Civil Rights will impose a penalty for noncompliance with HIPAA rules. The consent for patients should mention that these “public” applications potentially introduce privacy risks. This is a motivation for gynecologists to consider one of the programs that promises encryption, privacy, and HIPAA compliance, such as Updox, Doxy.me, and Amazon Chime. It is also important to recognize that a virtual visit could result in colleagues (if the patient is in an office setting) or family members (if the patient is in the home environment) overhearing conversations between the health care professional and the patient. Therefore, we suggest that patients conduct virtual visits in locations in which they feel assured of some semblance of privacy.
Continue to: Compensation for telemedicine...
Compensation for telemedicine
Perhaps the biggest barrier to virtual health adoption has been compensation for telemedicine visits. Both commercial payers and CMS have been slow to enact formal policies for telemedicine reimbursement. Because of this, the common misconceptions (that providers cannot be reimbursed for telemedicine appointments or that compensation occurs at a reduced rate) have persisted, making telemedicine economically unappealing.
The good news is that this is changing; legislation in most states is quickly embracing virtual health visits as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.9 In fact, as of January 1, 2020, telemedicine services are no longer considered “optional” coverage in Medicare Advantage plans.10 Nor are they required to have an additional fee. Instead, CMS now allows telemedicine as a standard, covered benefit in all plans, enabling beneficiaries to seek care from their homes rather than requiring them to go to a health care facility.11 In the past, telemedicine was restricted for use in rural areas or when patients resided a great distance from their health care providers. Starting March 6, 2020, and for the duration of the COVID-19 public health emergency, Medicare will make payment for professional services furnished to beneficiaries in all areas of the country in all settings regardless of location or distance between the patient and the health care provider.12
In addition, since March 15, 2020, CMS has expanded access to telemedicine services for all Medicare beneficiaries—not just those who have been diagnosed with COVID-19.13 The expanded access also applies to pre-COVID-19 coverage from physician offices, skilled nursing facilities, and hospitals. This means that Medicare will now make payments to physicians for telemedicine services provided in any health care facility or in a patient’s home, so that patients do not need to go to the physician’s office.
The facts are that there are parity laws and that commercial payers and CMS are required by state law to reimburse for telemedicine—often at the same rate as that for a comparable in-person visit. On the commercial side, there has been an increase in commercial parity legislation that requires health plans to cover virtual visits in the same way they cover face-to-face services. With the new guidelines for reimbursement, every state and Washington DC has parity laws in place. (To stay abreast of state-by-state changes in virtual health reimbursement, the Center for Connected Health Policy and the Advisory Board Primer are valuable resources. See “Resources.”) As long as the provider performs and documents the elements of history and decision-making, including the time spent counseling, and documents the visit as if a face-to-face visit occurred, then clinicians have a billable evaluation and management (E&M) visit.
Continue to: Virtual services for Medicare patients...
Virtual services for Medicare patients
There are 3 main types of virtual services gynecologists can provide to Medicare patients: Medicare telehealth visits, virtual check-ins, and e-visits.
Medicare telehealth visits. Largely because of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medicare patients may now use telecommunication technology for any services that previously occurred in an in-person communication. The gynecologist must use an interactive audio and video telecommunications system that permits real-time communication between the physician and the patient, and the patient should have a prior established relationship with the gynecologist with whom the telemedicine visit is taking place. The new guidelines indicate that the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will not conduct audits to ensure that such a prior relationship exists for claims submitted during this public health emergency.14
The Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for virtual visits using synchronous audio/visual communication are:
- 99201-99295, Office visit for a new patient
- 99211-99215, Office visit for an established patient.
Important modifiers for telemedicine visits include:
- modifier 02 for POS (place of service) for telehealth Medicare
- modifier 95 for commercial payers.
(A list of all available CPT codes for telehealth services from CMS can be found in “Resources.”)
Virtual check-ins. Established Medicare patients may have a brief communication with gynecologists the traditional way using a telephone or via live video. These brief virtual services, usually 5 to 10 minutes in duration, are initiated by the patient. The purpose of the virtual check-in is to determine if an office visit or a test or procedure is indicated.
Medicare pays for these “virtual check-ins” (or brief communication technology-based services) for patients to communicate with their physicians and avoid unnecessary trips to the office. These brief virtual check-ins are only for established patients. If an existing patient contacts the gynecologist’s office to ask a question or determine if an office visit is necessary, the gynecologist may bill for it using code G2012.
E-visits. Established Medicare patients may have non–face-to-face patient-initiated communications with their gynecologists without going to the physician’s office. These services can be billed only when the physician has an established relationship with the patient. The services may be billed using CPT codes 99421 to 99423. Coding for these visits is determined by the length of time the gynecologist spends online with the patient:
- 99421: Online digital evaluation and management service, for an established patient 5 to 10 minutes spent on the virtual visit
- 99422: 11 to 20 minutes
- 99423: ≥ 21 minutes.
Many clinicians want to immediately start the communication process with their patients. Many will avail themselves of the free video communication offered by Google Hangouts, Skype, Facetime, and Facebook Messenger. Since the March 15, 2020, relaxation of the HIPAA restrictions for telemedicine, it is now possible to have a virtual visit with a patient using one of the free, non–HIPAA-compliant connections. This type of visit is no different than a telephone call but with an added video component. Using these free technologies, a gynecologist can have an asynchronous visit with a patient (referred to as the store and forward method of sending information or medical images), which means that the service takes place in one direction with no opportunity for interaction with the patient. Asynchronous visits are akin to video text messages left for the patient. By contrast, a synchronous or real-time video visit with a patient is a 2-way communication that provides medical care without examining the patient.
Using triangulation
There are some downsides to telemedicine visits. First, virtual visits on Skype, FaceTime, and other non–HIPAA-compliant methods are not conducted on an encrypted website. Second, no documentation is created for the doctor-patient encounter. Finally, unless the physician keeps a record of these virtual visits and submits the interactions to the practice coders, there will be no billing and no reimbursement for the visits. In this scenario, physicians are legally responsible for their decision-making, prescription writing, and medical advice, but do not receive compensation for their efforts.
This can be remedied by using “triangulation,” which involves: 1. the physician, 2. the patient, and 3. a scribe or medical assistant who will record the visit. Before initiating the virtual visit using triangulation, it is imperative to ask the patient for permission if your medical assistant (or any other person in the office who functions as a scribe) will be listening to the conversation. It is important to explain that the person is there to take accurate notes and ascertain that the notes are entered into the EHR. Also, the scribe or assistant will record the time, date, and duration of the visit, which is a requirement for billing purposes. The scribe may also ascertain that the visit is properly coded and entered into the practice management system, and that a bill is submitted to the insurance company. By using triangulation, you have documentation that consent was obtained, that the visit took place, that notes were taken, and that the patient’s insurance company will be billed for the visit (see FIGURE 2 for a sample documentation form).
Continue to: Which CPT codes should I use?...
Which CPT codes should I use?
The answer depends on a number of factors, but a good rule of thumb is to use the same codes that you would use for an in-person appointment (CPT codes 99211-99215 for an established patient visit and 99201-99205 for a new patient visit). These are the most common CPT codes for outpatient gynecologic office visits whether they take place face-to-face or as a synchronous virtual visit (via a real-time interactive audio and video telecommunications system).
For example, the reimbursement for code 99213 has a range from $73 to $100. You may wonder how you can achieve the complexity requirements for a level-3 office visit without a physical examination. Whether as a face-to-face or virtual visit, documentation for these encounters requires 2 of 3 of the following components:
- expanded problem-focused history
- expanded problem-focused exam (not accomplished with telemedicine)
- low-complexity medical decision-making OR
- at least 15 minutes spent face to face with the patient if coding is based on time.
If a gynecologist reviews the results of a recent lab test for an estrogen-deficient patient and adjusts the estrogen dosage, writes a prescription, and spends 15 minutes communicating with the patient, he/she has met the complexity requirements for a code 99213. Because Level 3 and 4 visits (99214 and 99215) require a comprehensive physical examination, it is necessary to document the time spent with the patient (code 99214 requires 25 to 39 minutes of consultation and code 99215 requires ≥ 40 minutes).
Some final billing and coding advice
Always confirm telemedicine billing guidelines before beginning to conduct telemedicine visits. Consider starting a phone call to a payer armed with the fact that the payer is required by law to offer parity between telemedicine and face-to-face visits. Then ask which specific billing codes should be used.
Until you and your practice become comfortable with the process of, and the coding and billing for, telemedicine, consider using a telemedicine platform that has a built-in rules engine that offers recommendations for each telemedicine visit based on past claims data. These systems help gynecologists determine which CPT code to use and which modifiers are appropriate for the various insurance companies. In other words, the rules engine helps you submit a clean claim that is less likely to be denied and very likely to be paid. There are some vendors who are so confident that their rules engine will match the service with the proper CPT code and modifier that they guarantee full private payer reimbursement for telemedicine visits, or the vendor will reimburse the claim.
Watch for the third and final installment in this series, which was written with the assistance of 2 attorneys. It will review the legal guidelines for implementing telemedicine in a gynecologic practice and discuss the future of the technology. ●
- COVID-19 and Telehealth Coding Options as of March 20, 2020. https://www.ismanet.org/pdf/COVID-19andTelehealthcodes3-20-2020Updates.pdf.
- Federation of State Medical Boards. US States and Territories Modifying Licensure Requirements for Physicians in Response to COVID-19. Last updated May 26, 2020. https://www.fsmb.org/siteassets/advocacy/pdf/state-emergency-declarations-licensures-requirementscovid-19.pdf.
- Center for Connected Health Policy. Current State Laws and Reimbursement Policies https://www.cchpca.org/telehealth-policy/current-state-laws-and-reimbursement-policies.
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. List of Telehealth Services. Updated April 30, 2020. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-General-Information/Telehealth/Telehealth-Codes.
- American Medical Association. AMA quick guide to telemedicinein practice. Updated May 22, 2020. https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/digital/ama-quick-guide-telemedicine-practice.
Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, many significant changes have occurred that have made the implementation of telemedicine easier and more attractive for gynecologic practices. In the first article in this series, we discussed the benefits of telemedicine to physicians and patients, how to get started using telemedicine, and implementing a workflow. This article will discuss the common hurdles in the process and the proper coding to use to insure reimbursement for services rendered.
Barriers to implementing telemedicine
Incorrect assumptions
Latecomers to telemedicine often assume that patients prefer face-to-face visits when, in fact, many may prefer the convenience of virtual visits. More than 50% of patients who are surveyed about their experience with telemedicine say that online tools have helped improve their relationship with their providers.1 Telemedicine has grown astronomically during the COVID-19 pandemic to the point where many patients now expect their health care providers to be able to conduct virtual visits. Practices that do not offer telemedicine may find their patients seeking services elsewhere. Nearly two-thirds of health care professionals expect their commitment to telemedicine to increase significantly in the next 3 years.2 Of those providers who have not yet adopted the practice, nearly 85% expect to implement telemedicine in the near future.3 COVID-19 has motivated the increased use of telemedicine to enhance the communication with patients, making it possible for patients to have enhanced access to health care during this pandemic while minimizing infectious transmission of COVID-19 to physicians and their staff.4
Admittedly, telemedicine is not appropriate for all patients. In general, situations that do not lend themselves to telemedicine are those for which an in-person visit is required to evaluate the patient via a physical examination, to perform a protocol-driven procedure, or provide an aggressive intervention. Additional patients for whom telemedicine may be inappropriate include those with cognitive disorders, those with language barriers, those with emergency situations that warrant an office visit or a visit to the emergency department, and patients who do not have access to the technology to conduct a virtual visit.
Cost and complexity
The process of implementing electronic health records (EHRs) left a bitter taste in the mouths of many health care professionals. But EHRs are complicated and expensive. Implementation often resulted in lost productivity. Because the learning curve was so steep, many physicians had to decrease the number of patients they saw before becoming comfortable with the conversion from paper charts to an EHR.
Telemedicine implementation is much less onerous and expensive. Telemedicine is available as a cloud-based platform, which requires less information technology (IT) support and less hardware and software. The technology required for patients to participate in telemedicine is nearly ubiquitous. According to the Pew Research Center, 96% of Americans own a cell phone (81% have a smart phone), and more than half (52%) own a tablet, so the basic equipment to connect patients to providers is already in place.5
On the provider side, the basic equipment required for a telemedicine program is a computer with video and audio capabilities and a broadband connection that is fast enough to show video in real time and to provide high-quality viewing of any images to be reviewed.
The growth in telemedicine means that telemedicine options are now more diverse, with many more affordable solutions. However, most telemedicine programs do require the purchase and set-up of new technology and equipment and the training of staff—some of which may be outside the budgets of health care providers in smaller independent practices. Many gynecologists have technology budgets that are already stretched thin. And for patients who do not have access to a smartphone or computer with Internet access, real-time telemedicine may be out of reach.
But with new guidelines put forth by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in March 2020, connectivity can take place inexpensively using free platforms such as Google Hangouts, Skype, Facetime, and Facebook Messenger. If a non‒HIPAA-compliant platform is used initially, conversion to a HIPAA-compliant platform is recommended.6 These platforms do not require the purchase of, or subscription to, any expensive hardware or software. The disadvantages of these programs are the lack of documentation, the failure to be Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant, and the lack of encryption; however, these disadvantages are no longer an issue after the new CMS guidelines.
Depending on the magnitude of the program, IT assistance may be needed to get started. It is imperative that the telemedicine program is interoperable with the EHR and the billing program. Otherwise, double and triple entry will erase the efficiency provided by conducting a virtual visit.
Continue to: Licensing...
Licensing
Another concern or barrier is a license to participate in telemedicine. The March 15, 2020, approval of telemedicine states that physicians who are licensed in the state where the patient is located do not require any additional license or permission to conduct virtual visits.7 CMS has temporarily waived the requirement that out-of-state providers be licensed in the state where they are providing services when they are licensed in another state. For questions regarding licensure, contact your State Board of Medicine or Department of Health for information on requirements for licenses across state lines (see “Resources,” at the end of the article).
Informed consent
Just like with any other aspect of providing care for patients, obtaining informed consent is paramount. Not only is getting informed patient consent a recommended best practice of the American Telemedicine Association (ATA), but it is actually a legal requirement in many states and could be a condition of getting paid, depending on the payer. To check the requirements regarding patient consent in your state, look at The National Telehealth Policy Resource Center’s state map (see “Resources.")
Some states do not have any requirements regarding consent for a virtual visit. Others require verbal consent. Even if it is not a legal requirement in your state, consider making it a part of your practice’s policy to obtain written or verbal consent and to document in the patient’s record that consent was obtained prior to the virtual visit so that you are protected when using this new technology.
Because telemedicine is a new way of receiving care for many patients, it is important to let them know how it works including how patient confidentiality and privacy are handled, what technical equipment is required, and what they should expect in terms of scheduling, cancellations, and billing policies. A sample consent form for telemedicine use is shown in FIGURE 1.
Liability insurance
Another hurdle that must be considered is liability insurance for conducting virtual visits with patients. Gynecologists who are going to offer telemedicine care to patients should request proof in writing that their liability insurance policy covers telemedicine malpractice and that the coverage extends to other states should the patient be in another state from the state in which the gynecologist holds a license. Additionally, gynecologists who provide telemedicine care should check with liability insurers regarding any requirements or limitations to conducting a virtual visit with their patients and should document them. For example, the policy may require that the physician keep a written or recorded record of the visit in the EHR. If that is the case, then using Skype, Facebook, or Google for the virtual visit, which do not include documentation, would be less desirable.
Privacy
Certainly, there is concern about privacy, and HIPAA compliance is critical to telemedicine success. Because of the COVID-19 emergency, as of March 1, 2020, physicians may now communicate with patients, and provide telehealth services, through remote communications without penalties.8 With these changes in the HIPAA requirements, physicians may use applications that allow for video chats, including Apple FaceTime, Facebook Messenger video chat, Google Hangouts video, and Skype, to provide telehealth without risk that the Office for Civil Rights will impose a penalty for noncompliance with HIPAA rules. The consent for patients should mention that these “public” applications potentially introduce privacy risks. This is a motivation for gynecologists to consider one of the programs that promises encryption, privacy, and HIPAA compliance, such as Updox, Doxy.me, and Amazon Chime. It is also important to recognize that a virtual visit could result in colleagues (if the patient is in an office setting) or family members (if the patient is in the home environment) overhearing conversations between the health care professional and the patient. Therefore, we suggest that patients conduct virtual visits in locations in which they feel assured of some semblance of privacy.
Continue to: Compensation for telemedicine...
Compensation for telemedicine
Perhaps the biggest barrier to virtual health adoption has been compensation for telemedicine visits. Both commercial payers and CMS have been slow to enact formal policies for telemedicine reimbursement. Because of this, the common misconceptions (that providers cannot be reimbursed for telemedicine appointments or that compensation occurs at a reduced rate) have persisted, making telemedicine economically unappealing.
The good news is that this is changing; legislation in most states is quickly embracing virtual health visits as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.9 In fact, as of January 1, 2020, telemedicine services are no longer considered “optional” coverage in Medicare Advantage plans.10 Nor are they required to have an additional fee. Instead, CMS now allows telemedicine as a standard, covered benefit in all plans, enabling beneficiaries to seek care from their homes rather than requiring them to go to a health care facility.11 In the past, telemedicine was restricted for use in rural areas or when patients resided a great distance from their health care providers. Starting March 6, 2020, and for the duration of the COVID-19 public health emergency, Medicare will make payment for professional services furnished to beneficiaries in all areas of the country in all settings regardless of location or distance between the patient and the health care provider.12
In addition, since March 15, 2020, CMS has expanded access to telemedicine services for all Medicare beneficiaries—not just those who have been diagnosed with COVID-19.13 The expanded access also applies to pre-COVID-19 coverage from physician offices, skilled nursing facilities, and hospitals. This means that Medicare will now make payments to physicians for telemedicine services provided in any health care facility or in a patient’s home, so that patients do not need to go to the physician’s office.
The facts are that there are parity laws and that commercial payers and CMS are required by state law to reimburse for telemedicine—often at the same rate as that for a comparable in-person visit. On the commercial side, there has been an increase in commercial parity legislation that requires health plans to cover virtual visits in the same way they cover face-to-face services. With the new guidelines for reimbursement, every state and Washington DC has parity laws in place. (To stay abreast of state-by-state changes in virtual health reimbursement, the Center for Connected Health Policy and the Advisory Board Primer are valuable resources. See “Resources.”) As long as the provider performs and documents the elements of history and decision-making, including the time spent counseling, and documents the visit as if a face-to-face visit occurred, then clinicians have a billable evaluation and management (E&M) visit.
Continue to: Virtual services for Medicare patients...
Virtual services for Medicare patients
There are 3 main types of virtual services gynecologists can provide to Medicare patients: Medicare telehealth visits, virtual check-ins, and e-visits.
Medicare telehealth visits. Largely because of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medicare patients may now use telecommunication technology for any services that previously occurred in an in-person communication. The gynecologist must use an interactive audio and video telecommunications system that permits real-time communication between the physician and the patient, and the patient should have a prior established relationship with the gynecologist with whom the telemedicine visit is taking place. The new guidelines indicate that the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will not conduct audits to ensure that such a prior relationship exists for claims submitted during this public health emergency.14
The Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for virtual visits using synchronous audio/visual communication are:
- 99201-99295, Office visit for a new patient
- 99211-99215, Office visit for an established patient.
Important modifiers for telemedicine visits include:
- modifier 02 for POS (place of service) for telehealth Medicare
- modifier 95 for commercial payers.
(A list of all available CPT codes for telehealth services from CMS can be found in “Resources.”)
Virtual check-ins. Established Medicare patients may have a brief communication with gynecologists the traditional way using a telephone or via live video. These brief virtual services, usually 5 to 10 minutes in duration, are initiated by the patient. The purpose of the virtual check-in is to determine if an office visit or a test or procedure is indicated.
Medicare pays for these “virtual check-ins” (or brief communication technology-based services) for patients to communicate with their physicians and avoid unnecessary trips to the office. These brief virtual check-ins are only for established patients. If an existing patient contacts the gynecologist’s office to ask a question or determine if an office visit is necessary, the gynecologist may bill for it using code G2012.
E-visits. Established Medicare patients may have non–face-to-face patient-initiated communications with their gynecologists without going to the physician’s office. These services can be billed only when the physician has an established relationship with the patient. The services may be billed using CPT codes 99421 to 99423. Coding for these visits is determined by the length of time the gynecologist spends online with the patient:
- 99421: Online digital evaluation and management service, for an established patient 5 to 10 minutes spent on the virtual visit
- 99422: 11 to 20 minutes
- 99423: ≥ 21 minutes.
Many clinicians want to immediately start the communication process with their patients. Many will avail themselves of the free video communication offered by Google Hangouts, Skype, Facetime, and Facebook Messenger. Since the March 15, 2020, relaxation of the HIPAA restrictions for telemedicine, it is now possible to have a virtual visit with a patient using one of the free, non–HIPAA-compliant connections. This type of visit is no different than a telephone call but with an added video component. Using these free technologies, a gynecologist can have an asynchronous visit with a patient (referred to as the store and forward method of sending information or medical images), which means that the service takes place in one direction with no opportunity for interaction with the patient. Asynchronous visits are akin to video text messages left for the patient. By contrast, a synchronous or real-time video visit with a patient is a 2-way communication that provides medical care without examining the patient.
Using triangulation
There are some downsides to telemedicine visits. First, virtual visits on Skype, FaceTime, and other non–HIPAA-compliant methods are not conducted on an encrypted website. Second, no documentation is created for the doctor-patient encounter. Finally, unless the physician keeps a record of these virtual visits and submits the interactions to the practice coders, there will be no billing and no reimbursement for the visits. In this scenario, physicians are legally responsible for their decision-making, prescription writing, and medical advice, but do not receive compensation for their efforts.
This can be remedied by using “triangulation,” which involves: 1. the physician, 2. the patient, and 3. a scribe or medical assistant who will record the visit. Before initiating the virtual visit using triangulation, it is imperative to ask the patient for permission if your medical assistant (or any other person in the office who functions as a scribe) will be listening to the conversation. It is important to explain that the person is there to take accurate notes and ascertain that the notes are entered into the EHR. Also, the scribe or assistant will record the time, date, and duration of the visit, which is a requirement for billing purposes. The scribe may also ascertain that the visit is properly coded and entered into the practice management system, and that a bill is submitted to the insurance company. By using triangulation, you have documentation that consent was obtained, that the visit took place, that notes were taken, and that the patient’s insurance company will be billed for the visit (see FIGURE 2 for a sample documentation form).
Continue to: Which CPT codes should I use?...
Which CPT codes should I use?
The answer depends on a number of factors, but a good rule of thumb is to use the same codes that you would use for an in-person appointment (CPT codes 99211-99215 for an established patient visit and 99201-99205 for a new patient visit). These are the most common CPT codes for outpatient gynecologic office visits whether they take place face-to-face or as a synchronous virtual visit (via a real-time interactive audio and video telecommunications system).
For example, the reimbursement for code 99213 has a range from $73 to $100. You may wonder how you can achieve the complexity requirements for a level-3 office visit without a physical examination. Whether as a face-to-face or virtual visit, documentation for these encounters requires 2 of 3 of the following components:
- expanded problem-focused history
- expanded problem-focused exam (not accomplished with telemedicine)
- low-complexity medical decision-making OR
- at least 15 minutes spent face to face with the patient if coding is based on time.
If a gynecologist reviews the results of a recent lab test for an estrogen-deficient patient and adjusts the estrogen dosage, writes a prescription, and spends 15 minutes communicating with the patient, he/she has met the complexity requirements for a code 99213. Because Level 3 and 4 visits (99214 and 99215) require a comprehensive physical examination, it is necessary to document the time spent with the patient (code 99214 requires 25 to 39 minutes of consultation and code 99215 requires ≥ 40 minutes).
Some final billing and coding advice
Always confirm telemedicine billing guidelines before beginning to conduct telemedicine visits. Consider starting a phone call to a payer armed with the fact that the payer is required by law to offer parity between telemedicine and face-to-face visits. Then ask which specific billing codes should be used.
Until you and your practice become comfortable with the process of, and the coding and billing for, telemedicine, consider using a telemedicine platform that has a built-in rules engine that offers recommendations for each telemedicine visit based on past claims data. These systems help gynecologists determine which CPT code to use and which modifiers are appropriate for the various insurance companies. In other words, the rules engine helps you submit a clean claim that is less likely to be denied and very likely to be paid. There are some vendors who are so confident that their rules engine will match the service with the proper CPT code and modifier that they guarantee full private payer reimbursement for telemedicine visits, or the vendor will reimburse the claim.
Watch for the third and final installment in this series, which was written with the assistance of 2 attorneys. It will review the legal guidelines for implementing telemedicine in a gynecologic practice and discuss the future of the technology. ●
- COVID-19 and Telehealth Coding Options as of March 20, 2020. https://www.ismanet.org/pdf/COVID-19andTelehealthcodes3-20-2020Updates.pdf.
- Federation of State Medical Boards. US States and Territories Modifying Licensure Requirements for Physicians in Response to COVID-19. Last updated May 26, 2020. https://www.fsmb.org/siteassets/advocacy/pdf/state-emergency-declarations-licensures-requirementscovid-19.pdf.
- Center for Connected Health Policy. Current State Laws and Reimbursement Policies https://www.cchpca.org/telehealth-policy/current-state-laws-and-reimbursement-policies.
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. List of Telehealth Services. Updated April 30, 2020. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-General-Information/Telehealth/Telehealth-Codes.
- American Medical Association. AMA quick guide to telemedicinein practice. Updated May 22, 2020. https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/digital/ama-quick-guide-telemedicine-practice.
- Eddy N. Patients increasingly trusting of remote care technology. Healthcare IT News. October 22, 2019. https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/patients-increasingly-trusting-remote-care-technology-says-new-report. Accessed May 26, 2020.
- Welch BM, Harvey J, O’Connell NS, et al. Patient preferences for direct-to-consumer telemedicine services: a nationwide survey. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17:784.
- Tsai JM, Cheng MJ, Tsai HH, et al. Acceptance and resistance of telehealth: the perspective of dual-factor concepts in technology adoption. Int J Inform Manag. 2019;49:34-44.
- Hollander J, Carr BG. Virtually perfect? Telemedicine for COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:1679-1681.
- Pew Research Center. Internet and Technology. Mobile Fact Sheet. June 12, 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org /internet/fact-sheet/mobile/. Accessed May 18, 2020.
- American Medical Association. AMA quick guide to telemedicine in practice. https://www.ama-assn.org/ practice-management/digital/ama-quick-guide-telemedicine- practice. Accessed March 20, 2020.
- Center for Connected Health Policy. Federal and state regulation updates. https://www.cchpca.org. Accessed March 20, 2020.
- The White House. Proclamation on declaring a national emergency concerning the novel coronavirus disease (Covid-19) outbreak. March 13, 2020. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-declaring-national-emergency-concerning-novel-coronavirus-disease-covid-19-outbreak/. Accessed May 18, 2020.
- Center for Connected Health Policy. Quick glance state telehealth actions in response to COVID-19. https://www.cchpca.org/sites/default/files/2020-05/STATE%20TELEHEALTH%20ACTIONS%20IN%20RESPONSE%20TO%20COVID%20
OVERVIEW%205.5.2020_0.pdf. AccessedMay 13, 2020. - Medicare.gov. https://www.medicare.gov/sign-up-change -plans/types-of-medicare-health-plans/medicare-advantage-plans/how-do-medicare-advantage-plans-work. Accessed May 13, 2020.
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. CMS finalizes policies to bring innovative telehealth benefit to Medicare Advantage. April 5, 2019. https://www.cms.gov/newsroom /press-releases/cms-finalizes-policies-bring-innovative-telehealth-benefit-medicare-advantage. Accessed May 18,2020.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare telemedicine health care provider fact sheet. https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/fact-sheets/medicare-telemedicine-health-care-provider-fact-sheet. Accessed May 30, 2020.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare telehealth frequently asked questions. https://www.cms.gov/files/document/medicare-telehealth-frequently-asked-questions-faqs-31720.pdf.
- American Hospital Association. Coronavirus update: CMS broadens access to telehealth during Covid-19 public health emergency. https://www.aha.org/advisory/2020-03-17-coronavirus-update-cms-broadens-access-telehealth-during-covid-19-public-health. Accessed May 18, 2020.
- Eddy N. Patients increasingly trusting of remote care technology. Healthcare IT News. October 22, 2019. https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/patients-increasingly-trusting-remote-care-technology-says-new-report. Accessed May 26, 2020.
- Welch BM, Harvey J, O’Connell NS, et al. Patient preferences for direct-to-consumer telemedicine services: a nationwide survey. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17:784.
- Tsai JM, Cheng MJ, Tsai HH, et al. Acceptance and resistance of telehealth: the perspective of dual-factor concepts in technology adoption. Int J Inform Manag. 2019;49:34-44.
- Hollander J, Carr BG. Virtually perfect? Telemedicine for COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:1679-1681.
- Pew Research Center. Internet and Technology. Mobile Fact Sheet. June 12, 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org /internet/fact-sheet/mobile/. Accessed May 18, 2020.
- American Medical Association. AMA quick guide to telemedicine in practice. https://www.ama-assn.org/ practice-management/digital/ama-quick-guide-telemedicine- practice. Accessed March 20, 2020.
- Center for Connected Health Policy. Federal and state regulation updates. https://www.cchpca.org. Accessed March 20, 2020.
- The White House. Proclamation on declaring a national emergency concerning the novel coronavirus disease (Covid-19) outbreak. March 13, 2020. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-declaring-national-emergency-concerning-novel-coronavirus-disease-covid-19-outbreak/. Accessed May 18, 2020.
- Center for Connected Health Policy. Quick glance state telehealth actions in response to COVID-19. https://www.cchpca.org/sites/default/files/2020-05/STATE%20TELEHEALTH%20ACTIONS%20IN%20RESPONSE%20TO%20COVID%20
OVERVIEW%205.5.2020_0.pdf. AccessedMay 13, 2020. - Medicare.gov. https://www.medicare.gov/sign-up-change -plans/types-of-medicare-health-plans/medicare-advantage-plans/how-do-medicare-advantage-plans-work. Accessed May 13, 2020.
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. CMS finalizes policies to bring innovative telehealth benefit to Medicare Advantage. April 5, 2019. https://www.cms.gov/newsroom /press-releases/cms-finalizes-policies-bring-innovative-telehealth-benefit-medicare-advantage. Accessed May 18,2020.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare telemedicine health care provider fact sheet. https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/fact-sheets/medicare-telemedicine-health-care-provider-fact-sheet. Accessed May 30, 2020.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare telehealth frequently asked questions. https://www.cms.gov/files/document/medicare-telehealth-frequently-asked-questions-faqs-31720.pdf.
- American Hospital Association. Coronavirus update: CMS broadens access to telehealth during Covid-19 public health emergency. https://www.aha.org/advisory/2020-03-17-coronavirus-update-cms-broadens-access-telehealth-during-covid-19-public-health. Accessed May 18, 2020.
‘I didn’t train for this’: Take cues from elite athletes to maintain stamina during the COVID-19 crisis
I am not an elite athlete. Never have been, never will be. But as I contemplated how to support my colleagues at my hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic—knowing that we face more weeks of social distancing, probable virus outbreaks as business opens up, and myriad changes in how we will practice medicine—I wondered how Olympic athletes focus their mental and physical stamina to respond to the challenges of competition.
In this article, I offer some pointers, gleaned from techniques used by exceptional athletes, on how we can maintain our stamina during the COVID-19 marathon.
Train your mind
Elite athletes understand that what will take them to the top of their sport is less about their physical gifts (all elite athletes have superior athletic talent) and more about how they train their minds to achieve their goals. As basketball great Kareem Abdul-Jabbar said, “Your mind is what makes everything else work.” Not surprisingly, athletes who train to be mentally “tough” have a better chance to reach the podium.
One definition of mental toughness is the “ability to perform toward the upper range of your talent and skill” regardless of external circumstances.1 Mental toughness involves an unshakable self-belief, resilience, motivation, focus, and ability to perform under pressure and manage physical and emotional pain.
Like me, most of you probably are not elite athletes, but you can train your mind to be tougher and increase your stamina using some of the following techniques.
Think positively
Do you find yourself dealing with an inner monologue of fear, self-doubt, and feelings of worthlessness? That is the Obnoxious Roommate in your head as described in a HuffPost article and based on the pioneering work of psychiatrist Aaron Beck, MD, the father of cognitive-behavioral therapy.2,3 Such thoughts negatively affect one’s sense of self-efficacy, which is the mental state of believing that you can meet the challenges you face. Elite athletes pay particular attention to their self-talk and replace negative thoughts with positive ones. These may include affirmations of your strengths or cue words that pump you up or help you manage your nerves.
To begin this practice, first observe what you are telling yourself. You may be saying, “I can’t do this. This is too hard.” This is an important step because you may have lived with the Obnoxious Roommate for so long that these thoughts are automatic and seem like a part of you. If, however, you first observe the thought and acknowledge it, you can begin to replace negative thoughts with supportive ones: “This is hard, but I can do this. I am intelligent, strong, capable, and ready.” While practice and repetition are required, thinking positively eventually will become a habit of self-support. Elite athletes know that to reach the top, they need to become their own best friend.4
Continue to: Use visualization...
Use visualization
Elite athletes visualize their events in such meticulous detail that they can actually feel their feet on the track, their muscles tensing, the starter pistol going off, the roar of the crowd. Research shows that the part of the brain that is activated in a race is also activated when one visualizes the race. It is as though the race is happening in real time.5 Physicians could use this approach to visualize the day ahead, picturing the procedures in detail and the clinical encounters going well.
In the current crisis, we frequently need a way to calm down quickly. One suggestion is to find a quiet space and sit for a few minutes, allowing the chair to support you. Then imagine a beautiful, calm, soothing place. Relax there and take in that feeling. Or, imagine a past achievement when you felt good about yourself. See yourself in that moment, remember how you felt, and take it in.
Plan for setbacks
All elite athletes have setbacks: Marathon runners hit a wall, golfers hit into the rough. But they don’t spin out of control at setbacks. They expect them, and they have practiced skills to restore their confidence and re-center themselves.6 For example, some athletes calm themselves by performing a ritualized series of movements. Others use a specific phrase (that positive self-talk again!) that reminds them of their goals or skills, while others play specific songs on their media player, or in their head, to return to their center.
Another technique is to use deep, rhythmic, diaphragmatic breathing for about 30 seconds to bring yourself back to your body.
The point is to have a plan in place to respond to setbacks in a positive manner and get back on track. Don’t waste time on self-criticism.
Continue to: Manage stress...
Manage stress
Not all stress is negative. Everyone has a “sweet spot,” a level of activation from which we operate best.1 If we go too far over that level, though, we can panic. If we aren’t stressed enough, it is hard to get going at all.
If you need to be pumped up to function at your best, try playing music that energizes you. If you work best when you are calm, take deep breaths and attend to the exhalation while you engage in positive self-talk.
Another way to manage stress levels during the COVID-19 pandemic is to employ the ESCAPE mnemonic:
- Exercise. Research shows that regular aerobic exercise is a potent stress reliever; it raises endorphin levels, provides a general sense of well-being, and improves immune function.7 If you exercise regularly, do everything possible to keep doing so. If you do not have an exercise routine, try taking walks. Get out into the fresh air, pay attention to your surroundings, and work to be present in your body as you move.
- Sleep. Getting adequate sleep, 7 to 9 hours a night for most people, is important for maintaining physical and emotional health.8 Elite athletes pay particular attention to sleep because they know that their bodies need to recharge. The COVID-19 crisis has affected sleep for many, and we need to consciously attend to sleep hygiene. This includes limiting use of screen time to no more than 2 hours before bed. As well, limit your intake of the news and definitely avoid it right before bedtime. Take a warm shower, drink a cup of herbal tea, or read a less-than-stimulating journal article. Make sure your bedroom is cool and dark. Keep a regular bedtime and wake up at a regular time.
- Connect. Despite the current need for physical distancing, do not neglect your need to connect to those you love and care about. Whatever modality works for you—telephone, e-mail, video conferencing—if you feel lonely, reach out. Friends and families are concerned about us, and it makes them feel useful to support us. Allow that.
- Appreciate/cultivate gratitude. Look for causes for celebration in your life, whether that is your family, friends, or that you have a job and a home. Perhaps it is the cleaner air or the beauty of nature. Whatever you are grateful for, acknowledge it, perhaps by writing it down in a journal. Remembering these things can serve as an antidote to the stress created by the COVID-19 crisis.
- Play. Seek out things that make you laugh.9 Find your inner goofiness. Get creative and paint, sing, garden, golf, play an instrument, dance, do puzzles, or play games. We need to remember the pleasures in life when times are dark. Find whatever feels like joy.
- Exhale. If you have a meditation practice continue to do it. If not, consider starting. Try yoga as a way to center yourself in your body. Elite athletes use meditation and yoga to harness their minds and bodies to feel more in control.10 When so many things feel out of our control and unpredictable, it can be immensely soothing to connect to yourself in this way and realize you can reliably relax.
Self-care is a necessity
While we are in a marathon not of our choosing, we can use the techniques of elite athletes to think positively, visualize scenarios to achieve our goals or to simply relax, plan for setbacks so that we can bounce back, and manage stress productively. Self-care is paramount as we continue to care for others. Let’s not neglect ourselves, and we will cross the finish line together. ●
- Jones G. What is this thing called mental toughness? An investigation of elite sport performers. J Applied Sport Psych. 2002;14:205-218.
- Gregoire C. The brain-training secrets of Olympic athletes. HuffPost. February 11, 2014. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mind-hacks-from-olympic-a_n_4747755. Accessed May 27, 2020.
- Beck AT. A 60-year evolution of cognitive theory and therapy. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019;14:16-20.
- Afremow J. The Champion’s Mind: How Great Athletes Think, Train, and Thrive. New York, NY: Rodale Inc; 2014.
- Ranganathan VK, Siemionow V, Liu JZ, et al. From mental power to muscle power—gaining strength by using the mind. Neuropsychologia. 2004;42:944-956.
- Morgan Griffin R. 5 tips for building mental stamina. July 8, 2013. WebMD. https://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/features/mental-stamina#1. Accessed May 27, 2020.
- Hackney AC. Stress and the neuroendocrine system: the role of exercise as a stressor and modifier of stress. Expert Rev Endocrinol Metab. 2006;1:783-792.
- Hirschkowitz M, Whiton K, Albert SM, et al. National Sleep Foundation’s sleep time duration recommendations: methodology and results summary. Sleep Health. 2015;1:40-43.
- Saper B. The therapeutic use of humor for psychiatric disturbances of adolescents and adults. Psychiatr Q. 1990;61:261-272.
- Zeidan F, Johnson SK, Diamond BJ, et al. Mindfulness meditation improves cognition: evidence of brief mental training. Conscious Cogn. 2012;19:597-605.
Mary K. McCarthy, MD
Director
Faculty/Trainee Mental Health Program
Brigham and Women’s Hospital
Boston, Massachusetts
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry
Harvard Medical School
The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.
Mary K. McCarthy, MD
Director
Faculty/Trainee Mental Health Program
Brigham and Women’s Hospital
Boston, Massachusetts
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry
Harvard Medical School
The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.
Mary K. McCarthy, MD
Director
Faculty/Trainee Mental Health Program
Brigham and Women’s Hospital
Boston, Massachusetts
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry
Harvard Medical School
The author reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.
I am not an elite athlete. Never have been, never will be. But as I contemplated how to support my colleagues at my hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic—knowing that we face more weeks of social distancing, probable virus outbreaks as business opens up, and myriad changes in how we will practice medicine—I wondered how Olympic athletes focus their mental and physical stamina to respond to the challenges of competition.
In this article, I offer some pointers, gleaned from techniques used by exceptional athletes, on how we can maintain our stamina during the COVID-19 marathon.
Train your mind
Elite athletes understand that what will take them to the top of their sport is less about their physical gifts (all elite athletes have superior athletic talent) and more about how they train their minds to achieve their goals. As basketball great Kareem Abdul-Jabbar said, “Your mind is what makes everything else work.” Not surprisingly, athletes who train to be mentally “tough” have a better chance to reach the podium.
One definition of mental toughness is the “ability to perform toward the upper range of your talent and skill” regardless of external circumstances.1 Mental toughness involves an unshakable self-belief, resilience, motivation, focus, and ability to perform under pressure and manage physical and emotional pain.
Like me, most of you probably are not elite athletes, but you can train your mind to be tougher and increase your stamina using some of the following techniques.
Think positively
Do you find yourself dealing with an inner monologue of fear, self-doubt, and feelings of worthlessness? That is the Obnoxious Roommate in your head as described in a HuffPost article and based on the pioneering work of psychiatrist Aaron Beck, MD, the father of cognitive-behavioral therapy.2,3 Such thoughts negatively affect one’s sense of self-efficacy, which is the mental state of believing that you can meet the challenges you face. Elite athletes pay particular attention to their self-talk and replace negative thoughts with positive ones. These may include affirmations of your strengths or cue words that pump you up or help you manage your nerves.
To begin this practice, first observe what you are telling yourself. You may be saying, “I can’t do this. This is too hard.” This is an important step because you may have lived with the Obnoxious Roommate for so long that these thoughts are automatic and seem like a part of you. If, however, you first observe the thought and acknowledge it, you can begin to replace negative thoughts with supportive ones: “This is hard, but I can do this. I am intelligent, strong, capable, and ready.” While practice and repetition are required, thinking positively eventually will become a habit of self-support. Elite athletes know that to reach the top, they need to become their own best friend.4
Continue to: Use visualization...
Use visualization
Elite athletes visualize their events in such meticulous detail that they can actually feel their feet on the track, their muscles tensing, the starter pistol going off, the roar of the crowd. Research shows that the part of the brain that is activated in a race is also activated when one visualizes the race. It is as though the race is happening in real time.5 Physicians could use this approach to visualize the day ahead, picturing the procedures in detail and the clinical encounters going well.
In the current crisis, we frequently need a way to calm down quickly. One suggestion is to find a quiet space and sit for a few minutes, allowing the chair to support you. Then imagine a beautiful, calm, soothing place. Relax there and take in that feeling. Or, imagine a past achievement when you felt good about yourself. See yourself in that moment, remember how you felt, and take it in.
Plan for setbacks
All elite athletes have setbacks: Marathon runners hit a wall, golfers hit into the rough. But they don’t spin out of control at setbacks. They expect them, and they have practiced skills to restore their confidence and re-center themselves.6 For example, some athletes calm themselves by performing a ritualized series of movements. Others use a specific phrase (that positive self-talk again!) that reminds them of their goals or skills, while others play specific songs on their media player, or in their head, to return to their center.
Another technique is to use deep, rhythmic, diaphragmatic breathing for about 30 seconds to bring yourself back to your body.
The point is to have a plan in place to respond to setbacks in a positive manner and get back on track. Don’t waste time on self-criticism.
Continue to: Manage stress...
Manage stress
Not all stress is negative. Everyone has a “sweet spot,” a level of activation from which we operate best.1 If we go too far over that level, though, we can panic. If we aren’t stressed enough, it is hard to get going at all.
If you need to be pumped up to function at your best, try playing music that energizes you. If you work best when you are calm, take deep breaths and attend to the exhalation while you engage in positive self-talk.
Another way to manage stress levels during the COVID-19 pandemic is to employ the ESCAPE mnemonic:
- Exercise. Research shows that regular aerobic exercise is a potent stress reliever; it raises endorphin levels, provides a general sense of well-being, and improves immune function.7 If you exercise regularly, do everything possible to keep doing so. If you do not have an exercise routine, try taking walks. Get out into the fresh air, pay attention to your surroundings, and work to be present in your body as you move.
- Sleep. Getting adequate sleep, 7 to 9 hours a night for most people, is important for maintaining physical and emotional health.8 Elite athletes pay particular attention to sleep because they know that their bodies need to recharge. The COVID-19 crisis has affected sleep for many, and we need to consciously attend to sleep hygiene. This includes limiting use of screen time to no more than 2 hours before bed. As well, limit your intake of the news and definitely avoid it right before bedtime. Take a warm shower, drink a cup of herbal tea, or read a less-than-stimulating journal article. Make sure your bedroom is cool and dark. Keep a regular bedtime and wake up at a regular time.
- Connect. Despite the current need for physical distancing, do not neglect your need to connect to those you love and care about. Whatever modality works for you—telephone, e-mail, video conferencing—if you feel lonely, reach out. Friends and families are concerned about us, and it makes them feel useful to support us. Allow that.
- Appreciate/cultivate gratitude. Look for causes for celebration in your life, whether that is your family, friends, or that you have a job and a home. Perhaps it is the cleaner air or the beauty of nature. Whatever you are grateful for, acknowledge it, perhaps by writing it down in a journal. Remembering these things can serve as an antidote to the stress created by the COVID-19 crisis.
- Play. Seek out things that make you laugh.9 Find your inner goofiness. Get creative and paint, sing, garden, golf, play an instrument, dance, do puzzles, or play games. We need to remember the pleasures in life when times are dark. Find whatever feels like joy.
- Exhale. If you have a meditation practice continue to do it. If not, consider starting. Try yoga as a way to center yourself in your body. Elite athletes use meditation and yoga to harness their minds and bodies to feel more in control.10 When so many things feel out of our control and unpredictable, it can be immensely soothing to connect to yourself in this way and realize you can reliably relax.
Self-care is a necessity
While we are in a marathon not of our choosing, we can use the techniques of elite athletes to think positively, visualize scenarios to achieve our goals or to simply relax, plan for setbacks so that we can bounce back, and manage stress productively. Self-care is paramount as we continue to care for others. Let’s not neglect ourselves, and we will cross the finish line together. ●
I am not an elite athlete. Never have been, never will be. But as I contemplated how to support my colleagues at my hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic—knowing that we face more weeks of social distancing, probable virus outbreaks as business opens up, and myriad changes in how we will practice medicine—I wondered how Olympic athletes focus their mental and physical stamina to respond to the challenges of competition.
In this article, I offer some pointers, gleaned from techniques used by exceptional athletes, on how we can maintain our stamina during the COVID-19 marathon.
Train your mind
Elite athletes understand that what will take them to the top of their sport is less about their physical gifts (all elite athletes have superior athletic talent) and more about how they train their minds to achieve their goals. As basketball great Kareem Abdul-Jabbar said, “Your mind is what makes everything else work.” Not surprisingly, athletes who train to be mentally “tough” have a better chance to reach the podium.
One definition of mental toughness is the “ability to perform toward the upper range of your talent and skill” regardless of external circumstances.1 Mental toughness involves an unshakable self-belief, resilience, motivation, focus, and ability to perform under pressure and manage physical and emotional pain.
Like me, most of you probably are not elite athletes, but you can train your mind to be tougher and increase your stamina using some of the following techniques.
Think positively
Do you find yourself dealing with an inner monologue of fear, self-doubt, and feelings of worthlessness? That is the Obnoxious Roommate in your head as described in a HuffPost article and based on the pioneering work of psychiatrist Aaron Beck, MD, the father of cognitive-behavioral therapy.2,3 Such thoughts negatively affect one’s sense of self-efficacy, which is the mental state of believing that you can meet the challenges you face. Elite athletes pay particular attention to their self-talk and replace negative thoughts with positive ones. These may include affirmations of your strengths or cue words that pump you up or help you manage your nerves.
To begin this practice, first observe what you are telling yourself. You may be saying, “I can’t do this. This is too hard.” This is an important step because you may have lived with the Obnoxious Roommate for so long that these thoughts are automatic and seem like a part of you. If, however, you first observe the thought and acknowledge it, you can begin to replace negative thoughts with supportive ones: “This is hard, but I can do this. I am intelligent, strong, capable, and ready.” While practice and repetition are required, thinking positively eventually will become a habit of self-support. Elite athletes know that to reach the top, they need to become their own best friend.4
Continue to: Use visualization...
Use visualization
Elite athletes visualize their events in such meticulous detail that they can actually feel their feet on the track, their muscles tensing, the starter pistol going off, the roar of the crowd. Research shows that the part of the brain that is activated in a race is also activated when one visualizes the race. It is as though the race is happening in real time.5 Physicians could use this approach to visualize the day ahead, picturing the procedures in detail and the clinical encounters going well.
In the current crisis, we frequently need a way to calm down quickly. One suggestion is to find a quiet space and sit for a few minutes, allowing the chair to support you. Then imagine a beautiful, calm, soothing place. Relax there and take in that feeling. Or, imagine a past achievement when you felt good about yourself. See yourself in that moment, remember how you felt, and take it in.
Plan for setbacks
All elite athletes have setbacks: Marathon runners hit a wall, golfers hit into the rough. But they don’t spin out of control at setbacks. They expect them, and they have practiced skills to restore their confidence and re-center themselves.6 For example, some athletes calm themselves by performing a ritualized series of movements. Others use a specific phrase (that positive self-talk again!) that reminds them of their goals or skills, while others play specific songs on their media player, or in their head, to return to their center.
Another technique is to use deep, rhythmic, diaphragmatic breathing for about 30 seconds to bring yourself back to your body.
The point is to have a plan in place to respond to setbacks in a positive manner and get back on track. Don’t waste time on self-criticism.
Continue to: Manage stress...
Manage stress
Not all stress is negative. Everyone has a “sweet spot,” a level of activation from which we operate best.1 If we go too far over that level, though, we can panic. If we aren’t stressed enough, it is hard to get going at all.
If you need to be pumped up to function at your best, try playing music that energizes you. If you work best when you are calm, take deep breaths and attend to the exhalation while you engage in positive self-talk.
Another way to manage stress levels during the COVID-19 pandemic is to employ the ESCAPE mnemonic:
- Exercise. Research shows that regular aerobic exercise is a potent stress reliever; it raises endorphin levels, provides a general sense of well-being, and improves immune function.7 If you exercise regularly, do everything possible to keep doing so. If you do not have an exercise routine, try taking walks. Get out into the fresh air, pay attention to your surroundings, and work to be present in your body as you move.
- Sleep. Getting adequate sleep, 7 to 9 hours a night for most people, is important for maintaining physical and emotional health.8 Elite athletes pay particular attention to sleep because they know that their bodies need to recharge. The COVID-19 crisis has affected sleep for many, and we need to consciously attend to sleep hygiene. This includes limiting use of screen time to no more than 2 hours before bed. As well, limit your intake of the news and definitely avoid it right before bedtime. Take a warm shower, drink a cup of herbal tea, or read a less-than-stimulating journal article. Make sure your bedroom is cool and dark. Keep a regular bedtime and wake up at a regular time.
- Connect. Despite the current need for physical distancing, do not neglect your need to connect to those you love and care about. Whatever modality works for you—telephone, e-mail, video conferencing—if you feel lonely, reach out. Friends and families are concerned about us, and it makes them feel useful to support us. Allow that.
- Appreciate/cultivate gratitude. Look for causes for celebration in your life, whether that is your family, friends, or that you have a job and a home. Perhaps it is the cleaner air or the beauty of nature. Whatever you are grateful for, acknowledge it, perhaps by writing it down in a journal. Remembering these things can serve as an antidote to the stress created by the COVID-19 crisis.
- Play. Seek out things that make you laugh.9 Find your inner goofiness. Get creative and paint, sing, garden, golf, play an instrument, dance, do puzzles, or play games. We need to remember the pleasures in life when times are dark. Find whatever feels like joy.
- Exhale. If you have a meditation practice continue to do it. If not, consider starting. Try yoga as a way to center yourself in your body. Elite athletes use meditation and yoga to harness their minds and bodies to feel more in control.10 When so many things feel out of our control and unpredictable, it can be immensely soothing to connect to yourself in this way and realize you can reliably relax.
Self-care is a necessity
While we are in a marathon not of our choosing, we can use the techniques of elite athletes to think positively, visualize scenarios to achieve our goals or to simply relax, plan for setbacks so that we can bounce back, and manage stress productively. Self-care is paramount as we continue to care for others. Let’s not neglect ourselves, and we will cross the finish line together. ●
- Jones G. What is this thing called mental toughness? An investigation of elite sport performers. J Applied Sport Psych. 2002;14:205-218.
- Gregoire C. The brain-training secrets of Olympic athletes. HuffPost. February 11, 2014. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mind-hacks-from-olympic-a_n_4747755. Accessed May 27, 2020.
- Beck AT. A 60-year evolution of cognitive theory and therapy. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019;14:16-20.
- Afremow J. The Champion’s Mind: How Great Athletes Think, Train, and Thrive. New York, NY: Rodale Inc; 2014.
- Ranganathan VK, Siemionow V, Liu JZ, et al. From mental power to muscle power—gaining strength by using the mind. Neuropsychologia. 2004;42:944-956.
- Morgan Griffin R. 5 tips for building mental stamina. July 8, 2013. WebMD. https://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/features/mental-stamina#1. Accessed May 27, 2020.
- Hackney AC. Stress and the neuroendocrine system: the role of exercise as a stressor and modifier of stress. Expert Rev Endocrinol Metab. 2006;1:783-792.
- Hirschkowitz M, Whiton K, Albert SM, et al. National Sleep Foundation’s sleep time duration recommendations: methodology and results summary. Sleep Health. 2015;1:40-43.
- Saper B. The therapeutic use of humor for psychiatric disturbances of adolescents and adults. Psychiatr Q. 1990;61:261-272.
- Zeidan F, Johnson SK, Diamond BJ, et al. Mindfulness meditation improves cognition: evidence of brief mental training. Conscious Cogn. 2012;19:597-605.
- Jones G. What is this thing called mental toughness? An investigation of elite sport performers. J Applied Sport Psych. 2002;14:205-218.
- Gregoire C. The brain-training secrets of Olympic athletes. HuffPost. February 11, 2014. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mind-hacks-from-olympic-a_n_4747755. Accessed May 27, 2020.
- Beck AT. A 60-year evolution of cognitive theory and therapy. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019;14:16-20.
- Afremow J. The Champion’s Mind: How Great Athletes Think, Train, and Thrive. New York, NY: Rodale Inc; 2014.
- Ranganathan VK, Siemionow V, Liu JZ, et al. From mental power to muscle power—gaining strength by using the mind. Neuropsychologia. 2004;42:944-956.
- Morgan Griffin R. 5 tips for building mental stamina. July 8, 2013. WebMD. https://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/features/mental-stamina#1. Accessed May 27, 2020.
- Hackney AC. Stress and the neuroendocrine system: the role of exercise as a stressor and modifier of stress. Expert Rev Endocrinol Metab. 2006;1:783-792.
- Hirschkowitz M, Whiton K, Albert SM, et al. National Sleep Foundation’s sleep time duration recommendations: methodology and results summary. Sleep Health. 2015;1:40-43.
- Saper B. The therapeutic use of humor for psychiatric disturbances of adolescents and adults. Psychiatr Q. 1990;61:261-272.
- Zeidan F, Johnson SK, Diamond BJ, et al. Mindfulness meditation improves cognition: evidence of brief mental training. Conscious Cogn. 2012;19:597-605.
