Search This Blog

Thursday, May 17, 2018

AMA touts first graduates of redesigned medical curriculum

  • The American Medical Association is anticipating the coming graduation of the first class of students trained in a new curriculum developed by its Accelerating Change in Medical Education consortium, an initiative launched five years ago that seeks to prepare medical students for the modern healthcare system.
  • Since the launch of ACE, the AMA has awarded $12.5 million in grants to 32 leading medical schools to develop new curricula to be replicated by institutions across the country. So far, the initiative has supported training for an estimated 19,000 medical students.
  • Medical students trained in this new model are graduating with hands-on training in EHRs and coordinated care and are better prepared to work in an industry increasingly focused on value-based care, patient-centricity and population health.

As the healthcare industry evolves, medical education must do the same. Despite overwhelming volumes of data from EHRs, modern medical education doesn’t incorporate much training in data science. In fact, medical education today hasn’t drifted far from the Flexner Report, which was published in 1910.
AMA’s consortium has spent the past five years trying to change that paradigm by bringing medical education into the 21st century. Schools involved in the program are not just playing catch up, they’re preparing to be drivers of healthcare delivery reform with curricula focused on patient-centered care, population health and care coordination, according to Ruth Crowe, associate professor at New York University School of Medicine.
Hands-on EHR training is a large part of that. AMA recently partnered with the Regenstrief Institute and the Indiana University School of Medicine on the launch of its EHR Clinical Learning Platform, an EHR training system that gives students the opportunity to use real patient data.
EHR training in medical schools is long overdue, as the industry is thirsting for greater efficiency in the use of electronic platforms. According to a 2017 study from The Doctors Company, the pace of medical malpractice claims in which EHRs play a role is growing. Another study, published in the Annals of Family Medicine, found primary care doctors spend more than half their workday on EHR tasks. The administrative burden is a major factor in physician burnout.
As for the future, AMA Group Vice President for Medical Education Susan Skochelak said in a teleconference the organization will be looking to partner with residency training programs, hospital systems and medical schools for its next five-year push helping medical students transition into residencies. But the consortium’s work with medical school curricula isn’t over yet.
“We’ll continue our work with this consortium of schools and enlarge it,” Skochelak said. “There’s still a lot more change that needs to happen and many more schools to reach.”

U.S. military personnel at greater risk for skin cancer than general population

When one considers the risks of military service, skin cancer may not be top of mind. According to research published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, however, U.S. military personnel are more likely to develop skin cancer than the general population.
A review of nine published studies indicates that both active duty service members and veterans have an increased risk of developing skin cancer, including melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer. According to the authors, the military’s demographics include two groups known to have high rates of skin cancer: Caucasians and men over 50. Additionally, military personnel are often exposed to high levels of ultraviolet radiation, which can increase one’s risk for both melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer.
“From the Pacific Theater in World War II to more recent campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. military members have been deployed to areas where they face prolonged exposure to the sun’s harmful UV rays,” says board-certified dermatologist Jennifer G. Powers, MD, FAAD, one of the authors of the JAAD article. “This exposure is even more intense for those serving in desert environments because the sun’s rays reflect off of sand.”
As the JAAD review and an accompanying commentary indicate, the risk of skin cancer among military personnel is further compounded because sun protection is not a priority among active duty service members. And for many soldiers, skin cancer prevention strategies -; like wearing protective clothing that is not part of their uniform, or carrying and applying sunscreen -; are simply not feasible during deployment.
“U.S. military personnel face a unique set of skin cancer risk factors,” says Oliver J. Wisco, DO, FAAD, one of the authors of the commentary. “While they may not be able to take steps to reduce their risk during their deployment, they can take steps to detect skin cancer early, when it’s most treatable.”
The American Academy of Dermatology encourages everyone to perform regular self-exams to check themselves for signs of skin cancer, asking a partner to help them examine hard-to-see areas like their back. Those who notice any new or suspicious spots on their skin, or any spots that are changing, itching or bleeding should see a board-certified dermatologist.
“During Skin Cancer Awareness Month in May, the AAD is recognizing Skin Cancer Heroes, and that of course includes the heroes of the U.S. military,” says board-certified dermatologist Suzanne M. Olbricht, MD, FAAD, president of the AAD. “We encourage our soldiers and veterans to be aware of their increased skin cancer risk and be their own Skin Cancer Heroes by regularly examining their skin for suspicious spots.”
For more information on skin cancer detection and prevention, visit the AAD website SpotSkinCancer.org. There, you can also find instructions on how to perform a skin self-exam, download a body mole map for tracking changes in your skin and find free SPOTme® skin cancer screenings in your area. SPOT Skin Cancer is the AAD’s campaign to create a world without skin cancer through public awareness, community outreach programs and services, and advocacy that promote the prevention, detection and care of skin cancer.

Cerner signs 10-yr contract with Dept of Veterans Affairs for up to $10B

Veterans Affairs Acting Secretary Robert Wilkie says: I am pleased to announce we have signed a contract with Cerner today that will modernize the VA’s health care IT system and help provide seamless care to Veterans as they transition from military service to Veteran status, and when they choose to use community care. This is one of the largest IT contracts in the federal government, with a ceiling of $10 billion over 10 years. And with a contract of that size, you can understand why former Secretary Shulkin and I took some extra time to do our due diligence and make sure the contract does what the President wanted. President Trump has made very clear to me that he wants this contract to do right by both Veterans and taxpayers, and I can say now without a doubt that it does. With this contract, VA will adopt the same EHR platform as the Department of Defense: Patient data will be seamlessly shared between VA, DoD, and community providers through a secure system; Health information will be much easier to share, and health care will be much easier to coordinate and deliver, as well as faster and safer; Care by all providers will be transparent to the entire care team; VA will add capabilities to the system as necessary to meet the special needs of Veterans, VA clinicians, and our community-care partners

Bezos-Buffett-Dimon joint venture to save health care is struggling to find a CEO

  • After initially interviewing health-care executives, the group is now focused more on finding an entrepreneur.
  • The group is structured as an entity that is “free from profit-making incentives and constraints,” which makes it difficult to attract start-up founders.
  • Whoever takes the job will be working under the weight of Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett and Jamie Dimon.
Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett and Jamie Dimon.
CNBC
Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett and Jamie Dimon.
Almost four months ago, AmazonBerkshire Hathaway and J.P. Morgan Chase announced a bold new partnership aimed at bringing down the costs of health care.
But ABC, as the group is known, has encountered a surprising challenge filling the CEO spot.
The search for a person to lead ABC began around the time of the announcement in late January, with potential candidates meeting by phone as well as in Berkshire’s hometown of Omaha, Nebraska, and in New York, where J.P. Morgan is based, according to people with knowledge of the process.
Health policy and insurance experts were among the initial targets, with ex-Aetna executive Gary Loveman and former Medicare chief Andy Slavitt on the list, along with Todd Park, who was previously President Barack Obama’s technology chief.
More recently, ABC has started looking for a candidate with an entrepreneurial background in technology and health who is far removed from drug supply companies and health plans, which are viewed as part of the problem, said the people, who asked not to be named because the talks are confidential.
One of the top names to emerge in recent weeks was Owen Tripp, CEO of Grand Rounds Health, a start-up that sells a second medical opinion service as a benefit to large employers like Walmart and Target, the people said. Before Grand Rounds, Tripp co-founded Reputation.com, a developer of online reputation software, and he also has a background in health-care consulting.
Owen Tripp, CEO of Grand Rounds Health.
Source: YouTube
Owen Tripp, CEO of Grand Rounds Health.
But Tripp told CNBC in a statement that he’s committed to staying on as CEO of Grand Rounds.
“To the extent we can be part of their solution as their mission sharpens, we’d be glad to pitch in — just as we would assist any organization that wants to improve clinical outcomes,” Tripp said.
Berkshire CEO Warren Buffett said at the company’s investor meeting earlier this month that the consortium hoped to have a chief executive“within a couple of months.”
Todd Combs, an investment manager at Berkshire and the lead recruiter for ABC, has the challenge of finding a leader who can work across three companies with a combined 1.2 million employees and simultaneously help develop innovative solutions in a multitrillion-dollar industry. The group hasn’t said much about how it plans to leverage its size and scale to bring down costs or how it will use technology to simplify the health-care system for consumers.
As if that weren’t demanding enough, ABC is structured as an entity “free from profit-making incentives and constraints,” according to the initial announcement, although it will not necessarily be a nonprofit. That means Combs needs to find someone who can handle the requisite long hours, extensive travel and public scrutiny of running a high-profile start-up, but probably without the allure of a big stock incentive plan, which is typically an attractive incentive in tech recruiting.
“Senior talent with an entrepreneurial background might not be inclined to a structure like that,” said Annie Lamont, a co-founder and managing partner at Oak HC/FT who invests in health and financial start-ups. “They could find a professional manager, but true entrepreneurs might well be harder.”
Longtime technology venture capitalist John Doerr has been tapped to help put forward names from his network. The other executives involved, according to the January announcement, are J.P. Morgan’sMarvelle Sullivan Berchtold and Beth Galetti, a senior vice president at Amazon.

‘Transcend the challenges’

Whoever ultimately takes the top job has to align with Combs, who’s been kicking around the idea for the consortium for more than five years, according to people familiar with his thinking.
After getting his own company on board, Combs enlisted J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon, before bringing on Amazon as the tech partner, said one of the people. The three executives are also known to be friends.
“What’s intriguing about this group is the possibility of innovation, tech and a consumer focus coming together to transcend the challenges with the health-care ecosystem,” said Brian Marcotte, CEO of the National Business Group on Health, which represents large employers.
One area where industry experts see the consortium having a potentially dramatic impact on pricing is in cutting out the network of middlemen rather than partnering with them, and giving patients more direct access to their medical needs, whether that’s in the form of care, coverage or prescriptions.
The group could also expand. One person familiar with the matter said that other large employers have approached ABC about wanting to join once a CEO is announced.
That could be a while, as ABC has yet to find the right fit. Trevor Price, co-founder of executive search firm Oxeon Partners, which specializes in health, said there are significant potential upsides and downsides that make the position a tough sell for some.
“For anyone who believes they can build a fully integrated platform to care for millions of Americans, including the payer and provider and even gets into managing risk, nothing would stop them from taking this job,” Price said.
But it’s an extremely high-profile gig in a historically difficult industry to crack, and it comes with the added weight of working under Jeff BezosWarren Buffett and Dimon all at once.
“If the CEO isn’t successful,” Price said, “it would be hard to come back from that.”

Shorter breast cancer treatment could hurt providers’ pockets

A widely used breast cancer drug is as effective over a shorter treatment cycle, according to new research. While shorter treatments expose patients to fewer side effects and reduce cost, they could also have a significant impact on a profitable stream of hospital revenue.
Herceptin costs about $70,000 for a full year of weekly infusions that treat early-stage breast cancer. Women who used it for six months did just as well as those who received the treatment for a year, according to research from the University of Cambridge that involved more than 4,000 patients but has yet to be peer reviewed.
The five-year survival rate was nearly identical, and patients suffered fewer side effects, including heart problems. Only 4% of women who received the drug for 6 months stopped treatment early due to heart problems, compared to 8% in the 12-month group.
“This is a win-win for patients with breast cancer who are receiving this common treatment,” said Dr. Bruce Johnson, president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, which will be presenting the research at an ASCO meeting next month.
Many health systems look to their oncology service lines as a central part of their business models. They are building new cancer centers or expanding existing facilities. Providers are also targeting partners that could bolster their cancer programs.
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center plans to spend $2 billion to build three specialty hospitals, one of which is a cancer center.
Part of what attracted Atrium Health, formerly Carolinas HealthCare System, to Navicent Health is the opportunity to grow its oncology network, executives said. Atrium spent $150 million to double the size of its Levine Cancer Institute and expects a 10.1% return on that investment. Cancer treatment was also a significant driver of Atrium’s proposed merger with University of North Carolina, which the organizations called off in March.
“For years now, we have been hearing of stories of infusion centers that are bursting at the seams,” said Lindsay Conway, a managing director at Advisory Board. “For those that are desperate for new strategies to become more efficient, this is an exciting development.”
Capacity could increase as more immunotherapy and biologics come to market.
That being said, women who are HER2-positive and take Herceptin or related drugs represent only about one-fifth of breast cancer patients, Conway said. Still, there are broader implications as more studies come to fruition.
As oncology drugs improve and require shorter treatment cycles, that could dent hospital revenue for providers that primarily operate on volume-based models. But this development is a net positive for oncology providers that need extra capacity and would benefit from lower overall cost of care and fewer readmissions, which are linked to value-based models, said Naval Shanware, associate director at the consulting firm Navigant.
“Given the era of bundled payments, having less treatment and fewer side effects is a big positive,” he said. “At the same time, it also opens up additional resources and that goes to the bottom line.”
What remains to be seen is how pharmaceutical companies will respond through possible price hikes and how much of this cost saving pans out, Shanware added.
Less exposure to toxic cancer drugs could help providers reduce penalties related to cancer patients who use the emergency room within 30 days of treatment, administered under the CMS’ Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting Program, said Deirdre Saulet, a practice manager at Advisory Board. It could also lower out-of-pocket costs and improve patient satisfaction, which are important metrics in new payment models, she said.
This is an opportunity to study how long providers administer cancer drugs and at what dose, complementing research already underway at the Value in Cancer Care Consortium, Conway said.
“Anything that providers can do to improve quality or experience for cancer patients is a win,” she said. “We don’t have many opportunities in cancer care to do this in a significant way.”
While experts expect more related analysis to follow suit, it won’t be backed by the pharmaceutical industry. It will likely have to come from providers and the National Institute of Health, Shanware said.
Doctors are not happy that they continue to use these drugs to treat cancer patients over the long term and have no idea whether they are effective, he said.
“This is likely to become the norm and this study may be the canary in the coal mine,” Shanware said.

Medicare Slow to Boot Docs with State Sanctions

Physicians who land in hot water with state regulators have a helping hand when it comes to keeping their practices running:
The federal government.
At least 216 remained on Medicare payment rolls in 2015 despite surrendering a license, having one revoked, or being excluded from state-paid healthcare rolls in the previous five years, a MedPage Today/Milwaukee Journal Sentinelinvestigation found. In all, they were paid $25.8 million by taxpayers in 2015 alone.
Among them: Glen Marin, DO, from New York City.
According to New York Department of Health disciplinary records, Marin didn’t contest charges that he was sexually inappropriate with a female patient. In California, as a result, he surrendered his license rather than go through a full disciplinary hearing.
He was allowed to keep practicing in New York, but only if he had a chaperone present when he met with female patients.
Since 2007, Marin settled at least three separate malpractice cases, according to TruthMD, including one for failing to diagnose the cancer that eventually killed a patient.
Despite that, taxpayers helped foot the bill for him to keep practicing medicine. In 2015, the year after he surrendered his California license, he was paid more than $280,000 through Medicare.
Other individual physicians who faced serious sanctions were paid as much as $1.4 million that year.
The analysis focused on 2015 because that is the last year for which payment details from the annual $720-billion Medicare program are available.
To identify these cases, reporters from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and MedPage Today worked from a list compiled by TruthMD, a Los Angeles-based company that collects information on physicians from state boards, courts and other sources. The news organizations focused on the most serious cases — those in which physicians were stripped of their ability to practice or barred from state-run healthcare payments — then compared those names to Medicare payment data to gauge the total cost of looking the other way.
Medicare is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) — the same department that operates the National Practitioner Data Bank, which tracks discipline against physicians, including sanctions by state medical boards.
“That’s astonishing to me that HHS allows that to happen,” said Michael Carome, MD, who heads the watchdog group Public Citizen’s healthcare division. “If someone has a pattern of such adverse actions, that ought to be a red flag.”
Attempts to reach Marin were unsuccessful. His profile on the New York Department of Health website shows that he is now retired, but retains hospital credentials. The website says prospective patients can “contact the doctor’s office to see if this doctor is taking new patients.”
He did not return messages left at offices associated with his practice.
The HHS Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is required to exclude physicians from payment rolls if they are convicted of several specific charges, such as abusing patients, defrauding the system, or are caught improperly prescribing controlled substances.
But there are 16 categories of problems where the OIG may choose not to exclude physicians, including failing to meet basic standards of care or even having a medical license revoked.
As a result, while more than 1,500 physicians had licenses suspended, revoked or put on probation in 2015 by state medical boards, only 305 were prohibited from billing Medicare that year.
George Annas, JD, MPH, a professor of health law and bioethics at Boston University, said Medicare is enabling bad physicians to continue practicing.
“The last thing you want is Medicare patients to be seeing the worst doctors in the country,” said Annas, who spent six years on the medical board in Massachusetts. “That’s not right. They should be protecting Medicare patients. That should be their number one job.”
HHS databases
The Journal Sentinel and MedPage Todaywere able to find examples by simply comparing two kinds of information that HHS already maintains.
That turns up physicians such as Victoria Gaus, MD, who practices in Florida.
In 2012, the Florida medical board said Gaus had prescribed inappropriate and excessive amounts of controlled substances — opioids and tranquilizers — to five patients. That same year, a $50,000 malpractice claim was submitted to the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation involving a patient who died of an overdose.
In 2013, Gaus agreed to a reprimand, a $20,000 fine, a permanent ban from practicing in a pain management clinic, and a permanent ban from prescribing certain opioids drugs as well as a type of tranquilizer known as benzodiazepines.
She did not lose her license in Florida, but Illinois refused to renew her license based on the Florida action and Pennsylvania indefinitely suspended her license.
In 2015, Medicare paid her a total of $60,000. Gaus could not be reached by phone or email, and did not respond to a certified letter.
The review also turned up David Martini, MD, who practices in Maryland.
In 2013, Maryland reprimanded Martini and fined him $5,000, but put no restrictions on his license, after allegations that he performed back and abdominal liposuction on a woman who died as a result of the procedure. Martini is an ear, nose and throat specialist who was not trained in plastic surgery of the body, according to an anonymous complaint filed with the Maryland Board of Physicians. The board eventually found that Martini failed to properly supervise a nurse anesthetist and that he violated the law by performing the liposuction in his office which was not an accredited facility.
Based on Maryland’s action, Martini permanently surrendered his licenses in New York and Pennsylvania in 2014.
In 2015, he received $272,000 from Medicare. Martini would not comment for this story.
And Sarkis Aghazarian, MD, a surgeon who also practices in Maryland.
In 2003, Aghazarian was reprimanded by the Maryland Board of Physicians in a case in which he allegedly failed to diagnose and treat a serious infection that led to a man’s death.
In a 2011 malpractice lawsuit, he was accused of the 2008 death of a 70-year-old Maryland man after complications arose following an angioplasty he performed.
In each case, Aghazarian paid settlements of $250,000. He says he did so because it was cheaper than going to trial.
In 2012, a Maryland hospital suspended him for 90 days after complaints that included abusive language, angry and intimidating behavior, and rudeness in the operating room toward staff members and patients — in one case yelling at a woman while she was on the operating table.
In Maryland, the allegations led to a reprimand, two years probation and a $5,000 fine.Based on Maryland’s case, California took action that led to the surrender of his license there in 2014.
In May 2015, Aghazarian’s probation in Maryland ended and he was paid $321,000 that year from Medicare.
In an interview, Aghazarian said Medicare has reviewed his record and allowed him to continue seeing those patients.
“I never mistreated any of my patients,” he said.
He said the allegations that he was abusive and disruptive in the hospital were “pure dirty politics” that came about because he complained about patient safety.
“Rather than fixing the problems, they labeled me as disruptive,” he said. “I was trying to protect patients.”
More protections in private sector
Private insurance companies spend money to make sure they don’t pay more than needed, or support bad medicine, said Leslie Paige, vice president for policy and communications for Citizens Against Government Waste, a nonprofit watchdog group that lobbies for reduced government spending.
Medicare doles out far more money and isn’t even using the data the department already gathers on physicians’ problems, she said.
“They need to do a better job of tracking these people down and stopping them before they abscond with taxpayer dollars or hurt patients,” Paige said. “Seniors should not be sitting ducks for predators simply because they’re on Medicare.”
One example: James McGuckin Jr., MD, the target of a Washington state investigation and an FDA letter into his use of a risky and unproven vein-opening procedure on people with multiple sclerosis. McGuckin was part of an earlier Journal Sentinel/MedPage Todayinvestigation that found states were slow to take action against physicians who performed the procedure.
In a statement to an evaluator for an ethics course that was required as part of his Washington state discipline, McGuckin noted that several private insurers had cut ties with him.
But he has not lost his license and is still eligible for payments from the Medicare system. In 2015 alone, he was paid $8.8 million, the MedPage Today/Journal Sentinel analysis found.
According to Todd Echols, who oversees the OIG’s program, workers managing exclusions can be overwhelmed by a flood of information about providers — in part because computers are now involved.
For decades, the process was driven through relationships investigators forged with state medical boards. The state boards kept an eye out for cases that fit the criteria for exclusion from the federal system, then passed them along.
Last year, OIG started getting a data feed from the Federation of State Medical Boards. In the first year alone, the group sent more than 2,000 cases to investigate. The actions were a mix of positive and negative, and the vast majority didn’t meet the criteria for federal exclusion, a spokesman said.
“We can’t get through 2,000,” Echols said. “There are some actions that we just don’t even have a chance to get to.”
There’s also a good chance his inspectors couldn’t take action in many of those cases.
Some exclusion authorities only come into play if a physician’s behavior affected a patient on Medicare or Medicaid.
Echols said documents in such cases — whether they be from state medical boards, court filings or other sources — have to clearly indicate a relationship to those one of those two programs.
The problems must also match those in the federal law describing the exclusion process. For example, they have to document issues with “professional competence” or “financial integrity” to result in an exclusion.
“We have seen variation across the country as to when a licensing board will take action,” Echols said. “They know if they put these actions in there, it’s going to hurt [physicians].”
Echols said his investigators pursue cases that demonstrate a physician is dangerous or fraudulent, not merely incompetent.
Consider Lindsay Brathwaite, MD, a dermatologist in Delaware.
According to medical board filings from Delaware and California, Brathwaite ran an office in Delaware, where investigators said healthcare took a backseat to profit. He didn’t use diagnostic tests or sterilize instruments. His office had open bottles with needles in them and allowed for cross-contamination of blood products.
“Respondent exposed patients to the possibility of contracting hepatitis, AIDS and other blood-borne pathogens,” said a complaint filed by Kimberly Kirchemeyer, executive director of the Medical Board of California, where Brathwaite also had a license.
Two of the three states where he was licensed revoked his privileges in 2015.
That year, Medicare still paid him $100,000 to treat seniors.
He was prevented from receiving money through the program in May 2016.
“We take our time, we’re really careful,” Echols said. “We want to make sure we’re excluding physicians that deserve to be excluded.”
Still waiting
Federal regulators have not excluded Adelfo Pamatmat, MD, who was part of an elaborate pill mill operating in the Detroit suburbs.
His office, Compassionate Doctors, purported to be a physician’s practice. In actuality, “marketers” paid people to pose as patients, who then received fraudulent prescriptions for controlled substances, mostly opioid painkillers. The drugs were then sold on the streets.
According to federal charges following his 2013 arrest, Pamatmat illegally prescribed 200,000 dosages of oxycodone, and 1 million units of hydrocodone. All told, he was behind $4 million in healthcare fraud between 2009 and 2013.
Pamatmat was arrested in 2013 and barred from Michigan’s federally-funded Medicaid program for low-income patients. While on bond, he was ordered not to prescribe controlled substances.
Federal records show he kept right on doing so. Medicare underwrote prescriptions he gave out for tranquilizers and amphetamines after his arrest.
In 2014, taxpayers paid him $114,000; the next year, $118,000.
Last May, he was sentenced to 19 years in prison and is currently behind bars.
His name still does not appear on the list of physicians ineligible for Medicare payments.

Epizyme Phase 2 data at ASCO ‘looks solid’: Jefferies

Epizyme’s tazemetostat still looks ‘approvable and attractive,’ says Jefferies. After abstracts were released ahead of the ASCO meeting for new and updated Phase II tazemetostat data in mesothelioma and “more importantly” follicular lymphoma data to be presented at the EHA meeting, Jefferies analyst Michael Yee said the new lymphoma abstract data “looks solid.” The high responses rates support Yee’s view that tazemetostat looks like “an approval and attractive cancer drug,” he tells investors. Yee keeps a Buy rating on Epizyme with a $27 price target.