Search This Blog

Sunday, March 17, 2019

Shelter-In-Place, Close Air Vents Order in Houston ‘Uncontrolled’ Chemical Fire

A petrochemical terminal is on fire at an oil storage facility in Deer Park, Texas just outside of Houston and has been raging throughout the day Sunday. City officials have warned residents to shelter in place and further advised them to close air ventilation systems in their homes and close all windows.
As of 4:30pm central local reports said the fire remains “uncontrolled” and expanded the extent of the shelter in place order.
Image source: The Houston Chronicle 
“City of Deer Park issuing SHELTER-IN-PLACE emergency in Deer Park,” the city wrote in a tweet at Sunday morning. “Please take immediate action and seek shelter,” multiple warnings directed.
In a follow-up warning issued in the afternoon the city said, “Residents are asked to remain sheltered and avoid going outdoors if at all possible. Community air monitoring is being conducted and additional updates will be provided as they become available.”
City of Deer Park
✔@DEERPARKTXGOV
Deer Park Office of Emergency Management issuing a shelter in place for Deer Park. Seek shelter immediately.
Still frame of local news coverage at the Intercontinental Terminals Company in Deer Park.
Nearby Pasadena also told residents that Harris County Pollution Control was conducing air quality monitoring tests of the area, and cautioned residents to stay indoors if at all possible.
Firefighters and emergency response crews battled the fire at the Intercontinental Terminals Company in Deer Park, about 15 miles (24 kilometers) southeast of Houston.
Embedded video
PM Breaking News@PMBreakingNews
Breaking: Massive fire at a chemical plant in Deer Park, Texas. The entire city has been asked to shelter in place.
According to the Associated Press:
Harris County officials say the fire started about 10 a.m. at the terminal that stores petrochemical liquids and gases, including fuel oil and bunker oil. The company’s website says the terminal has a storage capacity of 13.1 million barrels.
It is the second such petrochemical facility to trigger an area emergency in as many days, per the AP:
The fire is the second in as many days at a Houston-area petrochemical facility. A fire at an ExxonMobil plant in nearby Baytown that broke out Saturday afternoon has been contained. Company officials say no injuries were reported.
Area traffic was gridlocked during the ongoing emergency as major State Highway 225 was closed throughout Sunday afternoon in both directions near the facility.
Embedded video
Sotiri Dimpinoudis@sotiridi
: Just in – Chemical Tank on Fire in Deer Park, at an oil storage facility in . People are told to stay inside, close air ventilation systems in their homes and close all windows.
According to local reports, the chemical tanks that caught fire contain a highly flammable liquid hydrocarbon mixture called naphtha, which is often used as a raw material for production and conversion to gasoline.
Naphtha is classified as “Extremely flammable” and a dangerous irritant to humans if encountered in “high vapor concentration”.
According to its chemical safety fact sheet it is “Irritating to eyes and respiratory system. Affects central nervous system. Harmful or fatal if swallowed. Aspiration Hazard.”
As of late afternoon southeast Houston area residents were still being warned of the potential chemical hazard due to the petrochemical fire.

Philips: results of DEFINE percutaneous coronary intervention study

At the American College of Cardiology’s annual meeting in New Orleans, U.S., Royal Philips announced the results of the DEFINE PCI study, which assessed the level of residual ischemia found in patients after percutaneous coronary interventions. This study found that 1 in 4 patients treated with standard of care PCI left the cath lab with residual ischemia, as demonstrated by using a blinded iFR pullback measurement, which is Philips’ new physiologic guidance technology. Sponsored by Philips, the DEFINE PCI study involved approximately 500 patients, and was led by investigators from the Cardiovascular Research Foundation, Duke Clinical Research Institute and the Imperial College London. The DEFINE PCI study, which took place at centers throughout the U.S. and Europe, shows that the current approach to PCI has limitations for identifying the locations of physiologically significant arterial lesions in patients suffering from coronary artery disease. Of the patients with residual ischemia, the study showed that 81.6% of those patients had an untreated focal stenosis. Further analysis of the study data showed that if all focal stenoses had been identified and successfully treated, only 1 in 20 patients would still have residual ischemia. This indicates that if the precise locations causing ischemia are better detected prior to stenting, patient outcomes may be improved. iFR is well established for determining whether a vessel is indicated for treatment through the landmark DEFINE FLAIR and iFR Swedeheart outcome studies, both published in the New England Journal of Medicine. The one-year patient outcomes were consistent with fractional flow reserve, while iFR involved less procedural time, reduced patient discomfort, and reduced cost. Philips SyncVision iFR Co-registration further advances physiology by mapping the pressure profile of the whole vessel onto the angiogram, providing physiologic guidance for where to treat within the vessel. With iFR Co-registration, physicians can identify the precise locations causing ischemia, plan stent length and placement with a virtual stent, and predict physiologic improvement. Philips SyncVision with iFR Co-registration provides physicians with a full physiologic image allowing them to see clearly and treat optimally.

Cardiovascular Primary Prevention Guidelines Updated

Aspirin got downgraded while heart-beneficial diabetes medications got a boost in updated primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) guidelines.
Other key additions to the American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association guidelines were prominent endorsements of team-based care, shared-decision making, and considering social determinants of health.
However, most sections largely pooled together existing recommendations on primary prevention from prior guidelines, such as 2017 and 2018 updates on cardiovascular risk assessment, cholesterol, and hypertension, writing committee co-chair Donna Arnett, PhD, MSPH, and colleagues noted.
The document was released here at the ACC annual meeting and simultaneously published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology and Circulation.
“One really has to be comprehensive if you want to make an impact on ASCVD risk,” said Amit Khera, MD, of UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas at an ACC press conference. “For busy clinicians, for people who are out there, this is a one-stop-shop, a central source for clinicians putting it all together…and hopefully that will help in the effectiveness of implementation.”
Aspirin Update
Perhaps one of the most impactful changes, Khera said, would be changes to the aspirin recommendations.
“Historically, we’ve always been trying to find this balance between lowering ASCVD risk, but aspirin always causes bleeding,” he said. “In the past, in the right groups — those at higher ASCVD risk — it was felt that that balance favored taking aspirin in the right situation. Well, as of late, there have been some new studies involving data that suggest that balance has tipped the other way.”
“We’ve had three trials in last year (ARRIVE, ASCEND, and ASPREE) which really have shown us that the place for aspirin has diminished in terms of primary prevention, and that bleeding will be outweighing the benefit in our modern era with all of our recommended therapies,” he added.
The guidelines now recommend that prophylactic low-dose aspirin:
  • “Might be considered” for select patients, ages 40-70, at higher ASCVD risk but not at increased bleeding risk (IIb recommendation)
  • Should not routinely be used for adults age >70 (class III, a warning of harm)
  • Should not be given at any age among people at increased risk of bleeding (class III)
“Generally no, occasionally yes,” was how Khera summed up the recommendations. But he also cautioned against conflating these primary prevention recommendations to secondary prevention, for which aspirin still is recommended for use.
Diabetes Update
2018 consensus document from the ACC recommended considering addition of a glucose-lowering drug proven to have cardiovascular benefits for all type 2 diabetes patients with ASCVD.
The new guideline suggests “it may be reasonable to initiate a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor or a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonist to improve glycemic control and reduce CVD risk,” in patients without established ASCVD as well. This got a IIb recommendation, although Khera noted that it’s in the context of a comprehensive approach with nutrition, exercise, and first-line metformin.
“Although most patients studied had established CVD at baseline, the reduction in heart failure has been shown to extend to primary prevention populations,” the document noted.
Global Care Issues
Among the overarching recommendations were class I recommendation for team-based care to control ASCVD risk factors, shared decision-making, and having social determinants of health inform implementation of treatment.
Multidisciplinary team-based care may not be feasible in every practice, but it improves risk factor control, Arnett noted. Consider it an inducement to join such a setting, she told reporters.
However, an accompanying editorial in Circulation by Vera Bittner, MD, MSPH, of the University of Alabama at Birmingham, cautioned that broad implementation in outpatient settings may take more than emphasis in guidelines: “To achieve wider implementation, greater flexibility in reimbursement paradigms by third party payers will be necessary.”
The guidelines suggested using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid’s screening tool for socioeconomic barriers to care, such as lack of transportation to visits and food insecurity, and then tailoring advice to fit patients’ circumstances.
“It is up to us to develop multidisciplinary models of care to implement these guidelines in our individual practices and to engage our patients to become our partners in this lifelong process,” concluded Bittner.
The guideline also was endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, the American Geriatrics Society, the American Society of Preventive Cardiology, and the Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association.
Bittner disclosed a relevant relationships with Sanofi and institutional relationships with Sanofi, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, DalCor, and Esperion.
LAST UPDATED 

Aspirin No Longer Needed for Select AFib Patients

For atrial fibrillation (Afib) patients who also need antiplatelet therapy due to a recent cardiac event, using apixaban (Eliquis) without aspirin may be the sweet spot for balancing thrombotic and bleeding risk, the two-by-two factorial AUGUSTUS trial showed.
In the arm comparing apixaban and vitamin K antagonist (VKA), the direct-acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC) cut clinically-relevant nonmajor or major bleeding by a relative 31% (10.5% vs 14.7%, P<0.001 for both non-inferiority and superiority), Renato Lopes, MD, PhD, of Duke University School of Medicine in Durham, North Carolina, and colleagues found.
In the aspirin versus placebo comparison, that bleeding risk was a relative 89% higher with the antiplatelet (16.1% vs 9.0%, P<0.001).
Ischemic events were similar between groups in both comparison, the researchers reported here at the American College of Cardiology (ACC) annual meeting and simultaneously in the New England Journal of Medicine.
“This is perhaps the last nail in the coffin for aspirin and warfarin,” said ACC press conference panel discussant Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy, MD, of the Kansas City Heart Rhythm Institute in Overland Park, Kansas.
Patients in the apixaban group also had a lower incidence of death or hospitalization compared with patients in the vitamin K antagonist group (23.5% vs 27.4%, HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.93, P=0.002).
“Prior studies, including WOESTPIONEER AF-PCI, and RE-DUAL PCI were designed to identify strategies to reduce the bleeding associated with triple antithrombotic therapy. However, there are limited data with apixaban in patients with AFib requiring dual antiplatelet therapy, and data on the independent effects of aspirin on this population are limited,” Lopes said.
In patients at high risk for bleeding, ischemic events, and stroke, these results “give physicians a good sense and reliable data to decide what regimen they are going to use…basically, we show that if we use apixaban and clopidogrel [Plavix] without aspirin for the majority of patients, it will be the safer regimen without compromise in efficacy endpoint so far,” Lopes told MedPage Today.
While it is fair to extrapolate the aspirin findings across the the direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), Lopes cautioned against extrapolating the warfarin comparison across the class.
“Fortunately, we do have trials with other DOACs,” Lakkireddy said at an ACC press conference. He noted that the AUGUSTUS findings fall into line with existing literature. “This as a concept was really not very surprising at all, because this is also pretty much expected.”
Study Details
The AUGUSTUS researchers evaluated 4,614 patients (median age 70.7; 29% women) across 33 countries, including Mexico, Canada, the U.K., and the U.S.
Patients had to have recent PCI with planned use of a P2Y12 inhibitor for at least 6 months, or a recent ACS, along with paroxysmal, persistent, permanent, or previous AFib and planned long-term use of an oral anticoagulant.
“We are the only trial that actually included, in this field, patients with acute coronary syndrome who were medically managed; in other words, who did not get a PCI. The other two studies, PIONEER and RE-DUAL, only included patients who underwent PCI…this is another differentiation of the [AUGUSTUS] trial,” Lopes told MedPage Today.
A history of intracranial hemorrhage, planned or recent coronary artery bypass graft surgery, severe renal insufficiency, ongoing bleeding or coagulopathy, contraindication to apixaban, aspirin, all P2Y12 inhibitors, and vitamin K antagonist, as well as patients taking anticoagulation for other reasons, such as venous thromboembolism, mitral stenosis, and prosthetic valves made up the exclusion criteria.
At baseline, the cohort had a mean CHA2DS2-VASc score of 3.9 and a mean HAS-BLED score of 2.9. Patients in the open-label aspect of the study were randomized to a vitamin K antagonist group or an apixaban group. Patients in the double-blind study component were then further randomized to a placebo group or an aspirin group.
Secondary safety and efficacy outcomes for the apixaban versus vitamin K antagonist randomization were:
  • Death/ischemic events at 6 months: 6.7% vs 7.1%
  • Stroke: 0.6% vs 1.1%
  • Death: 3.3% vs 3.2%
  • MI :3.1% vs 3.5%
  • Death from cardiovascular (CV) causes: 2.5% vs 2.3%
  • Hospitalization: 22.5% vs 26.3%
  • Academic Research Consortium (ARC) definite or probable stent thrombosis: 0.6% vs 0.8%
  • Urgent revascularization: 1.7% vs 1.9%
Secondary safety and efficacy outcomes for the aspirin versus placebo randomization were:
  • Death/ischemic events at 6 months: 6.5% vs 7.3%
  • Stroke: 0.9% vs 0.8%
  • Death: 3.1% vs 3.4%
  • Hospitalization: 25.4% vs 23.4%
  • MI: 2.9% vs 3.6%
  • Death from CV causes: 2.3% vs 2.5%
  • ARC definite or probable stent thrombosis: 0.5% vs 0.9%
  • Urgent revascularization: 1.6% vs 2.0%
Questions Remain
Referring to the secondary findings, ACC panel discussant Kristen Patton, MD, of the University of Washington in Seattle, stated that she was “struck by the mortality data, which I understand the trial was not powered for, but it did stand out that numerically the mortality was lower in both the aspirin and VKA groups [77 patients on apixaban, 72 on aspirin, 74 on VKA, 77 placebo]. In addition, in the aspirin groups that the MI, thrombosis, revascularization, was lower,” she said.
Lopes acknowledged that a study limitations was the challenge in assessing efficacy endpoints in a high-risk patient population with high CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores. “So that’s a limitation that is intrinsic of all these trials is that they are not powered enough to assess efficacy endpoints,” he emphasized.
Also, the time in therapeutic range was about 59% for patients who were assigned to a vitamin K antagonist, “This is a little bit lower than other studies…our follow-up is only 6 months, and for the other studies it’s 1 year,” Lopes added.
In an accompanying editorial, Shamir Mehta, MD, of McMaster University and Hamilton Health Sciences in Hamilton, Canada) noted that “Given the totality of data, a direct oral anticoagulant should now routinely be recommended for patients with atrial fibrillation who have an acute coronary syndrome or undergo PCI.”
But he cautioned that “findings from this trial do not necessarily provide reassuring evidence that early discontinuation of aspirin therapy after an acute coronary syndrome or PCI is warranted in all patients,” adding that “although the AUGUSTUS trial was a large trial evaluating this question, it was still substantially underpowered for coronary ischemic events.”
Mehta emphasized that “clinical decision making should continue to be based on a balanced assessment of three competing risks: cardioembolic stroke, coronary ischemic events, and bleeding.”
He concluded that guideline committees will now have to determine how to incorporate AUGUSTUS results into recommendations, but “it is clear that a one-size-fits-all policy is unlikely to apply in these patients.”
The study was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) and Pfizer. Some co-authors are BMS employees.
Lopes disclosed relevant relationships with Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Merck, Pfizer, and Portola. Co-authors disclosed multiple relevant relationships with industry.
Patton disclosed no relevant relationships with industry.
Mehta disclosed support from AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, and Boehringer Ingelheim.

Metro areas with highest healthcare prices have lowest utilization rates

A five-year study analyzed the healthcare prices and utilization rates across 112 metropolitan areas.


KEY TAKEAWAYS

Bill Johnson, PhD, lead author of the HCCI study, said the findings “underscore the need to dive into the data and understand the local factors explaining health care costs.”
Baltimore led the nation in both lowest overall prices and highest overall utilization.
The areas with the highest prices were Anchorage, Alaska and San Jose, California; Riverside, California finished with the lowest utilization rate.
The Health Care Cost Institute (HCCI) published an interactive report Tuesday morning that detailed the variation between commercial healthcare prices and overall utilization rates in metropolitan areas.
The healthy marketplace index tool, funded in part by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, examined commercial healthcare prices and utilization rates in more than 100 cities between 2012 and 2016.
During the course of the study, median healthcare prices in surveyed metropolitan areas rose 13% while overall utilization rates declined 17%.
Ultimately, HCCI determined that there was an inverse relationship among metropolitan areas, as those with high utilzation rates tended to have lower prices, while those with low utilization rates had higher overall prices.

There were a few outliers to this trend, most notably the Milwaukee and New York markets, which were nationwide leaders in both high price levels and high utilization rates.

Baltimore led the nation in both lowest overall prices, 26% below the national average, and highest overall utilization rate, 34% above the national average.
The areas with the highest prices were Anchorage, Alaska and San Jose, California, 82% above the national average, while Riverside, California finished with the lowest utilization rate, 56% below the national average.
Bill Johnson, PhD, lead author of the HCCI study, said the findings “underscore the need to dive into the data and understand the local factors explaining health care costs.”

Later in the report, researchers indicated that variations in utilization rates could be due to numerous factors, including consumer demand, provider concentration, and provider practice patterns.
The study included data from nearly 2 billion commercial healthcare claims and is sortable by inpatient, outpatient, and professional services.
Even within a certain metropolitan area, such as Trenton, New Jersey, there were noticeable differences among the three categories.

How hospitals can stop losing patients over surprise billing

New research finds that mothers who receive a surprise out-of-network bill after having their first baby have 13% higher odds of switching hospitals for their second delivery.


KEY TAKEAWAYS

Make every effort to ensure your providers are in-network.
Notify patients about network status ahead of their service.
Use in-network physicians as a marketing advantage.
Know which procedures are most shoppable.
Every business not only wants to attract new customers but to keep its existing ones, and hospitals and health systems are no different. Unfortunately, surprise medical bills can be the element that drives patients away from one hospital and into the waiting arms of the competition.
New research published this month in Health Affairs provides hospitals with one of the clearest examples yet of how serious a threat to business surprise medical bills can really be, beyond having to deal with disgruntled patients.
The research comes as bipartisan legislative efforts to curb surprise medical billing practices ramps up as various stakeholders from hospital groups to newly formed coalitionsmake their voices heard about surprise billing.
The research found that mothers who receive a surprise out-of-network bill after having their first baby have 13% higher odds of switching hospitals for their second delivery.

Christopher Garmon, one of the study’s coauthors, told HealthLeaders that reducing the likelihood of a patient receiving a surprise medical bill is a key element of promoting patient loyalty.
“I think our findings show that to promote patient loyalty, part of the experience is relative to billing,” he says. “It’s not just having a good experience with the doctors and nurses but also with what occurs afterwards.”
The study also showed that switching hospitals paid off financially for those mothers.
“Mothers who switched after a surprise medical bill had a 56% lower relative risk of a second surprise medical bill, compared to mothers who stayed at the same facility after a surprise bill,” Benjamin Chartock, another of the study’s coauthors, told HealthLeaders.
The study, which included a sample of 63,630 women who had exactly two births, who didn’t switch metropolitan areas between births, and who had a choice of hospitals, revealed that 11% of mothers received a surprise out-of-network bill after their first birth.
However, even Garmon said he was surprised by the “strength” of the finding that switching yielded a 56% lower relative risk of a second surprise bill.
“That seems to suggest that these cases are concentrated at particular hospitals,” he says. “If you receive a surprise bill, the optimal thing would be to switch.”

4 WAYS TO TAKE ACTION

The insight that surprise bills appear to be concentrated at certain hospitals is an important one because it shows that hospitals can—and likely should—take steps to reduce the odds that their patients receive a surprise out-of-network bill. Here are four actions hospitals can take.
1. Give providers an ultimatum: Garmon says hospitals that frequently generate out-of-network bills might consider giving their providers an ultimatum: “If you want to practice in my hospital … then you have to make a good-faith effort to be in network for all the health plans … so [we’re] aligned.”
Trying to ensure in-network status among providers isn’t only important for patient retention, but according to research from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, fewer patients than ever have out-of-network benefits, which increases likelihood of bad debt for hospitals.
2. Disclose network status to patients: Sarah Schutz, the study’s third coauthor, says that hospitals should disclose a provider’s out-of-network status to a patient before he or she receives the service.
In that way, hospitals should think of network status as a critical aspect of price transparency.
Doing so now would help hospitals get out ahead of any legislation that’s coming, since there’s broad bipartisan support for curbing surprise bills. For instance, a bill from Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), the chairman of the House Ways and Means’ health subcommittee, would require hospitals to notify patients at least 24 hours in advance about a hospital or provider’s network status.
3. Get a competitive edge: On the flip side, there’s an opportunity for hospitals to advertise their low rate of surprise bills, just as some advertise their short emergency department wait times.
“Our paper shows evidence that this is a good dimension upon which to compete,” Chartock says. “It may be one where hospitals can drive a competitive edge and eke out a little bit more profit.”
4. Know which procedures might prompt patients to switch hospitals: Elective procedures are the ones that lend themselves most to comparison shopping, yet 1-in-10 elective procedures result in a surprise out-of-network bill.
That’s why the authors purposely chose to research labor and delivery bills: The nature of pregnancy allows for advance planning and comparison shopping.
“Mothers have the ability to shop around and see what kind of facilities they want to use. They’re not in an emergency situation,” says Schutz.
The same is true for other highly utilized elective services like hip and knee replacements.
Knowing which procedures are most shoppable and utilized can help drive hospital price transparency initiatives, especially if you start with the top utilized procedures.
For instance, UCHealth’s groundbreaking price transparency efforts launched with estimates for 38 services when they went live with its estimator tool in August 2018, before ramping up to include 238 services by late February. It’s still adding more all the time.
The bottom line is that generating frequent surprise out-of-network bills isn’t something that hospitals can afford to do if they want to be competitive.
“They are harmful things, and patients—when they have the ability—respond to them by trying to avoid them,” Garmon says.

Not just another tech acquisition: Apple, Facebook care provider acquires Sherpaa

Crossover Health closes a deal that creates an innovative healthcare delivery model for self-insured employers and presents opportunities for health systems.


KEY TAKEAWAYS

For primary care, a combination of in-person and digital services available anytime is what consumers seek.
Asynchronous remote care promotes efficiency, enhances the patient experience, and fosters long-term relationships with the same provider.
Self-insured employers are growing, offering opportunities for much more flexible payer arrangements.
Crossover Health, a San Clemente, California­–based provider of comprehensive health services for self-insured employers, has acquired the digital health platform of Sherpaa, a virtual primary care provider headquartered in Brooklyn, New York. The deal was finalized on February 26, but the terms of the deal have not been disclosed.
Another day, another technology acquisition? Possibly not.
A closer look behind the scenes of this deal between two privately held companies reveals an innovative healthcare delivery model and presents opportunities for health systems to work with some of the nation’s largest self-insured employers. Apple, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Intuit are among Crossover’s stable of clients. These companies do not have the same restrictive practices as traditional payers.

Further fueling curiosity: Last October, Apple—which is actively expanding its healthcare strategy—was rumored to be interested in acquiring Crossover Health. Although the deal never happened, the attention could signal the potential power these arrangements between providers and self-insured employers might have down the road.
Beyond partnering with Crossover Health to provide specialty care and other services, the model itself might be something health systems want to emulate. In addition, some health systems with their own plans to provide primary care services to the self-insured market might view Crossover Health and similar companies as a competitive threat. Here are four things this acquisition can teach providers.

1. CREATE A CARE MODEL THAT COMBINES IN-PERSON AND DIGITAL CARE

Crossover Health provides on-site and “nearsite” primary care health services to large, self-insured employers. One unique aspect of their approach is that these clinics provide a “defined care team for a defined population,” says the company’s CEO and co-founder Scott Shreeve, MD. Rather than marketing to a broad base of patients who may come and go, he says, this arrangement helps build long-term relationships between care teams and the individuals they’re serving.
Physicians and nurses comprise the backbone of the primary care team, and on-site services are supplemented with physical therapy, chiropractic care, acupuncture, behavioral health, health coaching, and fitness. Some clinics offer optometry and dental services as well. Annual exams are allotted 60 minutes; follow-up appointments are 30 minutes in length.
While Crossover Health says that its “patient-centered, outcomes-based care delivery model has helped these large employers reduce their overall health care costs, keep their employees happy and healthy, and provide a valued benefit” to employees and prospects, an increasing number of these employees—about 80% says Shreeve—work remotely. Adding virtual care capabilities has become essential to the strategy.
Shreeve says that about 70% of primary care does not require an in-person visit.
“More healthcare services will be moving online,” he says. “We want to be a part of that. That’s what our clients are demanding. And we certainly see the employees and the members that use our services asking for more stuff to move online as well.”
By incorporating Sherpaa’s technology platform into Crossover Health, the same care team concept will be used to provide remote care. While some services like acupuncture and dental care cannot be offered digitally, certain aspects of physical therapy, for example, can. “It’s really creating a connected system of health for our employers who have populations [located] throughout the country.”
And, much like what is happening in the retail world, he says, “it’s the combination of the digital and the physical that makes for a great experience and becomes very seamless for people. We think the combination of in-person, online, and anytime is what consumers and employers are looking for.”

2. FOCUS ON ASYNCHRONOUS REMOTE CARE

Sherpaa specializes in asynchronous communications between providers and patients. Similar to texting or email, this form of communication allows a thoughtful exchange of information over time, rather than forcing a visit into a limited, real-time exchange. In an era where many healthcare interactions seem to be moving in the direction of real-time video, Shreeve contends that the asynchronous approach fosters long-term relationships, offers advantages that enhance the healthcare experience, and promotes efficiency.
While real-time video or phone consultations are currently available with doctors, Shreeve says that few patients choose this option. If the need for more direct consultation occurs, it usually results in a phone call, not a video chat.
Sherpaa’s system generates structured questions and responses, enabling each provider to concurrently interact with multiple patients, just as one might text multiple parties simultaneously. It also does not compress the visit into the short time frame currently allotted for most current video visits. Patients have time to get all their questions answered and can ask follow-up questions to the same practitioner, even days or weeks later.
The Sherpaa system also prescribes “definitive or discrete care plans with actions for members to take,” says Shreeve. The structured questions and care plans set this mode of communication apart from other solutions, he explains, and were part of the reason Crossover Health found Sherpaa an appealing acquisition.

3. BE AWARE THAT THE SELF-INSURED MARKET IS GROWING

Many large employers are self-insured, a practice in which the company assumes its own claims risk, but often uses an outside entity to manage and administer benefits. Due to market changes, in recent years this approach has become more appealing to mid-sized and even small companies. This trend is on the upswing and presents opportunities for health systems and other providers.
“There is a dramatic expansion of self-funding products and solutions entering the marketplace, all with the express focus of addressing the challenges of affordability for small and mid-sized employers,” says Mike Sullivan, chief growth officer of OneDigital, a company focused exclusively on employee benefits and HR. Not only are traditional employers gravitating to this concept, so are associations, Professional Employer Organizations, and chamber plans, he says. “The maturation of technologies, risk management solutions, and advisors with acumen and scale are leading this expansion of self-funding solutions nationally.”
Besides the growth of this market, there are other advantages. Self-funded companies don’t have the same requirements and restrictions as other payers, and they tend to be nimbler and more innovative.
“We think the most innovative payer is the employer, and that’s why we’ve chosen to work exclusively with them,” says Shreeve. Among the firm’s 30 clients, 23 are Fortune 500 companies and eight are the largest companies in the world.
“They value things differently,” he says. “They still expect a lot of value, they expect a lot of service, but they’re different than traditional payers. Getting paid directly by them allows us to innovate in totally different ways, and we’re not stuck on the fee-for-service treadmill trying to chase down CPT codes and optimize billing. We don’t need the whole billing apparatus, so we get to focus on … creating more value for our client and demonstrate that the outcomes we’re achieving are differentiated and deliver on what we commit to in terms of the cost and quality metrics.”
This approach is not only “liberating for us as a company,” says Shreeve, but also for providers.
Sherpaa also focuses on self-insured employers and members of health plans, as well as individuals. According to Shreeve, its typical client has between 50 to 250 workers or members, although recent customers include companies with 4,000‒5,000 employees.
Crossover Health’s acquisition included Sherpaa’s customer base and providers.
“It’s a nice market diversification strategy for us,” says Shreeve,” and we’re looking forward to supporting and serving that population.”

4. BE OPEN TO PARTNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES

Shreeve does not view his company as a threat to health systems; in fact, quite the opposite. “We 100% rely on health systems as our partners. We’re focused on primary care and some of the ancillary specialties associated with primary care. We always need specialists and great hospital partners,” he says.
For some health systems, “Primary care is a little bit of a throwaway or it’s a feeder to other things,” says Shreeve.
Health systems that rely on that feeder concept may view things differently, particularly those who see the advantages of directly working with self-insured companies and their patient populations. Nevertheless, as companies like Crossover Health increase their market share, it may behoove health systems located in those regions to explore partnership arrangements.
“We think primary care can have a much more foundational role in the health system,” says Shreeve. Partnerships with companies like his “provide an innovative way to engage with a large … educated patient population that can then be better consumers of the health system.”
Common goals related to reducing costs, improving quality, enhancing patient engagement and care coordination, and navigating the health delivery system offer opportunities for connection, Shreeve says. “We’re hoping to partner with health systems to send our patients there and come up with novel ways to use this asynchronous technology … and the relationships we have to provide even better care and care coordination.”