Tennessee Offers to Expand Dental Schools as Medicaid Coverage Stretches Need

More than 600,000 additional Medicaid patients in Tennessee may soon be covered with comprehensive dental benefits under a proposal by Republican Gov. Bill Lee. But the state, one of the last to extend dental coverage to adults, is also trying to make sure those Medicaid enrollees can find dentists willing to treat them.

Along with $75 million to extend Medicaid dental benefits to adults, Tennessee is considering $94 million to help its two dental schools expand. About a third of the money would help pay off the student loans of graduates who agree to work in high-need areas, with the idea that they would treat more Medicaid patients.

“It’s sometimes a chicken-and-egg phenomenon,” said Dr. Lisa Piercey, who leads the Tennessee Department of Health. “If you bring a bunch of people into coverage but don’t have the providers to do it, then that’s a real problem.”

The lack of dentists in some areas has bedeviled a number of states expanding Medicaid coverage in recent years, including Missouri and Oklahoma. Complicating matters is the unwillingness of many dentists to accept Medicaid insurance rates, which vary by state but typically pay less than half of what commercial insurance pays. A 2019 analysis from the Milliman consulting firm found some states paying less than a third of commercial rates for dental work on Medicaid patients.

In Tennessee, fewer than a third of dentists are even enrolled to treat Medicaid patients. American Dental Association data finds at least a dozen states have similar participation levels.

And many dentists cluster within higher-payer communities, leaving gaps elsewhere. Virtually every state has a shortage of dentists in at least some areas, according to tracking by KFF. The ADA finds that the problem has worsened during the covid-19 pandemic, with an exodus of dentists and hygienists. But the greatest needs are basically everywhere but large metropolitan areas, with rural communities representing roughly 60% of the shortage areas.

“There are only a handful of counties in this state that actually have an adequate number of dentists,” Piercey said of Tennessee.

So is there an actual shortage of dentists or just a shortage of those willing to practice where needed and treat those most in need? It’s likely a combination.

In the 1980s, dental schools were shrinking for lack of qualified students applying. Some were scared off by the escalating tuition to earn a “doctor of dental surgery” degree. Practicing dentists also had concerns about an oversupply in their profession. But predictions at the time suggested that advances in dentistry and even birth control would reduce demand, the dean of Emory’s dental school told The New York Times in 1987. Emory’s school closed. So did Georgetown’s, once the nation’s largest private dental program.

Within a decade, enrollment nationwide had dropped by a third. The University of Tennessee went from graduating two classes of 80 a year to just one 80-person class. It’s now grown to more than 100. But roughly a quarter of the seats are reserved for residents of neighboring Arkansas, which doesn’t have its own dental school.

Many schools are adding seats, and the American Dental Education Association isn’t standing in the way.

“The question of the right number of dentists to serve any given population is complex, with varying considerations, but in general, we believe the potential for an overabundance is a long ways off,” American Dental Education Association CEO Dr. Karen West said in a written statement.

In recent years, UT and Tennessee’s other dental school, at Meharry Medical College in Nashville, have started to add a few slots. Nationally, enrollment has surpassed 1980 levels, with the number of graduates hitting roughly 6,500 a year, though the U.S. population has also grown since then.

“Now the pendulum has swung the other way,” said Dr. James Ragain, dean of the UT College of Dentistry in Memphis.

But to expand by more than a handful of spots, Ragain said, schools need cash to build out the physical space and purchase equipment, such as sophisticated mannequins used by first-year students.

“Dentistry is a hand-skills profession,” Ragain said, contrasting dental schools with medical schools, which start out with classwork and then lean heavily on hospitals as their training grounds. “We do the clinical training.”

Providing the hands-on training and employing full-time dentists as professors, who are demanding ever-higher salaries, are the main drivers of escalating tuition, Ragain said.

The four years of dental school usually cost more than the four years of medical school. And with an average school debt of $300,000, many dentists don’t want to practice in a small town with few patients covered by commercial insurance and many retirees on Medicare, which doesn’t pay for most dental work.

So dentists prefer to work in the suburbs, where more people have private insurance through employers.

“The first thing that comes to mind is that I have $400,000 of loans,” said Dr. Ratrice Jackson, who graduated in 2018 from Meharry, one of the few historically Black dental schools. She then completed an optional two-year residency in Florida to become a pediatric specialist and now works in a Dallas suburb. “I hate that it is that way.”

While the career can be lucrative, Jackson said, the loans scare off people who would make great dentists. “A lot of people don’t want to be $500,000 in debt,” she said, adding that her monthly student loan payment is $4,500.

The median annual salary for a dentist is roughly $160,000, though specialists and practice owners make considerably more.

The expansion of dental schools alone isn’t expected to solve the clustered shortages. So as part of Tennessee’s oral health push, the state is also proposing to pay off student loans for dentists who work in high-need areas for three years, similar to an existing state program for primary care physicians.

The ADA has been pushing Congress to provide help through several bills involving loan deferment and refinancing. And some states already have loan forgiveness programs.

Dentists helped craft the Tennessee plan and are generally supportive. But Dr. Jeannie Beauchamp, president of the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, said the low rates paid by Medicaid in Tennessee still must be addressed. A practice like hers in Clarksville, Tennessee, could not have more than 35% or 40% of its patients on Medicaid, she said, “because you’d go broke.”

Tennessee’s program, known as TennCare, has proposed increasing reimbursement for pediatric dental services by an average of 6.5% this year. But rates haven’t been set for the 600,000 adults who would be newly covered.

Leaders in a number of Republican-led states have been convinced in recent years that poor oral health is dragging down overall health and even holding back their state economies, aligning with Medicaid advocates who have been calling for benefit expansion for years. They, too, say payments need to increase so dentists will accept the coverage.

A report from the Tennessee Justice Center finds that just 53% of children in the state’s Medicaid program saw a dentist in 2019, despite having coverage.

“We have to figure out how we make Medicaid more attractive for more providers,” said Kinika Young, the nonprofit advocacy center’s senior director of health policy and equity. “There’s not enough to even see the children … so we need more providers to step up.”

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts:

Reaction to the RaDonda Vaught Verdict: KHN Wants to Hear From Nurses

RaDonda Vaught, a former Tennessee nurse, killed a patient in 2017 by administering the wrong drug.  She was criminally prosecuted and convicted of gross neglect and negligent homicide on March 25. She faces up to eight years in prison. 

Vaught’s conviction drew national attention and left many in the nursing profession worried it will set a precedent for criminalizing medical mistakes. Some observers believe the conviction will make hospitals less transparent about medical errors or dissuade people from pursuing a nursing career.

In light of these concerns, KHN wants to hear from nurses and other medical professionals about their reactions to Vaught’s conviction. If you fill out the form below and send us a selfie video reacting to the case, we might use it in our upcoming coverage.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts:

Big Pharma Is Betting on Bigger Political Ambitions From Sen. Tim Scott

Sen. Tim Scott, a rising star in the Republican Party with broad popularity in his home state of South Carolina, is getting showered with drug industry money before facing voters this fall.

Scott was the top recipient of pharma campaign cash in Congress during the second half of 2021, receiving $99,000, KHN’s Pharma Cash to Congress database shows, emerging as a new favorite of the industry. Though Scott has been a perennial recipient since arriving in Congress in 2011, the latest amount is nearly twice as much as his previous highest haul.

Why Tim Scott? South Carolina’s junior senator is someone widely viewed as destined for greater things during his political career. And this is an existential moment for the American pharmaceutical industry when securing allies is critical.

Congress is under intense pressure to rein in the high prices of medicines in the U.S., which are often several times those in other developed countries. Roughly 1 in 4 adults report difficulty affording their prescription drugs, according to KFF polling. Further, 83% of Americans support the idea of Medicare negotiating with pharmaceutical firms to lower prices for both its beneficiaries as well those with private insurance — that’s 95% of Democrats, 82% of independents, and 71% of Republicans.

The industry needs people like Scott, who has introduced several health-related bills in recent years and maintains drug industry-friendly positions, in its corner. He opposes proposals introduced in legislation backed by most Democrats in Congress to let Medicare negotiate prices. In 2019, when the Senate Finance Committee considered a drug pricing bill crafted by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Scott voted against a measure that would have amended the legislation to allow Medicare drug price negotiation. (Scott himself was absent but registered his opposition through a proxy vote.)

In September, as the top Republican on the Senate’s Special Committee on Aging, he released a report arguing that HR 3, a sweeping measure from House Democrats to tamp down prices, would result in “shattered innovation” and “bankrupt businesses,” echoing arguments made by pharma companies.

“Democrats propose the federal government should be in charge of deciding the price of treatments, instead of a competitive free marketplace sustained by companies driving innovation,” the report stated. The bill would have allowed the federal government to negotiate prices for certain costly medicines and penalize drug companies that don’t cooperate, among other provisions.

Scott has also been a member of the Senate Finance Committee since 2015, an assignment that gives him significant influence over legislation affecting the sector as well as a prominent perch for fundraising. In total, 27 drug and biotech companies or their powerful lobbying organizations in Washington contributed to his campaign accounts in the latter half of last year. Amgen, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Merck & Co., AstraZeneca, BioMarin Pharmaceutical, and Genentech were his top donors, each giving between $5,000 and $10,500.

He also is a member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, which this year is set to consider an issue of great importance to pharma companies: reauthorization of user fees the industry pays to the FDA to help expedite the drug review and approval process. The law must be reauthorized by Congress every five years.

“I didn’t know until you told me,” Scott said when stopped by a KHN reporter in the Capitol and asked what the message was to his constituents as the member of Congress who has received the most money from pharmaceutical PACs in the last two quarters of 2021.

Stephen Billet, an expert on political action committees and associate professor at the Graduate School of Political Management at George Washington University, points to factors beyond his stances on pharma issues that contribute to his fundraising haul. Many of Scott’s positions are aligned with his fellow Republicans in Congress who shun greater government intervention in controlling costs. Instead, the contributions may reflect the industry’s bet that Scott has a promising political future.

He is a prolific fundraiser. Federal Election Commission records show that Scott has raised $38 million — the most of any GOP senator up for reelection in 2022 and the second highest among senators across both parties — and had $21.5 million in his campaign account at the end of 2021, fueling speculation about a future presidential run. “America, A Redemption Story,” Scott’s memoirs, is scheduled for release in August through Christian publisher Thomas Nelson.

Billet said pharmaceutical PACs will sit down at the beginning of a campaign cycle and take a close look at the upcoming races and what their budget is likely to be and then figure out who they want to help.

“So they’ll say, Tim Scott is up, he’s an up-and-comer, he’s been a pretty good guy,” Billet said. “It’s a good idea to get out front and put some money in his pocket.”

Pharmaceutical firms have a long tradition of strategic gift-giving to members to develop goodwill, the benefits of which typically emerge many years later.

Other Republican senators up for reelection didn’t get nearly as much money from drug companies during the same period, KHN’s analysis of Federal Election Commission data shows. For example, Sen. Michael Crapo (R-Idaho), the most senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, received $68,300. Fellow Finance panel member Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) took in $48,000. All three seats are considered safe for Republicans in November.

Scott has received money from drugmakers every year since coming to Congress as a member of the House in 2011, receiving $596,000 through the end of last year, according to the KHN analysis of FEC data. Scott joined the Senate in 2013 after then-Gov. Nikki Haley chose him to replace GOP senator Jim DeMint, who resigned from Congress to helm the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank. But this is his banner year; previously, the most he received was $54,000 during the second half of 2019.

The following year, Scott co-founded the congressional Personalized Medicine Caucus with a handful of other lawmakers, including fellow pharma darling Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.). Personalized medicine — which is also referred to as precision medicine — promises to use genetics and other traits to develop individualized treatments for patients, often at a very steep price.

“We will take steps to nurture scientific advancements that may reverse the genetic and molecular causes of rare and common diseases, bringing new hope to American patients and lasting benefits to our health care system,” Scott’s prepared statement read at the time.

Scott’s press secretary, Caroline Anderegg, shared that the senator has long held an interest in sickle cell disease, which is the most commonly inherited blood disorder in the U.S. and disproportionately strikes Black people. The disease, which affects roughly 100,000 Americans, is one that could benefit from the development of gene-based therapies, a form of precision medicine, she said.

The caucus’s formation was hailed by the Personalized Medicine Coalition, a pharma-friendly group whose members consist of drugmakers donating to Scott — AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Johnson & Johnson, and Merck, to name a few. The organization estimated that personalized medicines accounted for more than a quarter of new therapies the FDA had approved since 2015, underscoring the pharmaceutical industry’s widespread work in the field.

Since 2019, Scott has introduced 17 health-related bills or resolutions about everything from food allergens and sickle cell disease to health disparities among racial and ethnic minorities. Last year, he sponsored a bill that would create tax incentives for drug and medical device companies to manufacture more of their products in the U.S. The legislation’s framework loosely aligns with ideas from the Association for Accessible Medicines, which lobbies for generic drug companies.

Overall, from June to December, members of Congress received $3.5 million in their campaign coffers from pharmaceutical companies and their trade associations, according to the KHN analysis of industry contributions.

“There is kind of a cycle to giving and so the off year, 2021, is likely going to have less money than 2022, since it’s an election year,” said Paul Jorgensen, an associate professor at the University of Texas-Rio Grande Valley who studies campaign finance. “But there was a lot of money put into lobbying this cycle because of all of the initiatives that were being pushed in the House and with the Build Back Better plan, so in some ways your numbers just kind of mirror what one would expect.”

Other top recipients of drug industry money in the second half of 2021 include Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), who was second behind Scott in contributions, receiving $97,300. McMorris Rodgers is the top Republican on the House Energy & Commerce Committee, which has significant sway over pharmaceutical issues, and could become chair of the powerful panel should Republicans retake the House majority in November as expected. Over the entirety of 2021, she received the most money from the sector of any lawmaker.

The pharmaceutical PACs are cognizant of who is up for committee leadership roles, said Billet: “They are 100% aware of who the next person in line is, making McMorris Rodgers an obviously easy target.”

Sinema posted the third-highest haul — $74,800 despite not being up for reelection until 2024. It was a big gain over the first half of 2021, when she received $8,000. KHN reported in 2020 on Sinema’s connections to the pharmaceutical industry.

Data analyst Elizabeth Lucas contributed to this report.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts:

Nurse Convicted of Neglect and Negligent Homicide for Fatal Drug Error

NASHVILLE, Tenn. – RaDonda Vaught, a former nurse criminally prosecuted for a fatal drug error in 2017, was convicted of gross neglect of an impaired adult and negligent homicide Friday after a three-day trial that gripped nurses across the country.

Vaught faces three to six years in prison for neglect and one to two years for negligent homicide as a defendant with no prior convictions, according to sentencing guidelines provided by the Nashville district attorney’s office. Vaught is scheduled to be sentenced May 13, and her sentences are likely to run concurrently, said DA spokesperson Steve Hayslip.

Vaught was acquitted of reckless homicide. Criminally negligent homicide was a lesser charge included under reckless homicide.

Vaught’s trial has been closely watched by nurses and medical professionals across the country, many of whom worry it could set a precedent of criminalizing medical mistakes. Medical errors are generally handled by professional licensing boards or civil courts, and criminal prosecutions like Vaught’s case are exceedingly rare.

Janie Harvey Garner, the founder of Show Me Your Stethoscope, a Facebook nursing group with more than 600,000 members, worried the conviction would have a chilling effect on nurses disclosing their own errors or near-errors, which would have a detrimental effect on the quality of patient care.

“Health care just changed forever,” she said after the verdict. “You can no longer trust people to tell the truth because they will be incriminating themselves.”

Vaught, 38, of Bethpage, Tennessee, was arrested in 2019 and charged with reckless homicide and gross neglect of an impaired adult in connection with the killing of Charlene Murphey, who died at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in late December 2017. The neglect charge stemmed from allegations that Vaught did not properly monitor Murphey after she was injected with the wrong drug.

Murphey, 75, of Gallatin, Tennessee, was admitted to Vanderbilt for a brain injury. At the time of the error, her condition was improving, and she was being prepared for discharge from the hospital, according to courtroom testimony and a federal investigation report. Murphey was prescribed a sedative, Versed, to calm her before being scanned in a large, MRI-like machine.

Vaught was tasked to retrieve Versed from a computerized medication cabinet but instead grabbed a powerful paralyzer, vecuronium. According to an investigation report filed in her court case, the nurse overlooked several warning signs as she withdrew the wrong drug — including that Versed is a liquid but vecuronium is a powder — and then injected Murphey and left her to be scanned. By the time the error was discovered, Murphey was brain-dead.

During the trial, prosecutors painted Vaught as an irresponsible and uncaring nurse who ignored her training and abandoned her patient. Assistant District Attorney Chad Jackson likened Vaught to a drunken driver who killed a bystander, but said the nurse was “worse” because it was as if she was “driving with [her] eyes closed.”

“The immutable fact of this case is that Charlene Murphey is dead because RaDonda Vaught could not bother to pay attention to what she was doing,” Jackson said.

Vaught’s attorney, Peter Strianse, argued that his client made an honest mistake that did not constitute a crime and became a “scapegoat” for systemic problems related to medication cabinets at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in 2017.

But Vanderbilt officials countered on the stand. Terry Bosen, Vanderbilt’s pharmacy medication safety officer, testified that the hospital had some technical problems with medication cabinets in 2017 but that they were resolved weeks before Vaught pulled the wrong drug for Murphey.

In his closing statement, Strianse targeted the reckless homicide charge, arguing that his client could not have “recklessly” disregarded warning signs if she earnestly believed she had the right drug and saying that there was “considerable debate” over whether vecuronium actually killed Murphey.

During the trial, Dr. Eli Zimmerman, a Vanderbilt neurologist, testified it was “in the realm of possibility” Murphey’s death was caused entirely by her brain injury. Additionally, Davidson County Chief Medical Examiner Feng Li testified that although he determined Murphey died from vecuronium, he couldn’t verify how much of the drug she actually received. Li said a small dose may not have been lethal.

“I don’t mean to be facetious,” Strianse said of the medical examiner’s testimony, “but it sort of sounded like some amateur ‘CSI’ episode — only without the science.”

Vaught did not testify. On the second day of the trial, prosecutors played an audio recording of Vaught’s interview with law enforcement officials in which she admitted to the drug error and said she “probably just killed a patient.”

During a separate proceeding before the Tennessee Board of Nursing last year, Vaught testified that she allowed herself to become “complacent” and “distracted” while using the medication cabinet and did not double-check which drug she had withdrawn despite multiple opportunities.

“I know the reason this patient is no longer here is because of me,” Vaught told the nursing board, starting to cry. “There won’t ever be a day that goes by that I don’t think about what I did.”

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts:

KHN’s ‘What the Health?’: The ACA Turns 12

Can’t see the audio player? Click here to listen on Acast. You can also listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Pocket Casts or wherever you listen to podcasts.

The Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, turned 12 this week, in spite of efforts to repeal it through both legislation and court action over much of its lifetime. But key decisions facing federal and state lawmakers and the Biden administration in the coming year will say a lot about how many Americans the law ultimately benefits, and how much it will benefit them.

Meanwhile, three leading credit bureaus announced they would stop using most medical debt to determine U.S. consumers’ creditworthiness. The move comes shortly after the federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau threatened to make the agencies eliminate the use of medical debt in consumer credit reports.

This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of KHN, Anna Edney of Bloomberg News, Rachel Cohrs of Stat, and Mary Agnes Carey of KHN.

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

  • Administration officials this week celebrated the 12th anniversary of the Affordable Care Act, which brought major changes to the U.S. health care system, including expanding private insurance coverage and Medicaid coverage to millions of people, banning restrictions based on preexisting medical conditions, providing no-cost preventive care, and adding restrictions on health insurers’ profits.
  • Republicans appear to have lost momentum on repealing the law, and in many ways the public now takes the law for granted. But HuffPost’s Jonathan Cohn points out that key provisions could still face disruption in the coming year, including significant premium subsidies that Democrats added to the ACA in 2021. Those are not permanent and would need to be extended by Congress.
  • A recent report by the nonprofit Commonwealth Fund found that many young, healthy people have migrated off ACA exchange plans — which guarantee a wide range of benefits — to cheaper, short-term plans, which were promoted as an alternative by the Trump administration but do not have as many consumer protections. If that migration continues over the long term, the loss of healthy individuals from the ACA plans could undermine the risk pools for those insurers. ACA advocates are watching to see if the Biden administration puts new restrictions on the short-term plans, but that may not be a priority at this time.
  • The announcement last week by the leading credit rating agencies on medical debt will not provide relief to people who already have those bills on their record, as well as those with the largest unpaid bills.
  • As state legislatures around the country begin wrapping up their sessions, action is growing on abortion bills. Idaho’s governor signed a law this week banning abortions and calling on individuals — not state officials — to enforce it through lawsuits. That enforcement mechanism is the same one pioneered by Texas and, so far, not barred by the Supreme Court. The South Dakota governor, meanwhile, signed a law restricting the availability of abortion pills.
  • Public health officials warn that as the country moves to loosen covid restrictions, there is inadequate testing to spot any resurgence or provide confidence for consumers. The White House says Congress needs to appropriate more money for covid protections, including the purchase of more tests and vaccines. But that funding was left out of the recent government spending bill because Republicans and Democrats couldn’t agree on what was needed or how to pay for it.
  • The White House appears not to have realized before that vote in Congress that the covid spending was in trouble and failed to signal to Capitol Hill the ramifications of not acting. It may turn out to be a costly miscalculation if the country has another major covid wave and the government doesn’t have appropriate tools to fight it.
  • Administration officials appear to be working to sway Republican senators and have promised more information about covid spending and possible options for savings to Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah).
  • Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, the House is not in a rush to consider the Senate bill to switch the nation permanently to daylight saving time. House leaders say they want to study the measure — which breezed through the usually slow-moving Senate this month — and some sleep experts suggest that if the national policy changes, it might be better to go permanently with standard time, instead of daylight saving time.

Plus, for extra credit, the panelists recommend their favorite health policy stories of the week they think you should read too:

Julie Rovner: KHN’s “As States Impose Abortion Bans, Young Doctors Struggle — And Travel Far — To Learn the Procedure,” by Sarah Varney

Anna Edney: Politico’s “‘We’ve Learned Absolutely Nothing’: Tests Could Again Be in Short Supply if Covid Surges,” by David Lim

Rachel Cohrs: The Guardian’s “‘Betting Against the NHS’: £1bn Private Hospital to Open in Central London,” by Julia Kollewe

Mary Agnes Carey: KHN’s “Covid’s ‘Silver Lining’: Research Breakthroughs for Chronic Disease, Cancer, and the Common Flu,” by Liz Szabo

Also discussed on this week’s podcast:

HuffPost’s “The Affordable Care Act Turns 12 Today, and It Could Look Pretty Different by Year 13,” by Jonathan Cohn

Stat’s “The Breen Bill to Protect Health Providers Is Well-Intentioned. But It Won’t Stop Burnout,” by Greg Jasani

The Commonwealth Fund’s “Short-Term Health Insurance Markets and the ACA,” by Mark A. Hall and Michael J. McCue

To hear all our podcasts, click here.

And subscribe to KHN’s What the Health? on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Pocket Casts or wherever you listen to podcasts.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts:

Pharma Cash to Congress

Every year, pharmaceutical companies contribute millions of dollars to U.S. senators and representatives as part of a multipronged effort to influence health care lawmaking and spending priorities. Use this tool to explore the sizable role drugmakers play in the campaign finance system, where many industries seek to influence Congress. Discover which lawmakers rake in the most money (or the least) and which pharma companies are the biggest contributors. Or use our search tool to look up members of Congress by name or home state, as well as dozens of drugmakers that KHN tracks.

Methodology

 

UPDATE: KHN has removed contributions from Abbott Laboratories after 2013, when the company spun off its pharmaceutical business as Abbvie Inc. Abbott Laboratories is a medical device and health care company.

Kaiser Health News uses campaign finance reports from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to track donations from political action committees (PACs) registered with the FEC by pharmaceutical companies. Totals include donations to the principal campaign committees and leadership PACs for current members of Congress. We include only donations to members for election cycles in which they hold office (even if they weren’t in office for the full cycle, in the case of special elections). Donations are assigned to the quarter in which they were given, regardless of when they are reported by the receiving committee or PAC. Exact amounts can change as amendments and refunds are reported; KHN will update the analysis quarterly. Occasionally, refunds are reported in a different cycle from the original contribution, resulting in a negative total for the cycle.

There is a legal limit to how much each PAC can give to a member of the Senate or House of Representatives: $5,000 per election (including primaries and general elections) and per committee, or $10,000 per cycle. Each cycle is two calendar years, e.g. Jan. 1, 2017-Dec. 31, 2018.

When calculating changes in contributions from one cycle to another, we compare the latest quarter in the current cycle to the same point in the previous cycle for all drugmakers and for members of the House, who run for re-election every two years. For senators, who run for re-election every six years, we compare the current cycle to the cycle six years prior. We use the ProPublica Congress API to gather some information about past and present members. We use both Open Secrets and CQ Political Moneyline to collect additional information about PACs and verify our work.

KHN’s coverage of prescription drug development, costs and pricing is supported in part by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts:

In Nurse’s Trial, Investigator Says Hospital Bears ‘Heavy’ Responsibility for Patient Death

A lead investigator in the criminal case against former Tennessee nurse RaDonda Vaught testified Wednesday that state investigators found Vanderbilt University Medical Center had a “heavy burden of responsibility” for a grievous drug error that killed a patient in 2017, but pursued penalties and criminal charges only against the nurse and not the hospital itself.

Vaught, 38, was stripped of her nursing license and is now on trial in Nashville for charges of reckless homicide and abuse of an impaired adult. If convicted, she faces as much as 12 years in prison.

Vanderbilt received no punishment for the fatal drug error.

This testimony — from a Tennessee Bureau of Investigation agent — appears to support defense arguments that Vaught’s fatal error was made possible by systemic failures at Vanderbilt. Vaught’s attorney, Peter Strianse, has described his client as a “disposable person” who was scapegoated to protect the invaluable reputation of the most prestigious hospital in Tennessee.

“We are engaged in a pretty high-stakes game of musical chairs and blame-shifting. And when the music stopped abruptly, there was no chair for RaDonda Vaught,” Strainse said during opening statements. “Vanderbilt University Medical Center? They found a seat.”

Vaught is on trial for the death of Charlene Murphey, a 75-year-old Vanderbilt patient who died on Dec. 27, 2017, after she was prescribed a sedative, Versed, but was inadvertently injected with a powerful paralyzer, vecuronium. Vaught does not deny she accidentally confused the drugs but has pleaded not guilty to all charges. Her trial ― a rare example of a health care professional facing prison for a medical error ― has been closely watched by nurses across the country who worry it could set a precedent for future prosecutions.

In the wake of Murphey’s death, Vanderbilt took several actions that resulted in the medication error not being disclosed to the government or the public, according to county, state, and federal records related to the death. Vanderbilt did not report the error to state or federal regulators as required by law, a federal investigation report states. The hospital told the local medical examiner’s office that Murphey died of “natural” causes, with no mention of vecuronium, according to Murphey’s death certificate and Davidson County Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Feng Li. Vanderbilt also fired Vaught and negotiated an out-of-court settlement with Murphey’s family that barred them from publicly discussing the death.

The error was revealed months later when an anonymous tip alerted Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Tennessee Department of Health. The health department also alerted the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, which began a criminal investigation.

TBI Special Agent Ramona Smith testified Wednesday for the prosecution that her investigation focused only on Vaught’s drug error, not the actions of Vanderbilt or its other employees.

Smith testified she believed Vanderbilt did not accurately document Murphey’s cause of death on her death certificate, but Smith did not investigate this as a potential crime.

“It seemed odd to me that a ‘natural death’ came as a result of a medication error,” she testified. “And that concerned me, yes.”

Smith also described how the TBI, the Department of Health, and the Nashville district attorney’s office met to discuss Vaught’s case in January 2019, shortly before criminal charges were filed. At that meeting, it became clear the Department of Health had determined Vanderbilt had a significant role in the death, Smith said on the stand, reading a meeting summary from an internal report she wrote.

“In this case, the review led the [Department of Health] to believe that Vanderbilt Medical Center carried a heavy burden of responsibility in this matter,” Smith said. “There was no discipline because, according to [a DOH lawyer], a malpractice error has to be gross negligence before they can discipline for it.”

Although the health department did not try to fine or sanction Vanderbilt, it did punish Vaught. Several months after that meeting, the agency began the public process of revoking her nursing license, reversing a prior decision to close her case with no action.

Vanderbilt declined to comment on this new testimony. The Department of Health did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Vaught has admitted her role in the fatal drug mix-up, but she insists the error was possible only because of technical problems and flawed procedures in place at Vanderbilt at the time.

The case against Vaught hinges on her use of an electronic medication cabinet, a computerized device that dispenses drugs and is widely used in hospitals. According to documents filed in the case, Vaught initially tried to withdraw Versed from a cabinet by typing “VE” into its search function without realizing she should have been looking for its generic name, midazolam. When the cabinet did not produce Versed, Vaught triggered an override that unlocked a much larger swath of medications, then searched for “VE” again. This time, the cabinet offered vecuronium.

Prosecutors describe this override as a reckless act and a foundation for Vaught’s reckless homicide charge. Some experts have said cabinet overrides are a daily event at many hospitals.

Vaught insisted in her testimony before the nursing board last year that overrides were common at Vanderbilt, and that a 2017 upgrade to the hospital’s electronic health records system was causing rampant delays at medication cabinets. Vaught said Vanderbilt instructed nurses to use overrides to circumvent delays and get medicine as needed.

“Overriding was something we did as part of our practice every day,” Vaught testified to the nursing board. “You couldn’t get a bag of fluids for a patient without using an override function.”

Vanderbilt has never confirmed or denied whether the hospital widely used overrides to overcome cabinet delays in 2017. But, on Monday, a witness testified that the hospital’s medication cabinets were hampered by technical issues at the time of Murphey’s death.

Ethan Gulley, a former Vanderbilt nurse called as a witness by the prosecution, testified that all Vanderbilt nurses were experiencing delays at medication cabinets in late 2017, and nurses could use overrides to overcome these delays.

Separately, Gail Lanigan, a state health investigator, told the Tennessee Board of Nursing she had heard about computer issues causing problems with medication cabinets at Vanderbilt in 2017.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts:

As a Nurse Faces Prison for a Deadly Error, Her Colleagues Worry: Could I Be Next?

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Four years ago, inside the most prestigious hospital in Tennessee, nurse RaDonda Vaught withdrew a vial from an electronic medication cabinet, administered the drug to a patient, and somehow overlooked signs of a terrible and deadly mistake.

The patient was supposed to get Versed, a sedative intended to calm her before being scanned in a large, MRI-like machine. But Vaught accidentally grabbed vecuronium, a powerful paralyzer, which stopped the patient’s breathing and left her brain-dead before the error was discovered.

Vaught, 38, admitted her mistake at a Tennessee Board of Nursing hearing last year, saying she became “complacent” in her job and “distracted” by a trainee while operating the computerized medication cabinet. She did not shirk responsibility for the error, but she said the blame was not hers alone.

“I know the reason this patient is no longer here is because of me,” Vaught said, starting to cry. “There won’t ever be a day that goes by that I don’t think about what I did.”

If Vaught’s story followed the path of most medical errors, it would have been over hours later, when the Board of Nursing revoked her RN license and almost certainly ended her nursing career. But Vaught’s case is different: This week she goes on trial in Nashville on criminal charges of reckless homicide and felony abuse of an impaired adult for the killing of Charlene Murphey, a 75-year-old patient who died at Vanderbilt University Medical Center on Dec. 27, 2017.

Prosecutors do not allege in their court filings that Vaught intended to hurt Murphey or was impaired by any substance when she made the mistake, so her prosecution is a rare example of a health care worker facing years in prison for a medical error. Fatal errors are generally handled by licensing boards and civil courts. And experts say prosecutions like Vaught’s loom large for a profession terrified of the criminalization of such mistakes — especially because her case hinges on an automated system for dispensing drugs that many nurses use every day.

The Nashville district attorney’s office declined to discuss Vaught’s trial. Vaught’s lawyer, Peter Strianse, did not respond to requests for comment. Vanderbilt University Medical Center has repeatedly declined to comment on Vaught’s trial or its procedures.

Vaught’s trial will be followed by nurses nationwide, many of whom worry a conviction may set a precedent even as the coronavirus pandemic leaves countless nurses exhausted, demoralized, and likely more prone to error.

Janie Harvey Garner, a St. Louis registered nurse and founder of Show Me Your Stethoscope, a nursing group with more than 600,000 members on Facebook, said the group has closely watched Vaught’s case for years out of concern for her fate — and their own.

Garner said most nurses know all too well the pressures that contribute to such an error: long hours, crowded hospitals, imperfect protocols, and the inevitable creep of complacency in a job with daily life-or-death stakes.

Garner said she once switched powerful medications just as Vaught did and caught her mistake only in a last-minute triple-check.

“In response to a story like this one, there are two kinds of nurses,” Garner said. “You have the nurses who assume they would never make a mistake like that, and usually it’s because they don’t realize they could. And the second kind are the ones who know this could happen, any day, no matter how careful they are. This could be me. I could be RaDonda.”

As the trial begins, the Nashville DA’s prosecutors will argue that Vaught’s error was anything but a common mistake any nurse could make. Prosecutors will say she ignored a cascade of warnings that led to the deadly error.

The case hinges on the nurse’s use of an electronic medication cabinet, a computerized device that dispenses a range of drugs. According to documents filed in the case, Vaught initially tried to withdraw Versed from a cabinet by typing “VE” into its search function without realizing she should have been looking for its generic name, midazolam. When the cabinet did not produce Versed, Vaught triggered an “override” that unlocked a much larger swath of medications, then searched for “VE” again. This time, the cabinet offered vecuronium.

Vaught then overlooked or bypassed at least five warnings or pop-ups saying she was withdrawing a paralyzing medication, documents state. She also did not recognize that Versed is a liquid but vecuronium is a powder that must be mixed into liquid, documents state.

Finally, just before injecting the vecuronium, Vaught stuck a syringe into the vial, which would have required her to “look directly” at a bottle cap that read “Warning: Paralyzing Agent,” the DA’s documents state.

The DA’s office points to this override as central to Vaught’s reckless homicide charge. Vaught acknowledges she performed an override on the cabinet. But she and others say overrides are a normal operating procedure used daily at hospitals.

While testifying before the nursing board last year, foreshadowing her defense in the upcoming trial, Vaught said at the time of Murphey’s death that Vanderbilt was instructing nurses to use overrides to overcome cabinet delays and constant technical problems caused by an ongoing overhaul of the hospital’s electronic health records system.

Murphey’s care alone required at least 20 cabinet overrides in just three days, Vaught said.

“Overriding was something we did as part of our practice every day,” Vaught said. “You couldn’t get a bag of fluids for a patient without using an override function.”

Overrides are common outside of Vanderbilt too, according to experts following Vaught’s case.

Michael Cohen, president emeritus of the Institute for Safe Medication Practices, and Lorie Brown, past president of the American Association of Nurse Attorneys, each said it is common for nurses to use an override to obtain medication in a hospital.

Cohen and Brown stressed that even with an override it should not have been so easy to access vecuronium.

“This is a medication that you should never, ever, be able to override to,” Brown said. “It’s probably the most dangerous medication out there.”

Cohen said that in response to Vaught’s case, manufacturers of medication cabinets modified the devices’ software to require up to five letters to be typed when searching for drugs during an override, but not all hospitals have implemented this safeguard. Two years after Vaught’s error, Cohen’s organization documented a “strikingly similar” incident in which another nurse swapped Versed with another drug, verapamil, while using an override and searching with just the first few letters. That incident did not result in a patient’s death or criminal prosecution, Cohen said.

Maureen Shawn Kennedy, the editor-in-chief emerita of the American Journal of Nursing, wrote in 2019 that Vaught’s case was “every nurse’s nightmare.”

In the pandemic, she said, this is truer than ever.

“We know that the more patients a nurse has, the more room there is for errors,” Kennedy said. “We know that when nurses work longer shifts, there is more room for errors. So I think nurses get very concerned because they know this could be them.”

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts:

Money Flows Into Addiction Tech, But Will It Curb Soaring Opioid Overdose Deaths?

David Sarabia had already sold two startups by age 26 and was sitting on enough money to never have to work another day in his life. He moved from Southern California to New York City and began to indulge in all the luxuries his newly minted millionaire status conveyed. Then it all went sideways, and his life quickly unraveled.

“I became a massive cocaine addict,” Sarabia said. “It started off just casual partying, but that escalated to pretty much anything I could get my hands on.”

At one particularly low point, Sarabia was homeless for three months, sleeping on public transportation to stay warm. Even with plenty of money in the bank, Sarabia said, he’d lost the will to live. “I’d given up,” he said.

He got back on his feet, sort of, and for the next three years lived as a “functional cocaine addict” until his best friend, Jay Greenwald, died after a night of partying. Finally, Sarabia checked himself into a rehab in Southern California — ostensibly a luxurious one, although Sarabia didn’t find it to be so.

Still, the place saved his life. The clinicians really cared, he recalled, although their efforts were hampered by clunky technology and poor management. He had the feeling that the owners were more interested in profits than in helping people recover.

Just days off cocaine, the tech entrepreneur was scribbling designs for his next startup idea: a digital platform that would make clinician paperwork easier, combined with a mobile app to guide patients through recovery. After he left treatment in 2017, Sarabia tapped his remaining wealth — about $400,000 — to fund an addiction tech company he named inRecovery.

With the nation’s opioid overdose epidemic hitting a record high of more than 100,000 deaths in 2021, effective ways to fight addiction and expand treatment access are desperately needed. Sarabia and other entrepreneurs in the realm they call addiction tech see a $42 billion U.S. market for their products and an addiction treatment field that is, in techspeak, ripe for disruption.

It has long been torn by opposing ideologies and approaches: medication-assisted treatment versus cold-turkey detox; residential treatment versus outpatient; abstinence versus harm reduction; peer support versus professional help. And most people who report struggling with substance use never manage to access treatment at all.

Tech is already offering help to some. Those who can pay out-of-pocket, or have treatment covered by an employer or insurer, can access one of a dozen addiction telemedicine startups that allow them to consult with a physician and have a medication like buprenorphine mailed directly to their home. Some of the virtual rehabs provide digital cognitive behavior treatment, with connected devices and even mail-in urine tests to monitor compliance with sobriety.

Plentiful apps offer peer support and coaching, and entrepreneurs are developing software for treatment centers that handle patient records, personalize the client’s time in rehab, and connect them to a network of peers.

But while the founders of for-profit companies may want to end suffering, said Fred Muench, clinical psychologist and president of the nonprofit Partnership to End Addiction, it all comes down to revenue.

Startup experts and clinicians working on the front lines of the drug and overdose epidemic doubt the flashy Silicon Valley technology will ever reach people in the throes of addiction who are unstably housed, financially challenged, and on the wrong side of the digital divide.

“The people who are really struggling, who really need access to substance use treatment, don’t have 5G and a smartphone,” said Dr. Aimee Moulin, a professor and behavioral health director for the Emergency Medicine Department at UC Davis Health. “I just worry that as we start to rely on these tech-heavy therapy options, we’re just creating a structure where we really leave behind the people who actually need the most help.”

The investors willing to feed millions of dollars on startups generally aren’t investing in efforts to expand treatment to the less privileged, Moulin said.

Besides, making money in the addiction tech business is tough, because addiction is a stubborn beast.

Conducting clinical trials to validate digital treatments is challenging because of users’ frequent lapses in medication adherence and follow-up, said Richard Hanbury, founder and CEO of Sana Health, a startup that uses audiovisual stimulation to relax the mind as an alternative to opioids.

There are thousands of private, nonprofit, and government-run programs and drug rehabilitation centers across the country. With so many bit players and disparate programs, startups face an uphill battle to land enough customers to generate significant revenue, he added.

After conducting a small study to ease anxiety for people detoxing off opioids, Hanbury postponed the next step, a larger study. To sell his product to the country’s sprawling array of addiction treatment providers, Hanbury decided, he would need to hire a much larger sales team than his budding company could afford.

Still, the immense need is feeding enthusiasm for addiction tech.

In San Francisco alone, more than twice as many people died from drug overdoses as from covid over the past two years. Employers, insurers, providers, families, and those suffering addiction themselves are all demanding better and affordable access to treatment, said Unity Stoakes, president and managing partner of StartUp Health.

The investment firm has launched a portfolio of seed-stage startups that aim to use technology to end addiction and the opioid epidemic. Stoakes hopes the wave of new treatment options will reduce the stigma of addiction and increase awareness and education. The emerging tools aren’t trying to remove human care for addiction, but rather “supercharge the doctor or the clinician,” he said.

While acknowledging that underserved populations are hard to reach, Stoakes said tech can expand access and enhance targeted efforts to help them. With enough startups experimenting with different types of treatment and delivery methods, hopefully one or more will succeed, he said.

Addiction telehealth startups have gained the most traction. Quit Genius, a virtual addiction treatment provider for alcohol, opioid, and nicotine dependence, raised $64 million from investors last summer, and in October, $118 million went to Workit Health, a virtual prescriber of medication-assisted treatment. Several other startups — Boulder Care, Groups Recover Together, Ophelia, Bicycle Health, and Wayspring, most of which have nearly identical telehealth and prescribing models — have landed sizable funding since the pandemic started.

Some of the startups already sell to self-insured employers, providers, and payers. Some market directly to consumers, while others are conducting clinical trials to get FDA approval they hope to parlay into steadier reimbursement. But that route involves a lot of competition, regulatory hurdles, and the need to convince payers that adding another treatment will drive down costs.

Sarabia’s inRecovery plans to use its software to help treatment centers run more efficiently and improve their patient outcomes. The startup is piloting an aftercare program, aimed at keeping patients connected to prevent relapse after treatment, with Caron Treatment Centers, a high-end nonprofit treatment provider based in Pennsylvania.

His long-term goal is to drive down costs enough to offer his service to county-run treatment centers in hopes of expanding care to the neediest. But for now, implementing the tech doesn’t come cheap, with treatment providers paying anywhere from $50,000 to $100,000 a year to license the software.

“Bottom line, for the treatment centers that don’t have consistent revenue, those on the lower end, they will probably not be able to afford something like this,” he said.

This story was produced by KHN, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts:

Covid’s ‘Silver Lining’: Research Breakthroughs for Chronic Disease, Cancer, and the Common Flu

The billions of dollars invested in covid vaccines and covid-19 research so far are expected to yield medical and scientific dividends for decades, helping doctors battle influenza, cancer, cystic fibrosis, and far more diseases.

“This is just the start,” said Dr. Judith James, vice president of clinical affairs for the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation. “We won’t see these dividends in their full glory for years.”

Building on the success of mRNA vaccines for covid, scientists hope to create mRNA-based vaccines against a host of pathogens, including influenza, Zika, rabies, HIV, and respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV, which hospitalizes 3 million children under age 5 each year worldwide.

Researchers see promise in mRNA to treat cancer, cystic fibrosis, and rare, inherited metabolic disorders, although potential therapies are still many years away.

Pfizer and Moderna worked on mRNA vaccines for cancer long before they developed covid shots. Researchers are now running dozens of clinical trials of therapeutic mRNA vaccines for pancreatic cancer, colorectal cancer, and melanoma, which frequently responds well to immunotherapy.

Companies looking to use mRNA to treat cystic fibrosis include ReCode Therapeutics, Arcturus Therapeutics, and Moderna and Vertex Pharmaceuticals, which are collaborating. The companies’ goal is to correct a fundamental defect in cystic fibrosis, a mutated protein.

Rather than replace the protein itself, scientists plan to deliver mRNA that would instruct the body to make the normal, healthy version of the protein, said David Lockhart, ReCode’s president and chief science officer.

None of these drugs is in clinical trials yet.

That leaves patients such as Nicholas Kelly waiting for better treatment options.

Kelly, 35, was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis as an infant and has never been healthy enough to work full time. He was recently hospitalized for 2½ months due to a lung infection, a common complication for the 30,000 Americans with the disease. Although novel medications have transformed the lives of most people with CF, they don’t work in 10% of patients. About one-third of patients who don’t benefit from the new medications are Black and/or Hispanic, said JP Clancy, vice president of clinical research for the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation.

“Nobody wants to be hospitalized,” said Kelly, who lives in Cleveland. “If something could decrease my symptoms even 10%, I would try it.”

Predicting Which Covid Patients Are Most Likely to Die

Ambitious scientific endeavors have provided technological windfalls for consumers in the past; the race to land on the moon in the 1960s led to the development of CT scanners and MRI machines, freeze-dried food, wireless headphones, water purification systems, and the computer mouse.

Likewise, funding for AIDS research has benefited patients with a variety of diseases, said Dr. Carlos del Rio, a professor of infectious diseases at Emory University School of Medicine. Studies of HIV led to the development of better drugs for hepatitis C and cytomegalovirus, or CMV; paved the way for successful immunotherapies in cancer; and speeded the development of covid vaccines.

Over the past two years, medical researchers have generated more than 230,000 medical journal articles, documenting studies of vaccines, antivirals, and other drugs, as well as basic research into the structure of the virus and how it evades the immune system.

Dr. Michelle Monje, a professor of neurology at Stanford University, has found similarities in the cognitive side effects caused by covid and a side effect of cancer therapy often called “chemo brain.” Learning more about the root causes of these memory problems, Monje said, could help scientists eventually find ways to prevent or treat them.

James hopes that computer technology used to detect covid will improve the treatment of other diseases. For example, researchers have shown that cellphone apps can help detect potential covid cases by monitoring patients’ self-reported symptoms. James said she wonders if the same technology could predict flare-ups of autoimmune diseases.

“We never dreamed we could have a PCR test that could be done anywhere but a lab,” James said. “Now we can do them at a patient’s bedside in rural Oklahoma. That could help us with rapid testing for other diseases.”

One of the most important pandemic breakthroughs was the discovery that 15% to 20% of patients over 70 who die of covid have rogue antibodies that disable a key part of the immune system. Although antibodies normally protect us from infection, these “autoantibodies” attack a protein called interferon that acts as a first line of defense against viruses.

By disabling key immune fighters, autoantibodies against interferon allow the coronavirus to multiply wildly. The massive infection that results can lead the rest of the immune system to go into hyperdrive, causing a life-threatening “cytokine storm,” said Dr. Paul Bastard, a researcher at Rockefeller University.

The discovery of interferon-targeting antibodies “certainly changed my way of thinking at a broad level,” said E. John Wherry, director of the University of Pennsylvania’s Institute for Immunology, who was not involved in the studies. “This is a paradigm shift in immunology and in covid.”

Antibodies that disable interferon may explain why a fraction of patients succumb to viral diseases, such as influenza, while most recover, said Dr. Gary Michelson, founder and co-chair of Michelson Philanthropies, a nonprofit that funds medical research and recently gave Bastard its inaugural award in immunology.

The discovery “goes far beyond the impact of covid-19,” Michelson said. “These findings may have implications in treating patients with other infectious diseases” such as the flu.

Bastard and colleagues have also found that one-third of patients with dangerous reactions to yellow fever have autoantibodies against interferon.

International research teams are now looking for such autoantibodies in patients hospitalized by other viral infections, including chickenpox, influenza, measles, respiratory syncytial virus, and others.

Overturning Dogma

For decades, public health officials created policies based on the assumption that viruses spread in one of two ways: either through the air, like measles and tuberculosis, or through heavy, wet droplets that spray from our mouths and noses, then quickly fall to the ground, like influenza.

For the first 17 months of the covid pandemic, the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said the coronavirus spread through droplets and advised people to wash their hands, stand 6 feet apart, and wear face coverings. As the crisis wore on and evidence accumulated, researchers began to debate whether the coronavirus might also be airborne.

Today it’s clear that the coronavirus — and all respiratory viruses — spread through a combination of droplets and aerosols, said Dr. Michael Klompas, a professor at Harvard Medical School and infectious disease doctor.

“It’s not either/or,” Klompas said. “We’ve created this artificial dichotomy about how we think about these viruses. But we always put out a mixture of both” when we breathe, cough, and sneeze.

Knowing that respiratory viruses commonly spread through the air is important because it can help health agencies protect the public. For example, high-quality masks, such as N95 respirators, offer much better protection against airborne viruses than cloth masks or surgical masks. Improving ventilation, so that the air in a room is completely replaced at least four to six times an hour, is another important way to control airborne viruses.

Still, Klompas said, there’s no guarantee that the country will handle the next outbreak any better than this one. “Will we do a better job fighting influenza because of what we’ve learned?” Klompas said. “I hope so, but I’m not holding my breath.”

Fighting Chronic Disease

Lauren Nichols, 32, remembers exactly when she developed her first covid symptoms: March 10, 2020.

It was the beginning of an illness that has plagued her for nearly two years, with no end in sight. Although Nichols was healthy before developing what has become known as “long covid,” she deals with dizziness, headaches, and debilitating fatigue, which gets markedly worse after exercise. She has had shingles — a painful rash caused by the reactivation of the chickenpox virus — four times since her covid infection.

Six months after testing positive for covid, Nichols was diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome, also known as myalgic encephalomyelitis, or ME/CFS, which affects more than 1 million Americans and causes many of the same symptoms as covid. There are few effective treatments for either condition.

In fact, research suggests that “the two conditions are one and the same,” said Dr. Avindra Nath, clinical director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, part of the National Institutes of Health. The main difference is that people with long covid know which virus caused their illness, while the precise virus behind most cases of chronic fatigue is unknown, Nath said.

Advocates of patients with long covid want to ensure that future research — including $1.15 billion in targeted funding from the NIH — benefits all patients with chronic, post-viral diseases.

“Anything that shows promise in long covid will be immediately trialed in ME/CFS,” said Jarred Younger, director of the Neuroinflammation, Pain and Fatigue Laboratory at the University of Alabama-Birmingham.

Patients with chronic fatigue syndrome have felt a kinship with long covid patients, and vice versa, not just because they experience the same baffling symptoms, but also because both have struggled to obtain compassionate, appropriate care, said Nichols, vice president of Body Politic, an advocacy group for people with long covid and other chronic or disabling conditions.

“There is a lot of frustration about being written off by the medical community, being told that it’s all in one’s head, that they just need to see a psychiatrist or go to the gym,” said Dr. David Systrom, a pulmonary and critical care physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.

That sort of ignorance seems to be declining, largely because of increasing awareness about long covid, said Emily Taylor, vice president of advocacy and engagement at Solve M.E., an advocacy group for people with post-infectious chronic illnesses. Although some doctors still refuse to believe long covid is a real disease, “they’re being drowned out by the patient voices,” Taylor said.

A new study from the National Institutes of Health, called RECOVER (Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery), is enrolling 15,000 people with long covid and a comparison group of nearly 3,000 others who haven’t had covid.

“In a very dark cloud,” Nichols said, “a silver lining coming out of long covid is that we’ve been forced to acknowledge how real and serious these conditions are.”

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts:

Missouri Tried to Fix Its Doctor Shortage. Now the Fix May Need Fixing.

Missouri state Rep. Tricia Derges is pushing a bill to give assistant physicians like herself a pathway to becoming fully licensed doctors in the state.

Not that Derges — among the highest-profile holders of the assistant physician license created in 2014 to ease a doctor shortage — is the most persuasive advocate right now.

Derges was indicted last year on charges accusing her of selling fake stem-cell treatments, illegally prescribing drugs, and fraudulently receiving covid relief funds. Derges, who did not respond to multiple messages sent to her and her lawyer, has pleaded not guilty. But she has already been kicked out of the Republican caucus, forced to move her legislative office into a Statehouse broom closet, put on a three-year probation for her narcotics license, and denied the ability to run for reelection as a Republican following her indictment. A trial is set for June.

Her personal tribulations have jeopardized an already contentious solution for states that struggle with gaps in primary health care. Even some early proponents now want to rein in the assistant physician license.

Assistant physicians — sometimes called associate physicians, and not to be confused with physician assistants — are medical school graduates who have not yet completed residency training. Similar licenses also now exist in Arizona, Arkansas, Kansas, and Utah. Virginia is considering adding one, and model legislation is making such licenses easier than ever for other state legislatures to adopt.

Derges’ proposed legislation would allow assistant physicians to become licensed — similar to doctors who have completed a residency — provided an assistant physician has practiced for five years with a collaborating physician, passed a licensure exam, and completed certain training requirements.

Her bill would create a new path for training physicians. Competing legislation aims to scale back the license, though, and cap the number of years assistant physicians can practice until they funnel back into residency programs.

Dr. Keith Frederick, a former state representative and orthopedic surgeon from Rolla, Missouri, proposed the original assistant physician legislation, the first of its kind in the nation.

Nearly every county in Missouri is short of primary care providers, according to the federal Health Services and Resources Administration. It’d take nearly 500 physicians to fill that void, but efforts to get doctors to practice in underserved areas have been “chronically unsuccessful,” Frederick said. At the same time, thousands of medical school graduates who apply for residency programs each year are not accepted — 9,155 applicants did not match to a program in 2021 alone, or about 1 in 5 of the candidates, most coming from international medical schools.

The assistant physician license allows those medical school graduates to practice medicine in Missouri under a collaborative practice agreement with a physician, who is ultimately responsible for the care given, and on the condition that they do so in an underserved area. They can see patients, prescribe drugs, and provide certain treatments, in much the same way as nurse practitioners or physician assistants — so-called midlevel practitioners, both of which have distinct master’s-level training.

Frederick’s bill passed the same year it was introduced, a legislative feat he described as “pretty remarkable.”

The idea did have its detractors at the time. Chief among them was the Missouri Nurses Association, which argued the state’s 12,000 nurse practitioners were better suited to address primary care shortages. The association views the state’s rules for nurse practitioners as among “the most severely restrictive in the nation.”

Nationally, the American Medical Association, American Academy of Family Physicians, and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education also opposed the license.

One initial supporter of the idea was Dr. Jeff Davis, chief medical officer for Scotland County Hospital in rural Memphis, Missouri, and an executive committee member of the Missouri Association of Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons. Eight years after the law passed, however, Davis has no assistant physicians working with him, even though he said he has several openings that would benefit from them.

The challenge, Davis said, is Medicare will not reimburse for care provided by assistant physicians. Hospitals in rural areas often depend on revenue from that public insurance program for Americans 65 and older. But for hospitals to get paid by Medicare for the work of an assistant physician, Davis said, the assistant physician would have to work under the direct supervision of a physician whose name would be used to submit the bill.

“That doesn’t make much business sense,” Davis said.

Frederick hopes that having more states create an assistant physician license will force the hand of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to start reimbursing for the work done by those clinicians. The American Legislative Exchange Council adopted model associate physician legislation after Frederick presented the idea at the conservative nonprofit’s summit last year.

Currently, Missouri has 348 active licenses for assistant physicians, including Dr. Trevor Cook, creator of the Association of Medical Doctor Assistant Physicians. Cook graduated in 2014 from the International American University medical school on the Caribbean island of St. Lucia.

“Unfortunately, I was one of those many, many, many, many thousands of doctors that don’t match each year” into a residency program, Cook said.

Cook has practiced at Downtown Urgent Care in St. Louis since 2018, a position he called rewarding. He is supportive of a pathway for assistant physicians to become fully licensed in Missouri, like the one proposed by Derges. As to the indictment, Cook said, one person’s actions are not representative of an entire group of practitioners.

A review of active assistant physician licenses in the state — including Derges’ — found none under current disciplinary action. Two were previously under probation due to prior behavior.

Still, state doctor groups that initially supported the idea now want to cap the number of years someone can hold an assistant physician license, as other states have done. Under current Missouri law, assistant physicians can practice indefinitely.

“As with anything, you find out that people try to game the system and work an angle and get something that wasn’t intended out of something you did in good faith,” Davis said.

Dr. Sterling Ransone, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, said he already had concerns about the quality of care provided by assistant physicians, citing a 2018 JAMA article that found they had lagging test scores compared with their counterparts in residency programs. He said he’s doubtful about creating an alternative pathway to full physician licensure.

“I would personally have trouble supporting it without a lot more information to verify quality standards,” Ransone said.

The American Medical Association favors a bill in Congress that would increase the number of residency positions in the U.S. by 14,000 over the next seven years.

Dr. Kevin Klauer, CEO of the American Osteopathic Association, didn’t shut the door on a role for assistant physicians but said he was skeptical: “We have to be responsible to make sure that we’ve put all the safeguards in with training and verification and monitoring, so that health care that is delivered by a physician is up to the standards that it should be.”

Frederick called those concerns “purely turf protection” amid what he said is a tremendous health care shortage.

“We have all these people that are highly trained,” Frederick said. “Why would you waste that resource?”

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts:

‘An Arm and a Leg’: Need an Expensive Drug? Here’s What You Need to Know

Can’t see the audio player? Click here to listen.

Click here for a transcript of the episode.

Lillian Karabaic teaches personal finance to millennials through a podcast and community called Oh My Dollar! — and she needs an expensive drug to treat a chronic condition. That makes her an expert on one of the most complex arrangements in the American health care system: the copay accumulator.

In short, it’s an invention by the insurance industry to make sure only your money counts toward your yearly deductible — not any assistance you might receive from a drug company.

Drug companies offer copay assistance to patients whose plans make them pay a percentage of a medicine’s price so that they charge insurers more. For instance, if a drug’s monthly cost is $10,000, few people with a 20% copay could afford $2,000 a month. But if the drug company helps you with that $2,000 — sometimes they call it a “coupon” — it can charge your insurer $8,000 a month. Copay accumulators say these coupons can’t count toward an insurance plan’s out-of-pocket maximum.

It’s confusing, but Karabaic was well aware of how it works. Still, she recently got socked with an unexpected $3,000 charge — and expects to lose her very organized fight against it.

Finding out whether an insurance plan includes one of these policies can be extremely tough. Researchers from the AIDS Institute looked at hundreds of plans across the country and developed a tip sheet to help guide searches. A dozen states have banned copay accumulators, and more are considering doing so.

For tips on how to avoid overpaying for drugs — when that’s possible — check out the latest edition of our First Aid Kit newsletter.

Here’s a transcript of the episode

“An Arm and a Leg” is a co-production of KHN and Public Road Productions.

To keep in touch with “An Arm and a Leg,” subscribe to the newsletter. You can also follow the show on Facebook and Twitter. And if you’ve got stories to tell about the health care system, the producers would love to hear from you.

To hear all KHN podcasts, click here.

And subscribe to “An Arm and a Leg” on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, StitcherPocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry – Kaiser Health News

Related Posts: