Your Next Hospital Stay Could Involve Fewer IV Fluid Bags. Here’s Why.

When Hurricane Helene struck in late September, it flooded the largest IV fluid factory in the United States. The Baxter International facility in western North Carolina had been producing 1.5 million IV bags a day, 60 percent of the nation’s supply. The company immediately began rationing its products, and the shortage sent ripples through the health-care industry.

IV saline and fluids with carbohydrates are used regularly in hospitals and other clinical settings, both for hydration and to deliver medications. The shortage has left facilities scrambling to figure out the best use of the IV fluid bags they have.

But some hospital administrators see an opportunity in the IV fluid shortage to question standard practices. “There has been increasing literature over the last 10 to 20 years that indicates maybe you don’t need to use as much,” said Sam Elgawly, chief of resource stewardship at Inova, a health system in the D.C. area. “And this accelerated our sort of innovation and testing of that idea.”

Elgawly said he’s keeping one question front of mind: “How often are we actually giving it more than we need to, where we just keep it going because a patient’s in the hospital?”

He told KFF Health News that across the system IV fluid usage has dropped 55 percent since early October.

Hospitals such as those in the Inova system are using different ways to conserve, including giving some medications intravenously but without a dedicated IV fluid bag, known as “pushing” the medication.

“You don’t even need a bag at all. You just give the medication without the bag,” he said.

Simpler conservation measures could become common after the shortage abates, said Vince Green, chief medical officer for Pipeline Health, a small hospital system in the Los Angeles area that serves mainly people on Medicare and Medicaid. Green said medical staffers are encouraging patients to drink Gatorade or water instead of defaulting to IVs for hydration.

And medical staff make sure to use up the entire bag before starting another.

“If they come in with IV fluids that the paramedics have started, let’s continue it. If it saves half a bag of fluids, so be it, but it adds up over time,” Green said.

The North Carolina factory has reopened and is producing some IV fluid products, but it’s not up to prehurricane production levels. Some hospital administrators are anticipating dealing with the shortage through the end of the year.

This article is not available for syndication due to republishing restrictions. If you have questions about the availability of this or other content for republication, please contact NewsWeb@kff.org.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry Archives - KFF Health News

Related Posts:

KFF Health News' 'What the Health?': Public Health and the Dairy Cow in the Room

The Host

Julie Rovner KFF Health News @jrovner Read Julie's stories. Julie Rovner is chief Washington correspondent and host of KFF Health News’ weekly health policy news podcast, “What the Health?” A noted expert on health policy issues, Julie is the author of the critically praised reference book “Health Care Politics and Policy A to Z,” now in its third edition.

Public health, one of the more misunderstood concepts in the health world, is about the health of entire populations, rather than individuals. As a result, public health is closely tied to things like the environment, nutrition, and safety.

One commonality among many of President-elect Donald Trump’s picks to manage federal health agencies is their distrust of the nation’s public health system. With major concerns such as bird flu looming, that sentiment could translate into efforts to undermine those of public health workers.

To illuminate the importance and nuances of public health — and recognizing that public health is best explained at the local level — KFF Health News has partnered with Civic News Company to launch a project called Healthbeat.

In this special episode of KFF Health News’ “What the Health?”, chief Washington correspondent Julie Rovner is joined by KFF Health News public health correspondent and Healthbeat national reporter Amy Maxmen, Healthbeat editor-in-chief Charlene Pacenti, and Healthbeat New York City reporter Eliza Fawcett.

Panelists

Amy Maxmen KFF Health News and Healthbeat Read Amy's stories. Charlene Pacenti Healthbeat Read Charlene's bio. Eliza Fawcett Healthbeat Read Eliza's stories.

Among the takeaways from this week’s episode:

  • The covid-19 pandemic revealed the need for a deeper understanding of public health — a data-driven field devoted to the health and well-being of populations. Some of the biggest public health issues of the moment include childhood vaccination rates, and long covid and post-traumatic stress disorder cases among health care workers.
  • Bird flu is top of mind for many in public health. While the virus has been around for decades, its transmissibility to cattle is new, and that concerning characteristic emerged in the United States. The outbreak was not contained when it was first observed in a handful of states, and now the question is whether the virus mutates to enable human-to-human transmission — a trait that could make bird flu the next pandemic.
  • Many in the public health community are wary of the possibility that Trump and his administration’s officials could gut funding and policies that support the nation’s health — and even non-health policies can hold consequences for health care. For instance, anti-immigration measures could drain the health workforce; many immigrants work as home health aides, nursing home staffers, and more.

Mentioned in this week’s podcast:

Click to open the Transcript Transcript: Public Health and the Dairy Cow in the Room

[Editor’s note: This transcript was generated using both transcription software and a human’s light touch. It has been edited for style and clarity.] 

Julie Rovner: Hello, and welcome back to “What The Health?” I’m Julie Rovner, chief Washington correspondent for KFF Health News, and I’m joined by some of the best and smartest health reporters in Washington. We’re taping this special holiday episode — more on that in a minute — on Wednesday, Nov. 20, at 2:30 p.m. As always, news happens fast and things might’ve changed by the time you hear this. So, here we go. 

Today, I am thrilled to be joined here in our KFF studios by some of the staff of KFF Health News’ newest project, Healthbeat, which we’ve created with another nonprofit, Civic News Company, to cover public health in America. Here with us today, our Healthbeat editor-in-chief, Charlene Pacenti. 

Charlene Pacenti: Hello. 

Rovner: Amy Maxmen, KFF Health News public health correspondent and Healthbeat’s national reporter. 

Amy Maxmen: Hi. 

Rovner: And Eliza Fawcett, New York City reporter. 

Eliza Fawcett: Hi there. 

Rovner: Hello, everyone, and thank you so much for being here. Charlene, I want to start with you. What exactly is Healthbeat, and why do we need it? 

Pacenti: Now more than ever, I would say. Healthbeat was created in the wake of covid when it became very apparent that people needed a deeper understanding of what public health is, the kind of invisible shield that keeps us all safe. And we also needed more news coverage that centers reliable, science-based information so that people could make good decisions about the health of their families, themselves, and the people around them. So we thought part of that coverage should be rooted in communities. It’s been shown that no matter their politics or how they feel about the federal government, people do trust their local public health leaders. And we think that by elevating those voices on timely issues, we can start to win back people’s trust, not only in journalism but in science. 

Rovner: That sounds like a very uphill battle. 

Pacenti: Yes, as you mentioned, but we are part of Civic News Company, which you mentioned, whose model has been developed over the past 10 years covering schools with Chalkbeat. And so we’re trying to leverage the success they’ve had with the local plus national reporting. So for Healthbeat, we’re partnering with KFF Health News, which has a long tradition of excellent health reporting, to handle national coverage. And then we’ve opened two local bureaus to start. We’re in New York and Atlanta with a third location to come next year. 

Rovner: Cool. Amy, you’re our public health expert at the table. How is public health different from what we think of as regular health care or medical care in general? 

Maxmen: I am excited to answer that question, because I’m really into public health. So whereas you think about health care as what happens in a clinic. An individual is sick, and they’re treated within a hospital system. Public health really focuses on preventing illness and improving health at a population level through population-level interventions. So for example, infectious disease outbreaks are often a big component of public health, and that’s because they spread in communities. 

So even though a person is treated in a hospital — say if you have somebody who has measles, now the person’s treated for measles in a hospital — but public health officers actually go into communities. They figure out how the virus is spreading. They might go to schools or to hospitals or to a shopping mall, wherever that person was. Similarly, if a person is shot, they go to an emergency room and they get health care in that emergency department. But public health is going to look at the surrounding issues. How does gun violence affect the whole neighborhood? What does it mean to grow up with stress? Does it mean you can exercise as much if the neighborhood’s dangerous? So that’s sort of why also a big component of public health is about collecting a lot of data and analyzing that data. 

Rovner: I feel like people kind of misunderstand this a lot. They think of public health, they think of health care as something that’s between a health practitioner and you, the patient, whereas public health is bigger than that, and you are not the focus of public health, right? It’s everybody around you. 

Maxmen: Yeah, that’s the public part. Yeah, and it’s fun because it’s out there in the world. 

Rovner: But why do people — I feel like people really misunderstand that, and I feel like that’s the source of a lot of the frustration that people get with public health. It’s like, Well, that might not be good for me. 

Maxmen: Yeah, that’s the tricky thing because I think at its root, you have to believe in societal goods. You have to believe that having a cleaner neighborhood is good for everyone and not just because you have to take out your trash or not. I don’t know if that’s the best comparison. 

Rovner: Eliza, how’d you get into public health? 

Fawcett: I started as a reporter at the Hartford Courant during the start of the covid pandemic. I became really interested in covering health and also mental health during that time. And I grew up in New York, and it’s been really exciting to be the first New York reporter for Healthbeat, really getting into community health issues and understanding the sprawling New York City health department, which is one of the biggest in the country. And since I grew up in New York, it’s been really exciting to be doing this work. 

Rovner: Charlene, what kinds of stories is Healthbeat pursuing? 

Pacenti: Well, as you can imagine, public health is very broad, and we’re just getting started. We just officially launched Aug. 30, so we’ve just had the last of our reporters come aboard for right now. So we’re trying to narrow it down a little bit, and we’re kind of focusing on three key buckets for our coverage. One is infectious diseases, which Amy’s doing such a great job on bird flu right now, but also we’re looking at that locally, too. What are the flu numbers right now? We’re going into flu season. What are the covid numbers? How’s RSV [respiratory syncytial virus] ramping up? And those sorts of things, and the community’s preparedness to deal with outbreaks. 

Accountability is another really big thing that we’re focused on. What many people may not realize is that public health funding, even at the local level, comes from Washington. It’s coming from CDC [the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention]. It’s coming from HHS [the Department of Health and Human Services]. And so we’re looking at how those dollars flow down to the local communities and how they are spent, and also just officials who are in charge of public health policy. In Georgia already, we’ve seen some pretty good impact in our reporting just by showing up, frankly. Our first Atlanta reporter, Rebecca Grapevine, she got on the job the first week and realized that the Board of Public Health in Georgia had not held a public meeting in five months. So we wrote about that, and the story got a lot of attention. And by golly, in November they had a meeting. So that was really great. 

And then the third thing is really community. We really want to center our coverage on the people on the ground who are working on public health from many aspects. It can be social workers. It can be your local epidemiologist at the health department. It can be volunteers at a house of worship who has a ministry trying to help with homelessness or maternal mortality or any of those things. We’re really trying to be a platform and a voice for those people. At Civic News Company, we call people like that civic catalysts. They’re out there doing the work, and we really want to shine a light on them. 

Rovner: So Amy, obviously we’re going to talk about bird flu separately in a few minutes. What are the other public health, big national public health stories that you’re watching right now? 

Maxmen: I think we’ll keep an eye on vaccination rates. You can expect those to unfortunately drop. And I’m not talking about just the covid vaccine but childhood vaccination rates. It’s important to keep in mind the majority of adults, around 70%, still say that childhood vaccines are really important. But remember, going back to what’s public health, the power of vaccines is in herd immunity effect. So children are being protected with, say, a measles vaccine, but we want to have high rates above 90% of vaccinations so that teachers who are immunocompromised, children who are immunocompromised, infants too young to be vaccinated, so that they’re all protected, too. And what we’re going to see, if we see RFK [Robert F. Kennedy] Jr. as the head of HHS, there’s some rumors floating that Joseph Ladapo might have a role in the administration as well. 

Rovner: He’s the Florida surgeon general who we’ve talked about a lot on the podcast, who himself is kind of vaccine agnostic, if you will. 

Maxmen: Yeah. Exactly. And so we’re seeing a lot of signs that we’re going to hear a lot of terms like “choice” and “consent” when it comes to vaccines. And those sound like great words, but what it ultimately means is that we’ll see a loosening of mandates around having children be vaccinated before they go to public school, and that combined with misinformation. So we’ll probably see lower vaccine rates among children. So that’s something to watch because it means more outbreaks. Outbreaks are costly to contain in money and in lives lost. So that’s definitely one story. 

There’s certainly others besides even the bird flu, which I’ll talk about. I write a lot about occupational health, so there’s lots of health care workers who lost their lives in covid, but also I’ve covered how many are facing long covid and PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder] because they weren’t very well protected when they were at work during the pandemic, during the peak of the pandemic. I’ve written about how farmworkers and construction workers and landscapers have had heat-related illness and injuries. There was a law that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has been working on, but it will almost certainly stall under a Trump administration. So we’re not going to have national regulations on heat. So those are some of the other things I’ll be thinking about. 

Rovner: What are the big stories in New York, Eliza? 

Fawcett: Well, a lot of them are the same as what Amy mentioned, and we’re trying to see how the big changes coming down the pike with the second Trump administration will impact us locally. Obviously that is in big part about funding and whether CDC funding stays the same, is reduced, etc. Same for NIH [the National Institutes of Health] and other federal agencies that deal with health issues. The way that local health departments work, even really big ones like New York City, is that they do get a lot of money from the federal government, obviously. And so any small changes could have a really big impact on work on the ground, whether that’s making sure that kids can get vaccines. The Vaccines for Children Program is responsible for making sure that many, many, many children in the United States get vaccinated. 

Rovner: I’m, of course, so old that I covered the Vaccines for Children Program when it began in the 1990s. But yes, that is how most kids get vaccinated now, is through the federal government’s Vaccines for Children Program. One thing that obviously we are looking towards, the possibility with Republicans back in control of the Congress and the White House, is health care budget cuts. I assume New York is assuming that there will be less money in a Trump administration. 

Fawcett: Yeah, I think it’s a real concern for public health leadership in the city, and it’s been interesting to see what the response has been from city and state officials after the election. They’ve kind of made this point of saying that New Yorkers will be protected, whether that’s reproductive rights or vaccinations. And there’s this feeling of kind of pulling up the drawbridge, that New York has a pretty robust public health infrastructure. And so whatever happens on the federal level, we’ll be OK. But obviously things are a lot more complicated and intertwined than that. The city does get a lot of its funding from, or the New York City public health department does get a lot of its funding from the city and from the state but also from the federal government. And so if there are major changes there, that could have a big impact on the kinds of community-led programs that do good public health work in the city. 

And even on vaccinations, that’s an interesting question, too. Because while the CDC provides recommendations, they don’t actually provide mandates. That’s a states issue. If the CDC starts changing its messaging around vaccinations, particularly if RFK Jr. is running HHS, which is a big concern, that can still have a trickle-down impact on what New Yorkers think about getting vaccinated in general, which has already been a big concern for folks. So I think it’s been interesting to see this dynamic starting to play out in the city, where on the one hand, there’s this strong progressive leadership that is vowing to keep up the good fight. But we’ll see the extent to which they can really protect themselves from any large changes that are going to happen. 

Rovner: Let’s talk about bird flu, because it’s sort of the elephant or the dairy cow in the room. We’ve been watching all year, and I guess health authorities have been watching with some alarm as we’re seeing bird flu spreading in dairy cattle herds and then occasionally to people, to dairy workers, and now to some people who are apparently not dairy workers. What is your feeling about where we are with bird flu? And what has the Biden administration done about it? And what do you anticipate that the incoming Trump administration might do differently? 

Maxmen: Yeah, so I think the past, looking back on the past year with bird flu — the huge disappointment, appalling if you talk to researchers, sort of frustrating if you talk to public health officials — is we failed to contain it when the bird flu outbreak was confined to just a handful of states. That would be when it was smaller. It’s like putting out a fire when it’s small versus once there’s a huge forest fire. It’s harder to put out. So now it’s in at least 15 states, and the number might be higher because a lot of farms, maybe the majority of farms, haven’t tested at different periods during the year. There’s 52 cases among people in the U.S., mainly among farmworkers. But yeah, as you just mentioned from the case in California, there’s a few cases that have been mysterious, people who have no contact, no known contact with farm animals. 

These unknowns are actually kind of what’s as staggering as also the growth of the epidemic. We’ve sort of lost track of what’s going on. So what this means is, I’ve talked to so many experts at this point, and nobody thinks we’re going to eliminate this on dairy farms. And to be clear, bird flu has been around for 30 years. But the bird flu in cattle spreading among mammals, that’s new and that’s in the U.S. So what does this mean? This means best-case scenario, millions if not billions of dollars in losses for the dairy and poultry industry. It means farmworkers are going to continue to get the bird flu, which is not comfortable. And then it also means we just have this kind of ominous constant threat that maybe the virus will evolve in a way where it spreads between people easily. And that’s when you could get a pandemic. 

Rovner: That’s been the big fear about a pandemic. 

Maxmen: That’s the fear. 

Rovner: I mean but that was a fear even before the covid-19 pandemic. What everybody was afraid of was a bird flu pandemic, was an avian flu that mutated to pass from person to person. 

Maxmen: Exactly. It’s been on the — because humans don’t have a lot of experience with the bird flu. It’s novel. We may or may not have some partial immunity to it, so it could be very bad. So there’s a chance it will never mutate in a way that has it spread easily between people. But if it does, it could be horrible like on the scale of what we saw during covid. And so that’s why everyone I talked to, I guess the big question is: Why are we taking a gamble on this? But that’s what we’ve done this past year essentially — intentional, not intentional. I could get into — I’ve reported a lot on why this is, but that’s where we’re at. 

Rovner: Some of this, I know, comes back to the whole trust issue, which is that the CDC couldn’t get onto some of the dairy farms to test, because the dairy farmers didn’t trust the government. What has the Biden administration been able to accomplish in terms of dealing with the bird flu? 

Maxmen: Well, yeah, so on a local level, this is really left to local public health departments a lot of the time. So that’s really who’s doing the work here. Sometimes it’s state health departments, but on the ground we’re talking about veterinarians, farmers, and local health officials. I actually FOIA-ed [through the Freedom of Information Act] a lot of health departments and some agriculture departments to learn what’s even happening. The system of surveillance is a voluntary system, so when there’s mistrust or also just fears, right, so farmers would be afraid of, if they say they have the bird flu, of losing their entire milk market, which is a big one because then they lose the whole farm. So there’s a lot of concerns about their own privacy. 

So basically a lot of the cooperation has kind of fallen apart with that. What could the CDC do? I think there’s a lot of disappointment for the CDC and the USDA [Department of Agriculture] from the experts that I speak with, because although, yes, they can’t just storm onto farms, they haven’t actually been using the bully pulpit to say: This is what’s going wrong. We’re really concerned. This is how we can do it better. This is how we can get around some of these problems like farmers being afraid of losing their milk market or farmworkers being afraid of losing their job. 

They haven’t really been very open about the problems, and they also haven’t acted with urgency. So the response on the high level has seemed slow and uncoordinated. They’ll announce that they will be doing outreach to farmworkers, but then there will be months passed with no outreach. They’ll say that they’re going to be working on having other groups be able to test for the bird flu virus, but we still don’t see any group besides the CDC having that ability. So there’s a lot of people who are aggravated with the response under the Biden administration, and some of it’s not just because of leadership. There’s internal issues within the U.S. We have a voluntary system in a lot of ways, so for better or worse, this might be the way it is. 

Rovner: And what would you expect from an incoming Trump administration even? We obviously don’t know a lot about what to expect from an incoming Trump administration, but based on their handling of covid, what would you expect? 

Maxmen: Exactly. So based on their handling of covid, one is, I can say: Time-wise, OK, what’s on our side? The plus is as outbreaks continue, people often get better at figuring out what to do. So on the plus side, maybe farmers will start to have a little bit more trust that they’re not going to have huge losses and that therefore they’ll be a little bit more open. Maybe vets will get a better handle on how to control this. So that’s the plus side. The downside is also pretty huge. So during covid, the CDC basically stopped holding press briefings. So right now, at least there are press briefings. Here, I was critical of the CDC, but I might completely lose all contact with them under a Trump administration. 

Another one that’s quite big is there’s a study that showed that we’re missing a lot of cases among farmworkers, and I expect us to have more bird flu cases among people and miss more of them. And that’s bad because it’s bad for the people who have the bird flu, but also it means we might miss the moment if this starts to spread between people. If a person spreads it to their kids or other family members, we might miss those moments. And the reason why we’ll miss them — this happened during covid — is when there’s huge threats of deportations and when there’s just a lot of anti-immigrant rhetoric. I did a lot of reporting in the Central Valley around meatpacking plant workers and farmworkers. 

When there’s a lot of threats like this, people are maybe … There’s a lot of people in that community who are immigrants, and maybe some are undocumented. You also have people on temporary work visas whose visa is tied to their employers. Maybe they have family members who aren’t legally here, so they don’t want to risk even the threat of deportation by going to a clinic when they’re sick. They don’t want to complain if work conditions are really unsafe. If they’re given, say, no protection wall taking care of sick cattle, there’s no incentive to complain about the employer if you think you might actually be deported. So stigma tends to drive infectious diseases underground, and that’s sort of what we can expect. 

Rovner: And obviously immigration is one of those issues that we don’t cover generally as a health issue, but in New York, it is a health issue, right? 

Fawcett: Yeah, absolutely. I think that’s another thing that we’ll be looking at closely as this Trump administration gets going. Obviously, there are a lot of concerns among migrant communities in the city about mass deportations, which Trump has vowed to fulfill. And New York has a really large and fairly effective system for taking care of people regardless of immigration status or insurance, particularly through the municipal hospital system, NYC Health and Hospitals. And leadership there has said that migrants’ access to health care will be protected, but there is a lot that remains to be seen about how those communities will be impacted. 

Rovner: And Amy, which is the bigger threat out in the rest of the nation, the idea of people who could potentially spread misinformation about public health at the national level or the threat of not having enough money? 

Maxmen: Oh, I don’t like binaries. Having misinformation at a very high level is pretty terrifying. It’s pretty terrifying. And I think also, I always keep in mind big-picture stuff. As a reporter, if you’re constantly combating every new little piece of misinformation, it’s a bit exhausting. It’s great to fact-check what people say, the big picture. Speaking about RFK Jr., he’s endorsed a lot of conspiracy theories. And there’s studies showing that if you believe in multiple conspiracy theories, there’s a good chance you’re going to believe in another one. So to have a conspiratorial mindset at a high level of government or even in very influential positions, that’s pretty scary. Yeah. 

Fawcett: I think the other aspect to this conversation as well is just that, broadly speaking, the public health system is kind of beleaguered right now coming out of covid. A lot of the federal money that was there to support this work has dried up, and there are budget holes that need to be filled now, and people are burnt out. So I think that’s another aspect here. Will folks be ready to have any fight that needs to happen under another Trump administration? 

Rovner: Charlene, one of the things you said at the beginning is that one of the efforts here is to help rebuild trust in public health. Public health has been, I think, of everything, of all of the parts of American society where the public has lost trust, public health is way up towards the top. And also it’s way up towards the top in terms of the misinformation that’s been spread. So how do you combat those two things? It’s something that we talk about all the time on the podcast, and I don’t know how to fix it. 

Pacenti: It’s really tough. I think that one way that we really look at it is elevating local voices. To your point about immigrants and immigration status as a social determinant of health, we had a report just yesterday that came out in Georgia that laid out all the things that Amy and Eliza were just talking about in Georgia as well — the stigma, the not asking for help, because you fear about getting involved with the authorities in some negative way. But there are a lot of community organizations that are a safe space that do work to provide culturally sensitive care and speak the language and offer the help to people so that they’re not threatened. So I think by highlighting those resources, that’s one thing that we can do. 

And another one is just highlighting people who know what they’re talking about, scientific experts in the community, particularly local ones. One really exciting thing that we’re doing in New York is we’re kind of combining two of those concepts through a partnership with Your Local Epidemiologist. This is a newsletter that is run by Katelyn Jetelina, who back in 2020 started an email. She was teaching at the University of Texas. She’s an epidemiologist, and she was just writing an email to her students and her family and friends to explain the science behind what was going on with covid. And it has snowballed, and four years later, it’s really huge. So we have partnered with her to bring that concept to Healthbeat readers in New York. So every week we have our own epidemiologist. Her name is Marisa Donnelly, and she does an email newsletter every week that kind of breaks down what we call the community health forecast. And it’s all kinds of really great, science-driven information with nice little charts that just lays it all out for you. 

Rovner: It’s like the weather forecast, but for health? 

Pacenti: Exactly, exactly. So I think that’s one way. Just lay it out for people. Give them the rationale behind it, the science behind it, and I think that work like that over time, hopefully, will help regain some trust. 

Rovner: Well, I want to thank the panel. This has been really inspiring. I’m hoping that we can come back to you periodically to see how public health in general and Healthbeat in specific are doing. So thanks for joining us. 

OK, that is this week’s show. As always, if you enjoy the podcast, you can subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. We’d appreciate it if you left us a review. That helps other people find us, too. Special thanks this week to our producer, Taylor Cook, our editor, Emmarie Huetteman, and KFF Health News enterprise editor Kelly Johnson. As always, you can email us your comments or questions. We’re at whatthehealth, all one word, at KFF.org, or you can still find me at X, @jrovner, and increasingly at Bluesky, @julierovner.bsky.social. Do you hang around on social media any place, Amy? 

Maxmen: You know I’ve just started. I’ve joined the Bluesky trend. I just sort of came over there. It’s kind of one of those moments where there’s a lot of journalists and health people and researchers, so yeah, I’ve— 

Rovner: Do you have a handle? 

Maxmen: My handle is amymaxmen.bsky.social

Rovner: Excellent. Charlene? 

Pacenti: I’m most active on LinkedIn, where all the health people are. 

Rovner: There you go. Eliza? 

Fawcett: I am also on Bluesky newly, under my name, elizafawcett, and still kind of lurking on Twitter

Rovner: There you go. We’ll be back in your feed next week. Until then, have a very happy holiday weekend and be healthy. 

Credits

Lonnie Ro Audio producer Taylor Cook Audio producer Emmarie Huetteman Editor

To hear all our podcasts, click here.

And subscribe to KFF Health News’ “What the Health?” on SpotifyApple PodcastsPocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry Archives - KFF Health News

Related Posts:

Indiana Hospitals Pull Merger Application After Pushback Over Monopoly Concerns

Two rival hospitals in Terre Haute, Indiana, pulled back their merger application Monday, just days before the state was due to rule on the deal amid growing backlash to such medical monopolies.

The proposed merger between Union Health and Terre Haute Regional Hospital, the only acute care hospitals in Vigo County, Indiana, would have left Terre Haute’s 58,000 residents and those in the surrounding region with a single hospital operator. Although federal laws prohibit monopolies, the hospitals sought the merger under a state provision known as a “Certificate of Public Advantage” law, or COPA.

“Recognizing the COPA process is a very complex, innovative approach to improving access and quality health care for area residents, we believe it is best to withdraw the current application,” Union Health said in a statement posted on its website.

Union said it plans to submit a new application after working with Indiana regulators to “ensure the benefits” such as “improved access, quality” are included.

The withdrawal came nine days before a Dec. 4 deadline for state regulators to rule on whether to OK the merger. In recent months, the state health agency had received a deluge of public comments from residents and the Federal Trade Commission opposed to the deal between Union Health, a nonprofit whose main hospital is licensed as a 341-bed facility, and the 278-bed Terre Haute Regional Hospital, owned by for-profit chain HCA Healthcare. The commenters cited concerns about longer travel times to get emergency care, higher prices, and fewer choices. 

Union Health and HCA declined to answer questions about what prompted the decision to pull back the application.

“There could be any number of reasons why they pulled the application with the stated intention to refile,” said Christopher Garmon, a University of Missouri-Kansas City economist who has studied COPA mergers. Given the status of the application, he said, it’s unlikely the deal was headed toward an approval. “Either way, I think it’s clear that the state was not ready to approve the COPA with conditions similar to past COPAs.” 

It was the latest setback against mergers under COPA laws. Indiana and 18 other states have such laws that shield hospital mergers from federal enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission.

As a condition of the deals, states typically agree to monitor hospital performance and quality while limiting price hikes. Supporters of COPAs argue that state oversight built into the agreements can mitigate the harms of a monopoly. But health economists and the FTC have said that oversight cannot replace competition and that these mergers ultimately harm patients.

“We know that COPAs generally benefit the merging hospitals, but not local residents,” said Zack Cooper, a health economist and associate professor at Yale University.

His analysis of the Terre Haute deal suggested that it would have damaged the local economy and squeezed residents’ wallets. Cooper said he hopes that states faced with similar merger decisions will see Indiana’s waylaid case and the pushback against other COPA mergers as a cause for pause.

In comments to Indiana regulators, the FTC said COPAs “have proven unwieldy,” are “difficult to manage,” and “have failed to protect local communities from the harmful effects of anticompetitive hospital mergers.”

In 2018, Ballad Health formed as the nation’s largest state-approved hospital monopoly, with COPA agreements in Virginia and Tennessee. Since then, KFF Health News has reported, Ballad has fallen short on meeting quality and charity care goals, according to annual reports from Ballad and the Tennessee Department of Health. After years of complaints from patients, the state is now trying to hold Ballad more accountable for its quality of care. 

Ballad Health has said that “the most important thing to our patients is the quality of care they receive” and that its system is rebounding after hospital quality slipped due to the pressure of the coronavirus pandemic.

Problems have also occurred when a COPA — and its oversight — are removed, leaving the merged hospital system as an “unregulated monopoly.” After North Carolina repealed its COPA in 2015, a subsidiary of HCA Healthcare bought Mission Health, a COPA-created monopoly in Asheville, for $1.5 billion in 2019. The monopoly in Asheville remained, but none of the COPA’s conditions applied to the new owner.

Last year, government inspectors found “deficiencies” at Mission Health that contributed to four patient deaths and posed an “immediate jeopardy” to patients’ health and safety, according to the 384-page federal inspection report. HCA has said it promptly addressed the issues. But the state and the hospital system are now engaged in a lawsuit.

Four states besides North Carolina — Maine, Minnesota, Montana, and North Dakota — have repealed COPA laws. Maine ended its law last year amid warnings from the FTC regarding such mergers.

Bill Montejo, a director at Maine’s Department of Health and Human Services, pointed to an FTC study as he urged lawmakers on a health committee last year to repeal its COPA law due to “the growing concerns about the ineffectiveness and potential negative effects of COPAs.”

The Union-Regional merger was years in the making. In 2021, Union Health leaders were instrumental in the passage of Indiana’s COPA law. They supplied draft language for the bill to one of the bill’s authors, according to legislative testimony, and Union Health CEO Steve Holman testified before lawmakers that the merger would improve the county’s poor public health rankings.

In 2023, Union Health and Regional had signed an agreement to merge, beginning the COPA application process.

Union faces a July 1, 2026, deadline to refile an application, according to Indiana’s COPA law.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry Archives - KFF Health News

Related Posts:

El plan del gobernador de Florida para importar medicamentos más baratos de Canadá sigue en la nada

Casi un año después que la administración Biden diera luz verde a Florida para convertirse en el primer estado en importar medicamentos recetados más baratos de Canadá —un objetivo de muchos políticos de todas las tendencias, incluido el presidente electo Donald Trump— el programa aún no ha comenzado.

El gobernador de Florida, Ron DeSantis, celebró en enero que la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos (FDA) aprobara su plan, calificándolo de victoria sobre la industria farmacéutica, que se opone a la importación alegando que provocaría un aumento de medicamentos falsificados.

Un funcionario de salud de Florida, familiarizado con el programa de importación, dijo a KFF Health News que aún no había fecha prevista para que el estado comenzara a importar medicamentos. El funcionario pidió no ser identificado porque no estaba autorizado a hablar públicamente sobre este tema.

Florida solicitó crear un programa de importación en noviembre de 2020, pocos meses después que la administración Trump concediera esta opción a los estados. El republicano DeSantis se había quejado públicamente sobre el ritmo del proceso de aprobación federal bajo la administración Biden y en 2022 presentó una demanda contra la FDA por lo que llamó un “retraso imprudente”

Trump promocionó la medida de su administración para pasar medicamentos por la frontera en una entrevista previa a la elección publicada en octubre por AARP, la organización nacional que aboga por los derechos de los adultos mayores y que apoya que se permita a los estadounidenses comprar medicamentos en Canadá. En la entrevista, prometió “continuar mis esfuerzos para proteger a los estadounidenses de los precios inasequibles de los medicamentos” en un segundo mandato.

No está claro si su segunda administración hará o podrá hacer más para ayudar a Florida y a otros estados a establecer programas, porque en última instancia corresponde a los estados actuar. Colorado es el único otro estado que tiene un plan de importación pendiente con la FDA.

Funcionarios de la administración DeSantis se han negado durante meses a responder a las preguntas de KFF Health News sobre el programa. Alecia Collins, jefa de personal de la Agencia de Florida para la Administración del Cuidado de Salud, dijo en octubre que los funcionarios no estaban disponibles porque estaban de viaje. A mediados de noviembre, dijo que todavía no tenía respuestas.

El secretario de prensa de DeSantis, Jeremy Redfern, señaló que había sido “objeto de críticas” desde la primera semana de noviembre y no podía responder a las preguntas.

Cherie Duvall-Jones, vocera de la FDA, expresó que no podía responder a la pregunta sobre si Florida había presentado los documentos que la agencia exige antes de que el estado pueda empezar a importar medicamentos. Y remitió todas las preguntas al estado.

Las farmacéuticas suelen vender los medicamentos mucho más baratos en Canadá que en Estados Unidos por los controles de precios del gobierno canadiense. Pero por motivos de seguridad y eficacia, la ley federal prohíbe a los consumidores comprar medicamentos fuera de las fronteras de Estados Unidos, salvo en contadas ocasiones.

Políticos que van desde conservadores como DeSantis a liberales como el senador Bernie Sanders, de Vermont, llevan mucho tiempo presionando para que se importen medicamentos recetados de menor costo desde Canadá.

En el año 2000, el Congreso aprobó una ley que permite a los estados importar medicamentos recetados al norte de la frontera, con la advertencia de que sólo podría seguir adelante si el secretario del Departamento de Salud y Servicios Humanos (HHS) afirmaba que era seguro. Eso no ocurrió hasta 2020, cuando el secretario del HHS de Trump, Alex Azar, hizo tal declaración.

Desde 2022, Azar ha sido presidente de la junta directiva de LifeScience Logistics, una empresa con sede en Dallas a la que Florida está pagando millones de dólares para establecer su programa de importación de medicamentos, incluido su almacenamiento.

El 13 de noviembre, Azar se negó a responder a las preguntas de KFF Health News sobre la importación de medicamentos, diciendo que no estaba autorizado a hablar sobre el asunto.

El programa de Florida no ayudaría directamente a los consumidores en la farmacia. Su objetivo es reducir los costos del programa estatal de Medicaid y de los departamentos de salud y prisiones.

Matthew Baxter, director de Methapharm Specialty Pharmaceuticals, con sede en Ontario, que ha contratado a LifeScience para exportar medicamentos, no quiso decir si Methapharm ha enviado algún medicamento a través de la frontera.

La industria farmacéutica y el gobierno canadiense se oponen a la exportación de medicamentos a Estados Unidos. Las farmacéuticas afirman que aumentaría el riesgo de que aparezcan medicamentos falsificados en las estanterías de las farmacias estadounidenses, mientras que el Gobierno de Ottawa ha advertido de que no permitirá la exportación de medicamentos si, como consecuencia, los canadienses pudieran sufrir escasez.

El ahorro previsto en Florida también sería relativamente menor. DeSantis estimó que el programa ahorraría a las agencias estatales hasta $180 millones en su primer año. El presupuesto anual de Medicaid de Florida supera los $30,000 millones.

Florida identificó 14 medicamentos, entre ellos algunos para el cáncer y el sida, que intentaría importar de Canadá para sus agencias estatales.

Camm Epstein, analista de políticas de salud en Saratoga Springs, Nueva York, señaló que la importación de medicamentos es un concepto aparentemente simple que atrae la atención de los ciudadanos, razón por la cual DeSantis y otros han recurrido a la idea como respuesta al aumento de los precios de los medicamentos. “Es algo que agita a las masas”, dijo Epstein. “¿Quién no quiere pagar menos por las medicinas?”.

Pero pasar medicamentos por la frontera es complicado debido a los numerosos requisitos de la FDA, entre ellos encontrar empresas con las que trabajar —un exportador canadiense y un importador estadounidense— y seguir un proceso que garantice que los medicamentos sean auténticos, apuntó Epstein.

“Esto lo convirtió, en el mejor de los casos, en un despilfarro”, añadió.

Florida ha gastado decenas de millones de dólares para poner en marcha su programa de importación de medicamentos. El estado ya ha pagado a LifeScience Logistics $50 millones para establecer un depósito en donde guardar los fármacos. DeSantis señaló los costos en su demanda de 2022 contra la FDA.

“Los demandantes han pagado a su importador y distribuidor más de $24 millones hasta ahora —aumentando a razón de $1,2 millones cada mes— a pesar de que ni una sola píldora ha sido importada, reetiquetada o distribuida, debido a la desidia de la FDA”, expresó el estado en su demanda.

El retraso de Florida puede deberse a problemas operativos, según Epstein. “Previsiblemente, aunque abrieran el grifo no habría flujo, porque Canadá no iba a permitir el suministro”, dijo.

Colorado y Florida se encuentran entre los nueve estados que han aprobado leyes que permiten la importación de medicamentos canadienses. La solicitud de Colorado a la FDA, en 2022, sigue pendiente. En diciembre de 2023, las autoridades de Colorado publicaron un informe en el que señalaban que el estado era incapaz de encontrar un fabricante de fármacos dispuesto a venderle medicamentos procedentes de Canadá.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry Archives - KFF Health News

Related Posts:

Anti-Fraud Efforts Meet Real-World Test During ACA Enrollment Period

Unauthorized switching of Affordable Care Act plans appears to have tapered off in recent weeks based on an almost one-third drop in casework associated with consumer complaints, say federal regulators. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which oversees the ACA, credits steps taken to thwart enrollment and switching problems that triggered more than 274,000 complaints this year through August.

Now, the annual ACA open enrollment period that began Nov. 1 poses a real-world test: Will the changes curb fraud by rogue agents or brokerages without unduly slowing the process of enrolling or reducing the total number of sign-ups for 2025 coverage?

“They really have this tightrope to walk,” said Sabrina Corlette, co-director of the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University. “The more you tighten it up to prevent fraud, the more barriers there are that could inhibit enrollment among those who need the coverage.”

CMS said in July that some types of policy changes — those in which the agent is not “affiliated” with the existing plan — will face more requirements, such as a three-way call with the consumer, broker, and a healthcare.gov call center representative.

In August, the agency barred two of about a dozen private sector online-enrollment platforms from connecting with healthcare.gov over concerns related to improper switching.

And CMS has suspended 850 agents suspected of being involved in unauthorized plan-switching from accessing the ACA marketplace.

Still, the clampdown could add complexity to enrollment and slow the process. For example, a consumer might have to wait in a queue for a three-way call, or scramble to find a new agent because the one they previously worked with had been suspended.

Given that phone lines with healthcare.gov staff already get busy — especially during mid-December — agents and policy analysts advise consumers not to dally this year.

“Hit the ground running,” said Ronnell Nolan, president and CEO of Health Agents for America, a professional organization for brokers.

Meanwhile, reports are emerging that some rogue entities are already figuring out workarounds that could undermine some of the anti-fraud protections CMS put in place, Nolan said.

“Bottom line is: Fraud and abuse is still happening,” Nolan said.

Brokers assist the majority of people actively enrolling in ACA plans and are paid a monthly commission by insurers for their efforts. Consumers can compare plans or enroll themselves online through federal or state marketplace websites. They can also seek help from people called assisters or navigators — certified helpers who are not paid commissions. Under a “find local help” button on the federal and state ACA websites, consumers can search for nearby brokers or navigators.

CMS says it has “ramped up support operations” at its healthcare.gov marketplace call centers, which are open 24/7, in anticipation of increased demand for three-way calls, and it expects “minimal wait times,” said Jeff Wu, deputy director for policy of the CMS Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight.

Wu said those three-way calls are necessary only when an agent or a broker not already associated with a consumer’s enrollment wants to change that consumer’s enrollment or end that consumer’s coverage. It does not apply to people seeking coverage for the first time.

Organizations paid by the government to offer navigator services have a dedicated phone line to the federal marketplace, and callers are not currently experiencing long waits, said Xonjenese Jacobs, director of Florida Covering Kids & Families, a program based at the University of South Florida that coordinates enrollment across the state through its Covering Florida navigator program.

Navigators can assist with the three-way calls if a consumer’s situation requires it.

“Because we have our quick line in, there’s no increased wait time,” Jacobs said.

The problem of unauthorized switches has been around for a while but took off during last year’s open enrollment season.

Brokers generally blamed much of the problem on the ease with which rogue agents can access ACA information in the federal marketplace, needing only a person’s name, date of birth, and state of residence. Though federal regulators have worked to tighten that access with the three-way call requirement, they stopped short of instituting what some agent groups say is needed: two-factor authentication, which could involve a code accessed by a consumer through a smartphone.

Unauthorized switches can lead to a host of problems for consumers, from higher deductibles to landing in new networks that do not include their preferred physicians or hospitals. Some people have received tax bills when unauthorized policies came with premium credits for which they did not qualify.

Unauthorized switches posed a political liability for the Biden administration, a blemish on two years of record ACA enrollment. The practice drew criticism from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle; Democrats demanded more oversight and punishment of rogue agents, while Republicans said fraud attempts were fueled by Biden administration moves that allowed for more generous premium subsidies and special enrollment periods. The fate of those enhanced subsidies, which are set to expire, will be decided by Congress next year as the Trump administration takes power. But the premiums and subsidies that come with 2025 plans that people are enrolling in now will remain in effect for the entire year.

The actions taken this year to thwart the unauthorized enrollments apply to the federal marketplace, used by 31 states. The remaining states and the District of Columbia run their own websites, with many having in place additional layers of security.

For its part, CMS says its efforts are working, pointing to the 30% drop in complaint casework. The agency also noted a 90% drop in the number of times an agent’s name was replaced by another’s, which it says indicates that it is tougher for rival agents to steal clients to gain the monthly commissions that insurers pay.

Still, the move to suspend 850 agents has drawn pushback from agent groups that initially brought the problem to federal regulators’ attention. They say some of those accused were suspended before getting a chance to respond to the allegations.

“There will be a certain number of agents and brokers who are going to be suspended without due process,” said Nolan, with the health agents’ group. She said that it has called for increased protections against unauthorized switching and that two-factor authentication, like that used in some state marketplaces or in the financial sector, would be more effective than what’s been done.

“We now have to jump through so many hoops that I’m not sure we’re going to survive,” she said of agents in general. “They are just throwing things against the wall to see what sticks when they could just do two-factor.”

The agency did not respond to questions asking for details about how the 850 agents suspended since July were selected, the states where they were located, or how many had their suspensions reversed after supplying additional information.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry Archives - KFF Health News

Related Posts:

TV’s Dr. Oz Invested in Businesses Regulated by Agency Trump Wants Him To Lead

President-elect Donald Trump’s choice to run the sprawling government agency that administers Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act marketplace — celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz — recently held broad investments in health care, tech, and food companies that would pose significant conflicts of interest.

Oz’s holdings, some shared with family, included a stake in UnitedHealth Group worth as much as $600,000, as well as shares of pharmaceutical firms and tech companies with business in the health care sector, such as Amazon. Collectively, Oz’s investments total tens of millions of dollars, according to financial disclosures he filed during his failed 2022 run for a Pennsylvania U.S. Senate seat.

Trump said Tuesday he would nominate Oz as administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. The agency’s scope is huge: CMS oversees coverage for more than 160 million Americans, nearly half the population. Medicare alone accounts for approximately $1 trillion in annual spending, with over 67 million enrollees.

UnitedHealth Group is one of the largest health care companies in the nation and arguably the most important business partner of CMS, through which it is the leading provider of commercial health plans available to Medicare beneficiaries.

UnitedHealth also offers managed-care plans under Medicaid, the joint state-federal program for low-income people, and sells plans on government-run marketplaces set up via the Affordable Care Act. Oz also had smaller stakes in CVS Health, which now includes the insurer Aetna, and in the insurer Cigna.

It’s not clear if Oz, a heart surgeon by training, still holds investments in health care companies, or if he would divest his shares or otherwise seek to mitigate conflicts of interest should he be confirmed by the Senate. Reached by phone on Wednesday, he said he was in a Zoom meeting and declined to comment. An assistant did not reply to an email message with detailed questions.

“It’s obvious that over the years he’s cultivated an interest in the pharmaceutical industry and the insurance industry,” said Peter Lurie, president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a watchdog group. “That raises a question of whether he can be trusted to act on behalf of the American people.” (The publisher of KFF Health News, David Rousseau, is on the CSPI board.)

Oz used his TikTok page on multiple occasions in November to praise Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., including their efforts to take on the “illness-industrial complex,” and he slammed “so-called experts like the big medical societies” for dishing out what he called bad nutritional advice. Oz’s positions on health policy have been chameleonic; in 2010, he cut an ad urging Californians to sign up for insurance under President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act, telling viewers they had a “historic opportunity.”

Oz’s 2022 financial disclosures show that the television star invested a substantial part of his wealth in health care and food firms. Were he confirmed to run CMS, his job would involve interacting with giants of the industry that have contributed to his wealth.

Given the breadth of his investments, it would be difficult for Oz to recuse himself from matters affecting his assets, if he still holds them. “He could spend his time in a rocking chair” if that happened, Lurie said.

In the past, nominees for government positions with similar potential conflicts of interest have chosen to sell the assets or otherwise divest themselves. For instance, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Attorney General Merrick Garland agreed to divest their holdings in relevant, publicly traded companies when they joined the Biden administration.

Trump, however, declined in his first term to relinquish control of his own companies and other assets while in office, and he isn’t expected to do so in his second term. He has not publicly indicated concern about his subordinates’ financial holdings.

CMS’ main job is to administer Medicare. About half of new enrollees now choose Medicare Advantage, in which commercial insurers provide their health coverage, instead of the traditional, government-run program, according to an analysis from KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News.

Proponents of Medicare Advantage say the private plans offer more compelling services than the government and better manage the costs of care. Critics note that Medicare Advantage plans have a long history of costing taxpayers more than the traditional program.

UnitedHealth, CVS, and Cigna are all substantial players in the Medicare Advantage market. It’s not always a good relationship with the government. The Department of Justice filed a 2017 complaint against UnitedHealth alleging the company used false information to inflate charges to the government. The case is ongoing.

Oz is an enthusiastic proponent of Medicare Advantage. In 2020, he proposed offering Medicare Advantage to all; during his Senate run, he offered a more general pledge to expand those plans. After Trump announced Oz’s nomination for CMS, Jeffrey Singer, a senior fellow at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute, said he was “uncertain about Dr. Oz’s familiarity with health care financing and economics.”

Singer said Oz’s Medicare Advantage proposal could require large new taxes — perhaps a 20% payroll tax — to implement.

Oz has gotten a mixed reception from elsewhere in Washington. Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman, the Democrat who defeated Oz in 2022, signaled he’d potentially support his appointment to CMS. “If Dr. Oz is about protecting and preserving Medicare and Medicaid, I’m voting for the dude,” he said on the social platform X.

Oz’s investments in companies doing business with the federal government don’t end with big insurers. He and his family also hold hospital stocks, according to his 2022 disclosure, as well as a stake in Amazon worth as much as nearly $2.4 million. (Candidates for federal office are required to disclose a broad range of values for their holdings, not a specific figure.)

Amazon operates an internet pharmacy, and the company announced in June that its subscription service is available to Medicare enrollees. It also owns a primary care service, One Medical, that accepts Medicare and “select” Medicare Advantage plans.

Oz was also directly invested in several large pharmaceutical companies and, through investments in venture capital funds, indirectly invested in other biotech and vaccine firms. Big Pharma has been a frequent target of criticism and sometimes conspiracy theories from Trump and his allies. Kennedy, whom Trump has said he’ll nominate to be Health and Human Services secretary, is a longtime anti-vaccine activist.

During the Biden administration, Congress gave Medicare authority to negotiate with drug companies over their prices. CMS initially selected 10 drugs. Those drugs collectively accounted for $50.5 billion in spending between June 1, 2022, and May 31, 2023, under Medicare’s Part D prescription drug benefit.

At least four of those 10 medications are manufactured by companies in which Oz held stock, worth as much as about $50,000.

Oz may gain or lose financially from other Trump administration proposals.

For example, as of 2022, Oz held investments worth as much as $6 million in fertility treatment providers. To counter fears that politicians who oppose abortion would ban in vitro fertilization, Trump floated during his campaign making in vitro fertilization treatment free. It’s unclear whether the government would pay for the services.

In his TikTok videos from earlier in November, Oz echoed attacks on the food industry by Kennedy and other figures in his “Make America Healthy Again” movement. They blame processed foods and underregulation of the industry for the poor health of many Americans, concerns shared by many Democrats and more mainstream experts.

But in 2022, Oz owned stakes worth as much as $80,000 in Domino’s Pizza, Pepsi, and US Foods, as well as more substantial investments in other parts of the food chain, including cattle; Oz reported investments worth as much as $5.5 million in a farm and livestock, as well as a stake in a dairy-free milk startup. He was also indirectly invested in the restaurant chain Epic Burger.

One of his largest investments was in the Pennsylvania-based convenience store chain Wawa, which sells fast food and all manner of ultra-processed snacks. Oz and his wife reported a stake in the company, beloved by many Pennsylvanians, worth as much as $30 million.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry Archives - KFF Health News

Related Posts:

Florida Gov. DeSantis’ Canadian Drug Import Plan Goes Nowhere After FDA Approval

Nearly a year after the Biden administration gave Florida the green light to become the first state to import lower-cost prescription drugs from Canada — a longtime goal of politicians across the political spectrum, including President-elect Donald Trump — the program has yet to begin.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis hailed the FDA’s approval of his plan in January, calling it a victory over the drug industry, which opposes importation on the grounds that it would lead to a surge in counterfeit medications.

A Florida health official familiar with the importation program told KFF Health News there was no planned date yet for the state to begin importing drugs. The official asked not to be identified because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly about the program.

Florida applied to create an importation program in November 2020, just months after the Trump administration gave states the option. DeSantis, a Republican, complained publicly for years about the pace of the federal approval process under the Biden administration and in 2022 filed suit against the FDA for what he called a “reckless delay.”

Trump touted his administration’s move to bring medicines over the border in a preelection interview published last month by AARP, the advocacy group for older Americans, which supports allowing Americans to buy drugs from Canada. He vowed to “continue my efforts to protect Americans from unaffordable drug prices” in a second term.

It’s not clear whether his second administration will or can do more to help Florida and other states set up programs, because it’s ultimately up to the states to act. Colorado is the only other state that has an importation plan pending with the FDA.

DeSantis administration officials have refused for months to answer questions from KFF Health News about the program. Alecia Collins, deputy chief of staff for the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, said in October that officials were traveling and unavailable. In mid-November, she said she still had no answers.

DeSantis press secretary Jeremy Redfern said he had been “slammed” since the first week of November and could not answer questions.

FDA spokesperson Cherie Duvall-Jones said she could not answer whether Florida had submitted documents the agency requires before the state can start importing medicines. She referred all questions to the state.

Drug companies typically sell medications for far less in Canada than in the United States, as a result of Canadian government price controls. But because of safety and efficacy concerns, federal law prohibits consumers from buying drugs from outside U.S. borders except in rare cases.

Politicians ranging from conservatives such as DeSantis to liberals such as Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont have long pushed for importing lower-cost prescription drugs from Canada.

In 2000, Congress passed a law allowing states to import prescription drugs from north of the border, with the caveat that it could go forward only if the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services affirmed it was safe. That didn’t happen until 2020, when Trump’s HHS secretary, Alex Azar, made such a declaration.

Since 2022, Azar has been chairman of the board at LifeScience Logistics, a Dallas-based company that Florida is paying millions of dollars to set up its drug importation program, including warehousing its medicines.

Azar on Nov. 13 refused to answer questions from KFF Health News about drug importation, saying he wasn’t authorized to speak on the matter.

Florida’s program would not directly assist consumers at the pharmacy. It’s instead aimed at lowering costs for the state Medicaid program and for the corrections and health departments.

Matthew Baxter, a senior director at Ontario-based Methapharm Specialty Pharmaceuticals, which has contracted with LifeScience to export drugs, would not say whether Methapharm has sent any medicines over the border.

The pharmaceutical industry and the Canadian government oppose U.S. drug importation. Drug companies say importation would increase the risk of counterfeit drugs appearing on U.S. pharmacy shelves, while the government in Ottawa has warned it won’t allow medicines to be exported if Canadians could experience shortages as a result.

Florida’s predicted savings would also be relatively minor. DeSantis estimated the program would save state agencies up to $180 million in its first year. Florida’s annual Medicaid budget tops $30 billion.

Florida identified 14 drugs, including for cancer and AIDS, that it would attempt to import from Canada for its state agencies.

Camm Epstein, a health policy analyst in Saratoga Springs, New York, said drug importation is a seemingly simple concept that resonates with the public, which is why DeSantis and others have turned to the idea as a response to rising drug prices. “It riles up the crowd,” he said. “Who doesn’t want to pay lower drug costs?”

But bringing drugs over the border is complicated because of the FDA’s many requirements, including finding companies to work with — a Canadian exporter and a U.S. importer — and following a process that ensures the drugs are authentic, Epstein said.

“This was, at best, a boondoggle,” he said.

Florida has spent tens of millions of dollars to stand up its drug importation program. The state has already paid LifeScience Logistics $50 million to set up a warehouse to store the medicines. DeSantis noted the costs in his 2022 lawsuit against the FDA.

“Plaintiffs have paid their retained importer and distributor over $24 million thus far — and increasing at the rate of $1.2 million every month — even though not a single prescription pill has been imported, relabeled, or distributed, solely because of the FDA’s idleness,” the state said in its suit.

Florida’s delay may be due to operational challenges, Epstein said. “Predictably, even if they turned on the spigot there would be no flow, because Canada was not going to permit for the supply,” he said.

Colorado and Florida are among at least nine states that have passed laws allowing for Canadian drug importation. Colorado’s 2022 application to the FDA is still pending. In December 2023, Colorado officials released a report noting the state was unable to find a drugmaker willing to sell it medicines from Canada.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry Archives - KFF Health News

Related Posts:

Washington Power Has Shifted. Here’s How the ACA May Shift, Too.

President-elect Donald Trump’s return to the White House could embolden Republicans who want to weaken or repeal the Affordable Care Act, but implementing such sweeping changes would still require overcoming procedural and political hurdles.

Trump, long an ACA opponent, expressed interest during the campaign in retooling the health law. In addition, some high-ranking Republican lawmakers — who will now have control over both the House and the Senate — have said revamping the landmark 2010 legislation known as Obamacare would be a priority. They say the law is too expensive and represents government overreach.

The governing trifecta sets the stage for potentially seismic changes that could curtail the law’s Medicaid expansion, raise the uninsured rate, weaken patient protections, and increase premium costs for millions of people.

“The Republican plans — they don’t say they are going to repeal the ACA, but their collection of policies could amount to the same thing or worse,” said Sarah Lueck, vice president for health policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a research and policy institute. “It could happen through legislation and regulation. We’re on alert for anything and everything. It could take many forms.”

Congressional Republicans have held dozens of votes over the years to try to repeal the law. They were unable to get it done in 2017 after Trump became president, even though they held both chambers and the White House, in large part because some GOP lawmakers wouldn’t support legislation they said would cause such a marked increase in the uninsured rate.

Similar opposition to revamping the law could emerge again, especially because polls show the ACA’s protections are popular.

While neither Trump nor his GOP allies have elaborated on what they would change, House Speaker Mike Johnson said last month that the ACA needs “massive reform” and would be on the party’s agenda should Trump win.

Congress could theoretically change the ACA without a single Democratic vote, using a process known as “reconciliation.” The narrow margins by which Republicans control the House and Senate mean just a handful of “no” votes could sink that effort, though.

Many of the more ambitious goals would require Congress. Some conservatives have called for changing the funding formula for Medicaid, a federal-state government health insurance program for low-income and disabled people. The idea would be to use budget reconciliation to gain lawmakers’ approval to reduce the share paid by the federal government for the expansion population. The group that would be most affected is made up largely of higher-income adults and adults who don’t have children rather than “traditional” Medicaid beneficiaries such as pregnant women, children, and people with disabilities.

A conservative idea that would let individuals use ACA subsidies for plans on the exchange that don’t comply with the health law would likely require Congress. That could cause healthier people to use the subsidies to buy cheaper and skimpier plans, raising premiums for older and sicker consumers who need more comprehensive coverage.

“It’s similar to an ACA repeal plan,” said Cynthia Cox, a vice president and the director of the Affordable Care Act program at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News. “It’s repeal with a different name.”

Congress would likely be needed to enact a proposal to shift a portion of consumers’ ACA subsidies to health savings accounts to pay for eligible medical expenses.

Trump could also opt to bypass Congress. He did so during his previous tenure, when the Department of Health and Human Services invited states to apply for waivers to change the way their Medicaid programs were paid for — capping federal funds in exchange for more state flexibility in running the program. Waivers have been popular among both blue and red states for making other changes to Medicaid.

“Trump will do whatever he thinks he can get away with,” said Chris Edelson, an assistant professor of government at American University. “If he wants to do something, he’ll just do it.”

Republicans have another option to weaken the ACA: They can simply do nothing. Temporary, enhanced subsidies that reduce premium costs — and contributed to the nation’s lowest uninsured rate on record — are set to expire at the end of next year without congressional action. Premiums would then double or more, on average, for subsidized consumers in 12 states who enrolled using the federal ACA exchange, according to data from KFF.

That would mean fewer people could afford coverage on the ACA exchanges. And while the number of people covered by employer plans would likely increase, an additional 1.7 million uninsured individuals are projected each year from 2024 to 2033, according to federal estimates.

Many of the states that would be most affected, including Texas and Florida, are represented by Republicans in Congress, which could give some lawmakers pause about letting the subsidies lapse.

The Trump administration could opt to stop defending the law against suits seeking to topple parts of it. One of the most notable cases challenges the ACA requirement that insurers cover some preventive services, such as cancer screenings and alcohol use counseling, at no cost. About 150 million people now benefit from the coverage requirement.

If the Department of Justice were to withdraw its petition after Trump takes office, the plaintiffs would not have to observe the coverage requirement — which could inspire similar challenges, with broader implications. A recent Supreme Court ruling left the door open to legal challenges by other employers and insurers seeking the same relief, said Zachary Baron, a director of Georgetown University’s Center for Health Policy and the Law.

In the meantime, Trump could initiate changes from his first day in the Oval Office through executive orders, which are directives that have the force of law.

“The early executive orders will give us a sense of policies that the administration plans to pursue,” said Allison Orris, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “Early signaling through executive orders will send a message about what guidance, regulations, and policy could follow.”

In fact, Trump relied heavily on these orders during his previous term: An October 2017 order directed federal agencies to begin modifying the ACA and ultimately increased consumer access to health plans that didn’t comply with the law. He could issue similar orders early on in his new term, using them to start the process of compelling changes to the law, such as stepped-up oversight of potential fraud.

The administration could early on take other steps that work against the ACA, such as curtailing federal funding for outreach and help signing up for ACA plans. Both actions depressed enrollment during the previous Trump administration.

Trump could also use regulations to implement other conservative proposals, such as increasing access to health insurance plans that don’t comply with ACA consumer protections.

The Biden administration walked back Trump’s efforts to expand what are often known as short-term health plans, disparaging the plans as “junk” insurance because they may not cover certain benefits and can deny coverage to those with a preexisting health condition.

The Trump administration is expected to use regulation to reverse Biden’s reversal, allowing consumers to keep and renew the plans for much longer.

But drafting regulations has become far more complicated following a Supreme Court ruling saying federal courts no longer have to defer to federal agencies facing a legal challenge to their authority. In its wake, any rules from a Trump-era HHS could draw more efforts to block them in the courts.

Some people with ACA plans say they’re concerned. Dylan Reed, a 43-year-old small-business owner from Loveland, Colorado, remembers the days before the ACA — and doesn’t want to go back to a time when insurance was hard to get and afford.

In addition to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and anxiety, he has scleroderma, an autoimmune disease associated with joint pain and numbness in the extremities. Even with his ACA plan, he estimates, he pays about $1,000 a month for medications alone.

He worries that without the protections of the ACA it will be hard to find coverage with his preexisting conditions.

“It’s definitely a terrifying thought,” Reed said. “I would probably survive. I would just be in a lot of pain.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry Archives - KFF Health News

Related Posts:

Nearly All Vermonters Have Health Insurance, but Care Is Tough To Find

Almost all people have health insurance in Vermont, a state famed for its maple syrup and Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, yet residents pay the nation’s highest insurance premiums for individual coverage and endure months-long waits for care — and most hospitals here are losing money, according to state reports and interviews with residents and industry officials.

For more than 15 years, federal and state policymakers have focused on increasing the number of people insured, which they expected would shore up hospital finances and make care more available and affordable.

“Vermont’s struggles are a wake-up call that insurance is only one piece of the puzzle to ensuring access to care,” said Keith Mueller, a rural health expert at the University of Iowa.

Regulators and consultants say the state’s small, aging population of about 650,000 makes spreading insurance risk difficult. That demographic challenge is compounded by geography, as many Vermonters live in rural areas, where it’s difficult to attract more health workers to address shortages.

Unlike most states, Vermont regulates hospital and insurance prices through an independent agency, the Green Mountain Care Board. Until recently, the board typically approved whatever price changes companies wanted, said Julie Wasserman, a health consultant in Vermont.

In September, Bruce Hamory, a consultant hired by the board, recommended changes including potentially converting four rural hospitals into outpatient facilities and consolidating specialty services at others.

He cautioned that any fix would require sacrifices from everyone, including patients. “There is no simple single policy solution.”

Lynne Drevik, who runs an inn and spa in northern Vermont, said her doctor told her in April that she needed knee replacement surgeries — but the earliest appointment would be in January for one knee and next April for the other.

Drevik said it hurts to climb the stairs in her 19th century farmhouse. “My life is on hold here, and it’s hard to make any plans.”

Andy Kehler often worries about the cost of providing health insurance to the 85 workers at Jasper Hill Farm, the cheesemaking business he co-owns in northern Vermont. The company pays half the cost of workers’ health insurance premiums because that’s all it can afford, he said.

“It’s an issue every year for us, and it looks like there is no end in sight,” he said.

Recent data shows the University of Vermont Health Network controls about two-thirds of the state’s hospital market, and its main facility, the University of Vermont Medical Center in Burlington, has some of the highest prices nationwide.

Hospital officials contend their prices are average for the industry.

But for 2025, the Green Mountain Care Board required the Burlington hospital to cut the prices it bills private insurers by 1 percent.

The nonprofit system says it is navigating its own challenges, including a lack of housing to recruit workers and a shortage of mental health providers, nursing homes and long-term care services, which often creates delays in discharging patients, adding to costs.

This article is not available for syndication due to republishing restrictions. If you have questions about the availability of this or other content for republication, please contact NewsWeb@kff.org.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry Archives - KFF Health News

Related Posts:

Listen: A Tussle With a Rattlesnake Can Take a Bite Out of Your Wallet

After their younger son was bitten by a rattlesnake and ended up in the pediatric intensive care unit, a San Diego couple received a huge bill. Listen to hear why antivenom is so expensive.

This spring, a San Diego toddler spent two days in a pediatric intensive care unit after a rattlesnake bit his hand in his family’s backyard.

The bills that followed were staggering, with the lifesaving antivenom the 2-year-old needed accounting for more than two-thirds of the total cost — $213,000.

Why is antivenom so expensive? One explanation is the markup hospitals add to balance overhead costs and make money. Another explanation is a lack of meaningful competition. There are only two rattlesnake antivenoms approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

Stacie Dusetzina, a professor of health policy at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, said it can be difficult to sort out drug pricing because a hospital bill is often an instrument insurers and hospitals use to negotiate prices. Patients such as the Pfeffers often get stuck in the middle.

“When you see the word ‘charges,’ that’s a made-up number. That isn’t connected at all, usually, to what the actual drug cost,” Dusetzina said.

Read more here.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).



from Health Industry Archives - KFF Health News

Related Posts: