User login
Affordable Care Act Provides Two-Year Increase in Medicaid Payments for Primary-Care Services
Some hospitalist groups can expect a bump in total revenue over the next two years, thanks to the Medicaid-to-Medicare parity regulation that was included in the Affordable Care Act. But whether the increase in reimbursement lasts beyond 2014 is anyone’s guess.
The regulation, which the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released in November and made effective Jan. 1, increases Medicaid payments for certain primary-care services to 100% of Medicare levels this year and next. States will receive an estimated $11 billion over the next two years to fund the program, according to the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP). Eligible providers include physicians, physician assistants (PAs), and nurse practitioners (NPs), who self-attest they are board-certified in family, pediatric, or general internal medicine; it also includes those doctors, PAs, or NPs who self-attest that at least 60% of all Medicaid services they bill or provide in a managed-care environment are for specific evaluation and management (E&M) and vaccine administration codes.1
The concept is to boost Medicaid participation by improving historically lagging reimbursement rates.2 To wit, CMS’ Office of the Actuary estimates the parity rule will add more than 10,000 new primary-care physicians (PCPs) to the Medicaid participation ranks.3
SHM Public Policy Committee member Brad Flansbaum, DO, MPH, SFHM, says that hospitalists who deal with Medicaid populations can expect at least some increase in their revenue over the next two years. For example, he says, take an HM group earning $100,000 a year in Medicaid revenue. Now consider Urban Institute figures that show, in 2012, Medicaid physician fees on average were 66% of Medicare physician fees (with wide state variations). The parity rule now pays that hypothetical HM group about $150,000.
“It’s simple math,” Dr. Flansbaum says. “I would emphasize that the bump in pay is going to be proportional to the percentage of Medicaid patients that you see. There are some doctors who see an awful lot of Medicaid patients in safety-net and public hospitals, and that money, when it comes back to departments and divisions, can be used for things that a lot of these places never had the means to do before. It could be salary, but it could also mean hiring more people, more resources. It makes a difference.”
Public Policy Committee chair Ron Greeno, MD, FCCP, MHM, says SHM advocated for the parity regulation, as Medicaid has historically paid for only about 70% of the healthcare delivered to patients. Although the parity issue has not gathered as much attention as other facets of the healthcare reform movement, having CMS recognize that delivery of primary care is not restricted to traditional offices is one he and SHM are particularly proud of.
“This is a correction long in coming,” Dr. Greeno says. “We’re happy hospitalists were included in the group of people that will achieve that parity.”
Dr. Flansbaum, director of hospitalist services at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, says few physicians are even aware of the provision, in part because of a widespread frustration with Medicaid’s historic reimbursements rates.
“It’s almost a foregone conclusion that Medicaid never pays, reimbursement always goes down, and the interactions with Medicaid are always increasingly difficult,” Dr. Flansbaum adds.
The question for physicians and policy wonks now is what happens to the parity regulation after its scheduled expiration Dec. 31, 2014. Several medical societies, including SHM and the American College of Physicians (ACP), lobbied Congress to make sure the parity regulation was not impacted by the “fiscal cliff” negotiations. The next step is to craft a permanent funding source to pay for it.
“Unless Congress acts to permanently extend and fund this provision, a sudden return to disparate and inadequate payment for primary services needed by Medicaid patients after only two years will again threaten to restrict their access to such needed services,” AAFP said in a statement after the rule was implemented. “It would once again shut out people who have come to know and depend on their primary care physicians. Only by extending Medicaid parity with Medicare can we ensure that these Americans continue to have uninterrupted medical care in the future.”
—Brad Flansbaum, DO, MPH, SFHM, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York City, SHM Public Policy Committee member
SHM recommended that CMS work with the states to facilitate timely data collection designed to determine the effects on the quality and efficiency of care being received under Medicaid as a result of the enhanced fees. CMS agreed with this recommendation and the resulting data, hopefully, will make the case for continuing the enhanced payment following 2014.
Dr. Flansbaum says SHM’s policy team will continue to work on the issue, but given the precarious state of federal budgets and political dysfunction in Washington, it’s too early to know whether a funding source will be identified to pay for parity in 2015 and beyond—especially as politicians have yet to craft long-term solutions to issues including the sustainable-growth rate formula and other specialists, including radiologists and obstetricians, lobby to be eligible for the parity pay. However, he is hopeful that physicians who see the added impact of parity pay in the next two years will lobby Congress to find a way to continue the higher reimbursement.
“I can’t tell you whether or not when you put on the scale of all the priorities whether it’s going to be a new Air Force bomber, another $50 billion into Medicare for physicians, or an educational system upgrade,” he says. “I don’t know where the government is going to assign its priorities. Will the money be there to extend both the two-year Medicaid and the reprieve? And if the answer is yes, will it be extended to other providers beyond just primary-care practitioners? It’s anyone’s guess.”
Richard Quinn is a freelance writer in New Jersey.
References
- FAQ: Medicaid/Medicare Parity Regulation. Society of Hospital Medicine website. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/Images/Advocacy_Image/pdf/Parity_FAQ_Final.pdf. Accessed Jan. 27, 2013.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicaid program; payments for services furnished by certain primary care physicians and charges for vaccine administration under the Vaccines for Children program. Federal Register website. Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-11-06/pdf/2012-26507.pdf. Accessed Jan. 15, 2013.
- Bindman A. JAMA Forum: Warning: Dangerous physician payment cliffs ahead. Journal of the American Medical Association website. Available at: http://newsatjama.jama.com/2013/01/10/jama-forum-warning-dangerous-physician-payment-cliffs-ahead/.Accessed Jan. 15, 2013.
Some hospitalist groups can expect a bump in total revenue over the next two years, thanks to the Medicaid-to-Medicare parity regulation that was included in the Affordable Care Act. But whether the increase in reimbursement lasts beyond 2014 is anyone’s guess.
The regulation, which the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released in November and made effective Jan. 1, increases Medicaid payments for certain primary-care services to 100% of Medicare levels this year and next. States will receive an estimated $11 billion over the next two years to fund the program, according to the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP). Eligible providers include physicians, physician assistants (PAs), and nurse practitioners (NPs), who self-attest they are board-certified in family, pediatric, or general internal medicine; it also includes those doctors, PAs, or NPs who self-attest that at least 60% of all Medicaid services they bill or provide in a managed-care environment are for specific evaluation and management (E&M) and vaccine administration codes.1
The concept is to boost Medicaid participation by improving historically lagging reimbursement rates.2 To wit, CMS’ Office of the Actuary estimates the parity rule will add more than 10,000 new primary-care physicians (PCPs) to the Medicaid participation ranks.3
SHM Public Policy Committee member Brad Flansbaum, DO, MPH, SFHM, says that hospitalists who deal with Medicaid populations can expect at least some increase in their revenue over the next two years. For example, he says, take an HM group earning $100,000 a year in Medicaid revenue. Now consider Urban Institute figures that show, in 2012, Medicaid physician fees on average were 66% of Medicare physician fees (with wide state variations). The parity rule now pays that hypothetical HM group about $150,000.
“It’s simple math,” Dr. Flansbaum says. “I would emphasize that the bump in pay is going to be proportional to the percentage of Medicaid patients that you see. There are some doctors who see an awful lot of Medicaid patients in safety-net and public hospitals, and that money, when it comes back to departments and divisions, can be used for things that a lot of these places never had the means to do before. It could be salary, but it could also mean hiring more people, more resources. It makes a difference.”
Public Policy Committee chair Ron Greeno, MD, FCCP, MHM, says SHM advocated for the parity regulation, as Medicaid has historically paid for only about 70% of the healthcare delivered to patients. Although the parity issue has not gathered as much attention as other facets of the healthcare reform movement, having CMS recognize that delivery of primary care is not restricted to traditional offices is one he and SHM are particularly proud of.
“This is a correction long in coming,” Dr. Greeno says. “We’re happy hospitalists were included in the group of people that will achieve that parity.”
Dr. Flansbaum, director of hospitalist services at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, says few physicians are even aware of the provision, in part because of a widespread frustration with Medicaid’s historic reimbursements rates.
“It’s almost a foregone conclusion that Medicaid never pays, reimbursement always goes down, and the interactions with Medicaid are always increasingly difficult,” Dr. Flansbaum adds.
The question for physicians and policy wonks now is what happens to the parity regulation after its scheduled expiration Dec. 31, 2014. Several medical societies, including SHM and the American College of Physicians (ACP), lobbied Congress to make sure the parity regulation was not impacted by the “fiscal cliff” negotiations. The next step is to craft a permanent funding source to pay for it.
“Unless Congress acts to permanently extend and fund this provision, a sudden return to disparate and inadequate payment for primary services needed by Medicaid patients after only two years will again threaten to restrict their access to such needed services,” AAFP said in a statement after the rule was implemented. “It would once again shut out people who have come to know and depend on their primary care physicians. Only by extending Medicaid parity with Medicare can we ensure that these Americans continue to have uninterrupted medical care in the future.”
—Brad Flansbaum, DO, MPH, SFHM, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York City, SHM Public Policy Committee member
SHM recommended that CMS work with the states to facilitate timely data collection designed to determine the effects on the quality and efficiency of care being received under Medicaid as a result of the enhanced fees. CMS agreed with this recommendation and the resulting data, hopefully, will make the case for continuing the enhanced payment following 2014.
Dr. Flansbaum says SHM’s policy team will continue to work on the issue, but given the precarious state of federal budgets and political dysfunction in Washington, it’s too early to know whether a funding source will be identified to pay for parity in 2015 and beyond—especially as politicians have yet to craft long-term solutions to issues including the sustainable-growth rate formula and other specialists, including radiologists and obstetricians, lobby to be eligible for the parity pay. However, he is hopeful that physicians who see the added impact of parity pay in the next two years will lobby Congress to find a way to continue the higher reimbursement.
“I can’t tell you whether or not when you put on the scale of all the priorities whether it’s going to be a new Air Force bomber, another $50 billion into Medicare for physicians, or an educational system upgrade,” he says. “I don’t know where the government is going to assign its priorities. Will the money be there to extend both the two-year Medicaid and the reprieve? And if the answer is yes, will it be extended to other providers beyond just primary-care practitioners? It’s anyone’s guess.”
Richard Quinn is a freelance writer in New Jersey.
References
- FAQ: Medicaid/Medicare Parity Regulation. Society of Hospital Medicine website. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/Images/Advocacy_Image/pdf/Parity_FAQ_Final.pdf. Accessed Jan. 27, 2013.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicaid program; payments for services furnished by certain primary care physicians and charges for vaccine administration under the Vaccines for Children program. Federal Register website. Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-11-06/pdf/2012-26507.pdf. Accessed Jan. 15, 2013.
- Bindman A. JAMA Forum: Warning: Dangerous physician payment cliffs ahead. Journal of the American Medical Association website. Available at: http://newsatjama.jama.com/2013/01/10/jama-forum-warning-dangerous-physician-payment-cliffs-ahead/.Accessed Jan. 15, 2013.
Some hospitalist groups can expect a bump in total revenue over the next two years, thanks to the Medicaid-to-Medicare parity regulation that was included in the Affordable Care Act. But whether the increase in reimbursement lasts beyond 2014 is anyone’s guess.
The regulation, which the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released in November and made effective Jan. 1, increases Medicaid payments for certain primary-care services to 100% of Medicare levels this year and next. States will receive an estimated $11 billion over the next two years to fund the program, according to the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP). Eligible providers include physicians, physician assistants (PAs), and nurse practitioners (NPs), who self-attest they are board-certified in family, pediatric, or general internal medicine; it also includes those doctors, PAs, or NPs who self-attest that at least 60% of all Medicaid services they bill or provide in a managed-care environment are for specific evaluation and management (E&M) and vaccine administration codes.1
The concept is to boost Medicaid participation by improving historically lagging reimbursement rates.2 To wit, CMS’ Office of the Actuary estimates the parity rule will add more than 10,000 new primary-care physicians (PCPs) to the Medicaid participation ranks.3
SHM Public Policy Committee member Brad Flansbaum, DO, MPH, SFHM, says that hospitalists who deal with Medicaid populations can expect at least some increase in their revenue over the next two years. For example, he says, take an HM group earning $100,000 a year in Medicaid revenue. Now consider Urban Institute figures that show, in 2012, Medicaid physician fees on average were 66% of Medicare physician fees (with wide state variations). The parity rule now pays that hypothetical HM group about $150,000.
“It’s simple math,” Dr. Flansbaum says. “I would emphasize that the bump in pay is going to be proportional to the percentage of Medicaid patients that you see. There are some doctors who see an awful lot of Medicaid patients in safety-net and public hospitals, and that money, when it comes back to departments and divisions, can be used for things that a lot of these places never had the means to do before. It could be salary, but it could also mean hiring more people, more resources. It makes a difference.”
Public Policy Committee chair Ron Greeno, MD, FCCP, MHM, says SHM advocated for the parity regulation, as Medicaid has historically paid for only about 70% of the healthcare delivered to patients. Although the parity issue has not gathered as much attention as other facets of the healthcare reform movement, having CMS recognize that delivery of primary care is not restricted to traditional offices is one he and SHM are particularly proud of.
“This is a correction long in coming,” Dr. Greeno says. “We’re happy hospitalists were included in the group of people that will achieve that parity.”
Dr. Flansbaum, director of hospitalist services at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, says few physicians are even aware of the provision, in part because of a widespread frustration with Medicaid’s historic reimbursements rates.
“It’s almost a foregone conclusion that Medicaid never pays, reimbursement always goes down, and the interactions with Medicaid are always increasingly difficult,” Dr. Flansbaum adds.
The question for physicians and policy wonks now is what happens to the parity regulation after its scheduled expiration Dec. 31, 2014. Several medical societies, including SHM and the American College of Physicians (ACP), lobbied Congress to make sure the parity regulation was not impacted by the “fiscal cliff” negotiations. The next step is to craft a permanent funding source to pay for it.
“Unless Congress acts to permanently extend and fund this provision, a sudden return to disparate and inadequate payment for primary services needed by Medicaid patients after only two years will again threaten to restrict their access to such needed services,” AAFP said in a statement after the rule was implemented. “It would once again shut out people who have come to know and depend on their primary care physicians. Only by extending Medicaid parity with Medicare can we ensure that these Americans continue to have uninterrupted medical care in the future.”
—Brad Flansbaum, DO, MPH, SFHM, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York City, SHM Public Policy Committee member
SHM recommended that CMS work with the states to facilitate timely data collection designed to determine the effects on the quality and efficiency of care being received under Medicaid as a result of the enhanced fees. CMS agreed with this recommendation and the resulting data, hopefully, will make the case for continuing the enhanced payment following 2014.
Dr. Flansbaum says SHM’s policy team will continue to work on the issue, but given the precarious state of federal budgets and political dysfunction in Washington, it’s too early to know whether a funding source will be identified to pay for parity in 2015 and beyond—especially as politicians have yet to craft long-term solutions to issues including the sustainable-growth rate formula and other specialists, including radiologists and obstetricians, lobby to be eligible for the parity pay. However, he is hopeful that physicians who see the added impact of parity pay in the next two years will lobby Congress to find a way to continue the higher reimbursement.
“I can’t tell you whether or not when you put on the scale of all the priorities whether it’s going to be a new Air Force bomber, another $50 billion into Medicare for physicians, or an educational system upgrade,” he says. “I don’t know where the government is going to assign its priorities. Will the money be there to extend both the two-year Medicaid and the reprieve? And if the answer is yes, will it be extended to other providers beyond just primary-care practitioners? It’s anyone’s guess.”
Richard Quinn is a freelance writer in New Jersey.
References
- FAQ: Medicaid/Medicare Parity Regulation. Society of Hospital Medicine website. Available at: http://www.hospitalmedicine.org/AM/Images/Advocacy_Image/pdf/Parity_FAQ_Final.pdf. Accessed Jan. 27, 2013.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicaid program; payments for services furnished by certain primary care physicians and charges for vaccine administration under the Vaccines for Children program. Federal Register website. Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-11-06/pdf/2012-26507.pdf. Accessed Jan. 15, 2013.
- Bindman A. JAMA Forum: Warning: Dangerous physician payment cliffs ahead. Journal of the American Medical Association website. Available at: http://newsatjama.jama.com/2013/01/10/jama-forum-warning-dangerous-physician-payment-cliffs-ahead/.Accessed Jan. 15, 2013.
Hospital Medicine Group Leaders Strive to Balance Administrative, Clinical Tasks
Balance Is Key to HM Group Leaders’ Clinical Load
Should the leader of my hospitalist group have a lighter clinical load?
Cheryl Clinkenbeard, DO, MPH, Bartlesville, Okla.
Dr. Hospitalist responds:
This is an incredibly tough question, and it applies to pretty much every hospitalist program in existence. Big, small, private, teaching—every program needs leaders.
For starters, being a hospitalist program leader is generally a thankless job. It involves a heck of a lot of meetings, administrative hassles, and parsing of complaints. In my experience, it also tends to be a horrifically underpaid position. There generally is no waiting list of clinicians begging to be the group leader. Given all the time demands, I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect a leader to have a lighter clinical load. There is no way to fulfill both clinical and administrative duties while working full time, unless the group is very small (less than six FTEs). On the other hand, having a leader do no clinical work is pretty much a recipe for disaster. If your group leader is a clinician and does a lot less, or no clinical work, they will lose credibility with colleagues quickly. Group leaders focused solely on administration also lose sight of the day-to-day morale and activem issues facing the group.
The crux is trying to find the balance between admin and clinical duties. I think it is preferable to have a leader work fewer shifts but take an equivalent clinical load on those days. That allows group leaders to be viewed as “one of the team,” with the same shift responsibilities as everyone else—just not as many shifts. It’s a better way to understand the day-to-day variations and concerns of the job.
The other option is to have the leader work the same number of shifts but take a smaller census. I think this is a bad idea, mainly from the standpoint that HM is nothing if not unpredictable, and trying to protect one person’s census on a busy day is an impossible task. Either the leader will end up taking on too much clinical work (to help even the census) or the rest of the group will feel bitter that the group leader is not always available to help. I’ve seen both sides of this equation, and it is just not a good working environment.
Another factor to consider are the “undesirable” shifts. Whether it is nights or weekends, there are always shifts that folks would rather not do. A leader should continue to work these shifts, even at a reduced number, for the same reasons. Becoming an HM leader is not an excuse to design the perfect, protected schedule at the expense of the other physicians.
On balance, I think the hospitalist group leader ends up with more work, similar schedule obligations, and an inadequate pay structure. That does not make the position particularly attractive, as has been my experience over the years. However, given the opportunity to modify those variables, I think the shifts should be kept “whole” and reduced only in number, with the remainder of the compensation for the work coming in the form of increased pay. How much, you ask? Well, have a seat; this could take a while.
Balance Is Key to HM Group Leaders’ Clinical Load
Should the leader of my hospitalist group have a lighter clinical load?
Cheryl Clinkenbeard, DO, MPH, Bartlesville, Okla.
Dr. Hospitalist responds:
This is an incredibly tough question, and it applies to pretty much every hospitalist program in existence. Big, small, private, teaching—every program needs leaders.
For starters, being a hospitalist program leader is generally a thankless job. It involves a heck of a lot of meetings, administrative hassles, and parsing of complaints. In my experience, it also tends to be a horrifically underpaid position. There generally is no waiting list of clinicians begging to be the group leader. Given all the time demands, I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect a leader to have a lighter clinical load. There is no way to fulfill both clinical and administrative duties while working full time, unless the group is very small (less than six FTEs). On the other hand, having a leader do no clinical work is pretty much a recipe for disaster. If your group leader is a clinician and does a lot less, or no clinical work, they will lose credibility with colleagues quickly. Group leaders focused solely on administration also lose sight of the day-to-day morale and activem issues facing the group.
The crux is trying to find the balance between admin and clinical duties. I think it is preferable to have a leader work fewer shifts but take an equivalent clinical load on those days. That allows group leaders to be viewed as “one of the team,” with the same shift responsibilities as everyone else—just not as many shifts. It’s a better way to understand the day-to-day variations and concerns of the job.
The other option is to have the leader work the same number of shifts but take a smaller census. I think this is a bad idea, mainly from the standpoint that HM is nothing if not unpredictable, and trying to protect one person’s census on a busy day is an impossible task. Either the leader will end up taking on too much clinical work (to help even the census) or the rest of the group will feel bitter that the group leader is not always available to help. I’ve seen both sides of this equation, and it is just not a good working environment.
Another factor to consider are the “undesirable” shifts. Whether it is nights or weekends, there are always shifts that folks would rather not do. A leader should continue to work these shifts, even at a reduced number, for the same reasons. Becoming an HM leader is not an excuse to design the perfect, protected schedule at the expense of the other physicians.
On balance, I think the hospitalist group leader ends up with more work, similar schedule obligations, and an inadequate pay structure. That does not make the position particularly attractive, as has been my experience over the years. However, given the opportunity to modify those variables, I think the shifts should be kept “whole” and reduced only in number, with the remainder of the compensation for the work coming in the form of increased pay. How much, you ask? Well, have a seat; this could take a while.
Balance Is Key to HM Group Leaders’ Clinical Load
Should the leader of my hospitalist group have a lighter clinical load?
Cheryl Clinkenbeard, DO, MPH, Bartlesville, Okla.
Dr. Hospitalist responds:
This is an incredibly tough question, and it applies to pretty much every hospitalist program in existence. Big, small, private, teaching—every program needs leaders.
For starters, being a hospitalist program leader is generally a thankless job. It involves a heck of a lot of meetings, administrative hassles, and parsing of complaints. In my experience, it also tends to be a horrifically underpaid position. There generally is no waiting list of clinicians begging to be the group leader. Given all the time demands, I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect a leader to have a lighter clinical load. There is no way to fulfill both clinical and administrative duties while working full time, unless the group is very small (less than six FTEs). On the other hand, having a leader do no clinical work is pretty much a recipe for disaster. If your group leader is a clinician and does a lot less, or no clinical work, they will lose credibility with colleagues quickly. Group leaders focused solely on administration also lose sight of the day-to-day morale and activem issues facing the group.
The crux is trying to find the balance between admin and clinical duties. I think it is preferable to have a leader work fewer shifts but take an equivalent clinical load on those days. That allows group leaders to be viewed as “one of the team,” with the same shift responsibilities as everyone else—just not as many shifts. It’s a better way to understand the day-to-day variations and concerns of the job.
The other option is to have the leader work the same number of shifts but take a smaller census. I think this is a bad idea, mainly from the standpoint that HM is nothing if not unpredictable, and trying to protect one person’s census on a busy day is an impossible task. Either the leader will end up taking on too much clinical work (to help even the census) or the rest of the group will feel bitter that the group leader is not always available to help. I’ve seen both sides of this equation, and it is just not a good working environment.
Another factor to consider are the “undesirable” shifts. Whether it is nights or weekends, there are always shifts that folks would rather not do. A leader should continue to work these shifts, even at a reduced number, for the same reasons. Becoming an HM leader is not an excuse to design the perfect, protected schedule at the expense of the other physicians.
On balance, I think the hospitalist group leader ends up with more work, similar schedule obligations, and an inadequate pay structure. That does not make the position particularly attractive, as has been my experience over the years. However, given the opportunity to modify those variables, I think the shifts should be kept “whole” and reduced only in number, with the remainder of the compensation for the work coming in the form of increased pay. How much, you ask? Well, have a seat; this could take a while.
Multiple Patient-Safety Events Affect 1 in 1000 Hospitalizations
Patients who experienced multiple patient-safety events—co-occurring iatrogenic events during a single stay in a U.S. hospital in 2004.6 This represents 1 out of every 1,000 hospitalizations. These patients experienced four times greater average lengths of stay and eight times greater average charges per admission.
Patients who experienced multiple patient-safety events—co-occurring iatrogenic events during a single stay in a U.S. hospital in 2004.6 This represents 1 out of every 1,000 hospitalizations. These patients experienced four times greater average lengths of stay and eight times greater average charges per admission.
Patients who experienced multiple patient-safety events—co-occurring iatrogenic events during a single stay in a U.S. hospital in 2004.6 This represents 1 out of every 1,000 hospitalizations. These patients experienced four times greater average lengths of stay and eight times greater average charges per admission.
New Anticoagulation Website Offers Guidelines, Self-Assessment Tools
In January, the Anticoagulation Forum, a nonprofit in Newton, Mass., launched “Anti-Coagulation Centers of Excellence,” a searchable resource center of guidelines and tools, including up-to-date information on novel oral anticoagulants, examples of excellence submitted by other providers, and an online self-assessment tool of anticoagulation programs’ performance. In its first month, the site (www.excellence.acforum.org) had 1,200 visitors, with about 10% of visitors attempting the self-assessment. Participating centers tend to be hospital-based outpatient clinics for patients receiving anti-thrombotic medications.
In January, the Anticoagulation Forum, a nonprofit in Newton, Mass., launched “Anti-Coagulation Centers of Excellence,” a searchable resource center of guidelines and tools, including up-to-date information on novel oral anticoagulants, examples of excellence submitted by other providers, and an online self-assessment tool of anticoagulation programs’ performance. In its first month, the site (www.excellence.acforum.org) had 1,200 visitors, with about 10% of visitors attempting the self-assessment. Participating centers tend to be hospital-based outpatient clinics for patients receiving anti-thrombotic medications.
In January, the Anticoagulation Forum, a nonprofit in Newton, Mass., launched “Anti-Coagulation Centers of Excellence,” a searchable resource center of guidelines and tools, including up-to-date information on novel oral anticoagulants, examples of excellence submitted by other providers, and an online self-assessment tool of anticoagulation programs’ performance. In its first month, the site (www.excellence.acforum.org) had 1,200 visitors, with about 10% of visitors attempting the self-assessment. Participating centers tend to be hospital-based outpatient clinics for patients receiving anti-thrombotic medications.
Special Interest Groups Target Healthcare Waste
As HM ramps up its efforts to eliminate wasteful and unnecessary medical treatments through its participation in the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) Foundation’s Choosing Wisely Campaign (choosingwisely.org), two new policy reports help to delineate the problem of waste in healthcare.
The Health Affairs health policy brief “Reducing Waste in Health Care” concludes that a third or more of U.S. healthcare spending could be considered wasteful.4 Its categories of waste include unnecessary services, inefficiently delivered services, excessive prices and administrative costs, fraud, and abuse—along with a handful of categories familiar to hospitalists: failures of care coordination, avoidable hospital readmissions, and missed prevention opportunities.
The policy brief offers potential solutions, including increased provider use of digital data to improve care coordination and delivery, and heightened transparency of provider performance for consumers.
On Jan. 10, the Commonwealth Fund proposed a new set of strategies to slow health spending growth by $2 trillion dollars over the next 10 years.5 The report outlines a broad set of policies to change the way healthcare is paid for, accelerating a variety of delivery system innovations already under way; disseminate better quality and cost information to enhance consumers’ ability to choose high-value care; and address the market forces that drive up costs.
“We know that by innovating and coordinating care, our healthcare system can provide better care at lower cost,” Commonwealth Fund president David Blumenthal, MD, said in the report.
References
- Health Affairs. Health Policy Brief: Reducing Waste in Health Care. Health Affairs website. Available at: http://www.healthaffairs.org/healthpolicybriefs/brief.php?brief_id=82. Accessed Jan. 10, 2013.
- The Commonwealth Fund Commission on a High Performance Health System. Confronting Costs: Stabilizing U.S. Health Spending While Moving Toward a High Performance Health Care System. The Commonwealth Fund website. Available at: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Publications/Fund-Reports/2013/Jan/Confronting-Costs.aspx?page=all. Accessed Feb. 2, 2013.
As HM ramps up its efforts to eliminate wasteful and unnecessary medical treatments through its participation in the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) Foundation’s Choosing Wisely Campaign (choosingwisely.org), two new policy reports help to delineate the problem of waste in healthcare.
The Health Affairs health policy brief “Reducing Waste in Health Care” concludes that a third or more of U.S. healthcare spending could be considered wasteful.4 Its categories of waste include unnecessary services, inefficiently delivered services, excessive prices and administrative costs, fraud, and abuse—along with a handful of categories familiar to hospitalists: failures of care coordination, avoidable hospital readmissions, and missed prevention opportunities.
The policy brief offers potential solutions, including increased provider use of digital data to improve care coordination and delivery, and heightened transparency of provider performance for consumers.
On Jan. 10, the Commonwealth Fund proposed a new set of strategies to slow health spending growth by $2 trillion dollars over the next 10 years.5 The report outlines a broad set of policies to change the way healthcare is paid for, accelerating a variety of delivery system innovations already under way; disseminate better quality and cost information to enhance consumers’ ability to choose high-value care; and address the market forces that drive up costs.
“We know that by innovating and coordinating care, our healthcare system can provide better care at lower cost,” Commonwealth Fund president David Blumenthal, MD, said in the report.
References
- Health Affairs. Health Policy Brief: Reducing Waste in Health Care. Health Affairs website. Available at: http://www.healthaffairs.org/healthpolicybriefs/brief.php?brief_id=82. Accessed Jan. 10, 2013.
- The Commonwealth Fund Commission on a High Performance Health System. Confronting Costs: Stabilizing U.S. Health Spending While Moving Toward a High Performance Health Care System. The Commonwealth Fund website. Available at: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Publications/Fund-Reports/2013/Jan/Confronting-Costs.aspx?page=all. Accessed Feb. 2, 2013.
As HM ramps up its efforts to eliminate wasteful and unnecessary medical treatments through its participation in the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) Foundation’s Choosing Wisely Campaign (choosingwisely.org), two new policy reports help to delineate the problem of waste in healthcare.
The Health Affairs health policy brief “Reducing Waste in Health Care” concludes that a third or more of U.S. healthcare spending could be considered wasteful.4 Its categories of waste include unnecessary services, inefficiently delivered services, excessive prices and administrative costs, fraud, and abuse—along with a handful of categories familiar to hospitalists: failures of care coordination, avoidable hospital readmissions, and missed prevention opportunities.
The policy brief offers potential solutions, including increased provider use of digital data to improve care coordination and delivery, and heightened transparency of provider performance for consumers.
On Jan. 10, the Commonwealth Fund proposed a new set of strategies to slow health spending growth by $2 trillion dollars over the next 10 years.5 The report outlines a broad set of policies to change the way healthcare is paid for, accelerating a variety of delivery system innovations already under way; disseminate better quality and cost information to enhance consumers’ ability to choose high-value care; and address the market forces that drive up costs.
“We know that by innovating and coordinating care, our healthcare system can provide better care at lower cost,” Commonwealth Fund president David Blumenthal, MD, said in the report.
References
- Health Affairs. Health Policy Brief: Reducing Waste in Health Care. Health Affairs website. Available at: http://www.healthaffairs.org/healthpolicybriefs/brief.php?brief_id=82. Accessed Jan. 10, 2013.
- The Commonwealth Fund Commission on a High Performance Health System. Confronting Costs: Stabilizing U.S. Health Spending While Moving Toward a High Performance Health Care System. The Commonwealth Fund website. Available at: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Publications/Fund-Reports/2013/Jan/Confronting-Costs.aspx?page=all. Accessed Feb. 2, 2013.
Post-Hospital Syndrome Contributes to Readmission Risk for Elderly
Post-hospital syndrome, as labeled in a recent, widely publicized opinion piece in the New England Journal of Medicine, is not a new concept, according to one hospitalist pioneer.1
Harlan Krumholz, MD, of the Yale School of Medicine in New Haven, Conn., writes in NEJM what others previously have described as “hospitalization-associated disability,” says Mark Williams, MD, MHM, chief of hospital medicine at Northwestern University School of Medicine and principal investigator of SHM’s Project BOOST (www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost).2
Dr. Krumholz found that the majority of 30-day readmissions for elderly patients with heart failure, pneumonia, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are for conditions other than the diagnosis named at discharge. He attributes this phenomenon to hospitalization-related sleep deprivation, malnourishment, pain and discomfort, cognition- and physical function-altering medications, deconditioning from bed rest or inactivity, and the experience of confronting stressful, mentally challenging situations in the hospital.1 Such stressors leave elderly patients with post-hospitalization disabilities comparable to a bad case of jet lag.
For Dr. Williams, the physical deterioration leading to rehospitalizations is better attributed to the underlying serious illness and comorbidities experienced by elderly patients—a kind of high-risk, post-illness syndrome. Prior research also has demonstrated the effects of bed rest for hospitalized elderly patients.
Regardless of the origins, is there anything hospitalists can do about this syndrome? “Absolutely,” Dr. Williams says. “Get elderly, hospitalized patients out of bed as quickly as possible, and be mindful of medications and their effects on elderly patients. But most hospitalists already think about these things when managing elderly patients.”
References
Post-hospital syndrome, as labeled in a recent, widely publicized opinion piece in the New England Journal of Medicine, is not a new concept, according to one hospitalist pioneer.1
Harlan Krumholz, MD, of the Yale School of Medicine in New Haven, Conn., writes in NEJM what others previously have described as “hospitalization-associated disability,” says Mark Williams, MD, MHM, chief of hospital medicine at Northwestern University School of Medicine and principal investigator of SHM’s Project BOOST (www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost).2
Dr. Krumholz found that the majority of 30-day readmissions for elderly patients with heart failure, pneumonia, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are for conditions other than the diagnosis named at discharge. He attributes this phenomenon to hospitalization-related sleep deprivation, malnourishment, pain and discomfort, cognition- and physical function-altering medications, deconditioning from bed rest or inactivity, and the experience of confronting stressful, mentally challenging situations in the hospital.1 Such stressors leave elderly patients with post-hospitalization disabilities comparable to a bad case of jet lag.
For Dr. Williams, the physical deterioration leading to rehospitalizations is better attributed to the underlying serious illness and comorbidities experienced by elderly patients—a kind of high-risk, post-illness syndrome. Prior research also has demonstrated the effects of bed rest for hospitalized elderly patients.
Regardless of the origins, is there anything hospitalists can do about this syndrome? “Absolutely,” Dr. Williams says. “Get elderly, hospitalized patients out of bed as quickly as possible, and be mindful of medications and their effects on elderly patients. But most hospitalists already think about these things when managing elderly patients.”
References
Post-hospital syndrome, as labeled in a recent, widely publicized opinion piece in the New England Journal of Medicine, is not a new concept, according to one hospitalist pioneer.1
Harlan Krumholz, MD, of the Yale School of Medicine in New Haven, Conn., writes in NEJM what others previously have described as “hospitalization-associated disability,” says Mark Williams, MD, MHM, chief of hospital medicine at Northwestern University School of Medicine and principal investigator of SHM’s Project BOOST (www.hospitalmedicine.org/boost).2
Dr. Krumholz found that the majority of 30-day readmissions for elderly patients with heart failure, pneumonia, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are for conditions other than the diagnosis named at discharge. He attributes this phenomenon to hospitalization-related sleep deprivation, malnourishment, pain and discomfort, cognition- and physical function-altering medications, deconditioning from bed rest or inactivity, and the experience of confronting stressful, mentally challenging situations in the hospital.1 Such stressors leave elderly patients with post-hospitalization disabilities comparable to a bad case of jet lag.
For Dr. Williams, the physical deterioration leading to rehospitalizations is better attributed to the underlying serious illness and comorbidities experienced by elderly patients—a kind of high-risk, post-illness syndrome. Prior research also has demonstrated the effects of bed rest for hospitalized elderly patients.
Regardless of the origins, is there anything hospitalists can do about this syndrome? “Absolutely,” Dr. Williams says. “Get elderly, hospitalized patients out of bed as quickly as possible, and be mindful of medications and their effects on elderly patients. But most hospitalists already think about these things when managing elderly patients.”
References
Automated Hospital Inpatient Assignment Program Increases Efficiency, Coordination of Care
A computerized patient assignment program to distribute new hospital admissions among 12 hospitalist-led, unit-based teams at Our Lady of the Lake Hospital in Baton Rouge, La., not only saves time and improves coordination of care, but also helps to build trust and satisfaction with patients, according to a poster presented at HM12.
Lead author and hospitalist Eric Wascome, MD, says the automated program takes into account patient medical intensity scores aggregated by hospital team in deciding who should get the next patient, thus smoothing out the referral process and minimizing hard feelings that some physicians are getting more than their fair share of work. The program also adjusts for particular units and room locations and incorporates physician preferences, then spits out the next referral within minutes. It also reduces the need to reassign rooms and allows patients to be told who their next-day hospitalist will be when they are admitted to the hospital overnight.
“It takes a complicated, head-scratching process and makes it a no-brainer,” Dr. Wascome says.
The Web-based, HIPAA-compliant program has thrived since Dr. Wascome’s presentation in April 2012. “A new twist is that we’ve added the capacity to bring in doctors who are not scheduled to work if they are needed on a voluntary basis, to address higher volumes of patients, and to have them on site within an hour,” he says.
Hospitalists say they approve of computerized patient scheduling, which was programmed by Dr. Wascome based on previous spreadsheet-based approaches to scheduling. Automation, he says, makes possible greater numbers of variables.
For more information, email Dr. Wascome at [email protected].
A computerized patient assignment program to distribute new hospital admissions among 12 hospitalist-led, unit-based teams at Our Lady of the Lake Hospital in Baton Rouge, La., not only saves time and improves coordination of care, but also helps to build trust and satisfaction with patients, according to a poster presented at HM12.
Lead author and hospitalist Eric Wascome, MD, says the automated program takes into account patient medical intensity scores aggregated by hospital team in deciding who should get the next patient, thus smoothing out the referral process and minimizing hard feelings that some physicians are getting more than their fair share of work. The program also adjusts for particular units and room locations and incorporates physician preferences, then spits out the next referral within minutes. It also reduces the need to reassign rooms and allows patients to be told who their next-day hospitalist will be when they are admitted to the hospital overnight.
“It takes a complicated, head-scratching process and makes it a no-brainer,” Dr. Wascome says.
The Web-based, HIPAA-compliant program has thrived since Dr. Wascome’s presentation in April 2012. “A new twist is that we’ve added the capacity to bring in doctors who are not scheduled to work if they are needed on a voluntary basis, to address higher volumes of patients, and to have them on site within an hour,” he says.
Hospitalists say they approve of computerized patient scheduling, which was programmed by Dr. Wascome based on previous spreadsheet-based approaches to scheduling. Automation, he says, makes possible greater numbers of variables.
For more information, email Dr. Wascome at [email protected].
A computerized patient assignment program to distribute new hospital admissions among 12 hospitalist-led, unit-based teams at Our Lady of the Lake Hospital in Baton Rouge, La., not only saves time and improves coordination of care, but also helps to build trust and satisfaction with patients, according to a poster presented at HM12.
Lead author and hospitalist Eric Wascome, MD, says the automated program takes into account patient medical intensity scores aggregated by hospital team in deciding who should get the next patient, thus smoothing out the referral process and minimizing hard feelings that some physicians are getting more than their fair share of work. The program also adjusts for particular units and room locations and incorporates physician preferences, then spits out the next referral within minutes. It also reduces the need to reassign rooms and allows patients to be told who their next-day hospitalist will be when they are admitted to the hospital overnight.
“It takes a complicated, head-scratching process and makes it a no-brainer,” Dr. Wascome says.
The Web-based, HIPAA-compliant program has thrived since Dr. Wascome’s presentation in April 2012. “A new twist is that we’ve added the capacity to bring in doctors who are not scheduled to work if they are needed on a voluntary basis, to address higher volumes of patients, and to have them on site within an hour,” he says.
Hospitalists say they approve of computerized patient scheduling, which was programmed by Dr. Wascome based on previous spreadsheet-based approaches to scheduling. Automation, he says, makes possible greater numbers of variables.
For more information, email Dr. Wascome at [email protected].
Houston Hospitalists Create Direct-Admit System
Two hospitalists in the greater Houston area have developed a computer application that streamlines the hospital admission process—a major frustration for busy, office-based primary-care physicians (PCPs).
Mujtaba Ali-Khan, DO, who has practiced at Conroe Regional Medical Center since 2009, is president of Streamlined Medical Solutions (www.streamlinedmedical.com), a company incorporated in July 2011 to market the Direct Admit System for Hospitals, or DASH.1 DASH allows referring physicians to access and submit a direct-admit form, upload medical records, and order preliminary medications and tests for the patient. Once the on-call hospitalist accepts the submitted referral, a “boarding pass” with assigned hospitalist and room number is generated for the patient to take to the hospital’s admissions department. Patients bypass the ED and avoid duplicative medical tests. The process also sends a confirmation to the PCP.
With the support of Hospital Corporation of America (HCA), Dr. Ali-Khan and his business partner, hospitalist Ali Bhuriwala, MD, piloted DASH at two HCA hospitals in Texas. It’s now on the market and has been implemented or is in the works at several others.
“When we started using DASH, we found ourselves getting all sorts of data: Who are the referring physicians, the patients’ ZIP codes, how long do admissions take?” says Dr. Ali-Khan, who adds plans are under way to expand the software’s capacity to allow PCPs to upload tests and place medical orders from the field. “We’re also developing a full suite of hospitalist communication and coordination functions on a dashboard, accessible from smartphones and text alerts, dispensing with pagers entirely.”
Watch a video about DASH at www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUG_vQgKvE0.
Reference
Two hospitalists in the greater Houston area have developed a computer application that streamlines the hospital admission process—a major frustration for busy, office-based primary-care physicians (PCPs).
Mujtaba Ali-Khan, DO, who has practiced at Conroe Regional Medical Center since 2009, is president of Streamlined Medical Solutions (www.streamlinedmedical.com), a company incorporated in July 2011 to market the Direct Admit System for Hospitals, or DASH.1 DASH allows referring physicians to access and submit a direct-admit form, upload medical records, and order preliminary medications and tests for the patient. Once the on-call hospitalist accepts the submitted referral, a “boarding pass” with assigned hospitalist and room number is generated for the patient to take to the hospital’s admissions department. Patients bypass the ED and avoid duplicative medical tests. The process also sends a confirmation to the PCP.
With the support of Hospital Corporation of America (HCA), Dr. Ali-Khan and his business partner, hospitalist Ali Bhuriwala, MD, piloted DASH at two HCA hospitals in Texas. It’s now on the market and has been implemented or is in the works at several others.
“When we started using DASH, we found ourselves getting all sorts of data: Who are the referring physicians, the patients’ ZIP codes, how long do admissions take?” says Dr. Ali-Khan, who adds plans are under way to expand the software’s capacity to allow PCPs to upload tests and place medical orders from the field. “We’re also developing a full suite of hospitalist communication and coordination functions on a dashboard, accessible from smartphones and text alerts, dispensing with pagers entirely.”
Watch a video about DASH at www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUG_vQgKvE0.
Reference
Two hospitalists in the greater Houston area have developed a computer application that streamlines the hospital admission process—a major frustration for busy, office-based primary-care physicians (PCPs).
Mujtaba Ali-Khan, DO, who has practiced at Conroe Regional Medical Center since 2009, is president of Streamlined Medical Solutions (www.streamlinedmedical.com), a company incorporated in July 2011 to market the Direct Admit System for Hospitals, or DASH.1 DASH allows referring physicians to access and submit a direct-admit form, upload medical records, and order preliminary medications and tests for the patient. Once the on-call hospitalist accepts the submitted referral, a “boarding pass” with assigned hospitalist and room number is generated for the patient to take to the hospital’s admissions department. Patients bypass the ED and avoid duplicative medical tests. The process also sends a confirmation to the PCP.
With the support of Hospital Corporation of America (HCA), Dr. Ali-Khan and his business partner, hospitalist Ali Bhuriwala, MD, piloted DASH at two HCA hospitals in Texas. It’s now on the market and has been implemented or is in the works at several others.
“When we started using DASH, we found ourselves getting all sorts of data: Who are the referring physicians, the patients’ ZIP codes, how long do admissions take?” says Dr. Ali-Khan, who adds plans are under way to expand the software’s capacity to allow PCPs to upload tests and place medical orders from the field. “We’re also developing a full suite of hospitalist communication and coordination functions on a dashboard, accessible from smartphones and text alerts, dispensing with pagers entirely.”
Watch a video about DASH at www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUG_vQgKvE0.
Reference
On being a first-year fellow and a first-year mom
For the past 2 weeks I have been on call overnight and to put it lightly, it has been brutal. Fellow call, unlike resident call, can be taken from home, but some nights it seems almost as though it would be easier to just stay at the hospital. My pager typically starts going off at 5:01 pm and does not stop until sometime after midnight. Nightly, I have been averaging a record number of admissions, consults, outpatient calls, and enough inpatient issues to keep me awake stalking labs and vitals until the early morning, just in time to get the critical lab calls from nursing.
*Click on the link to the left of this introduction for a PDF of the full article.
For the past 2 weeks I have been on call overnight and to put it lightly, it has been brutal. Fellow call, unlike resident call, can be taken from home, but some nights it seems almost as though it would be easier to just stay at the hospital. My pager typically starts going off at 5:01 pm and does not stop until sometime after midnight. Nightly, I have been averaging a record number of admissions, consults, outpatient calls, and enough inpatient issues to keep me awake stalking labs and vitals until the early morning, just in time to get the critical lab calls from nursing.
*Click on the link to the left of this introduction for a PDF of the full article.
For the past 2 weeks I have been on call overnight and to put it lightly, it has been brutal. Fellow call, unlike resident call, can be taken from home, but some nights it seems almost as though it would be easier to just stay at the hospital. My pager typically starts going off at 5:01 pm and does not stop until sometime after midnight. Nightly, I have been averaging a record number of admissions, consults, outpatient calls, and enough inpatient issues to keep me awake stalking labs and vitals until the early morning, just in time to get the critical lab calls from nursing.
*Click on the link to the left of this introduction for a PDF of the full article.
Treatment patterns in HER2-/HR-positive postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer initiating first-line treatment in a community oncology setting in the US
Background Within community oncology practices, the regimens used for treatment of postmenopausal women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2- and hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) may vary.
Objective A retrospective observational study was conducted to examine treatment patterns in HER2-/HR-positive patients initiating first-line treatment in a community oncology setting.
Methods Using US Oncology’s iKnowMed electronic health records (EHRs), postmenopausal HER2-/HR-positive patients who had been newly diagnosed with MBC between January 1, 2007 and June 30, 2010 were identified and stratified by visceral crisis.
Results We identified 347 postmenopausal HER2-/HR-positive patients, of whom 258 (74%) did not have evidence of visceral crisis. Chemotherapy plus targeted plus hormone therapy was the most frequently used treatment strategy (33%). Trastuzumab was the most frequently used HER2-targeted therapy (77% and 66% with and without visceral crisis, respectively); followed by lapatinib. Paclitaxel (24%, nonvisceral; 39% visceral) and letrozole (26%, nonvisceral; 28% visceral) were the most frequently used chemotherapy and endocrine therapies, respectively. Over time, trastuzumab use decreased whereas lapatinib use increased.
Limitation The heterogeneity in the regimens prescribed precluded large sample sizes for robust statistical analyses to link specific therapeutic combinations with outcomes.
Conclusion Community oncologists use a variety of treatments in postmenopausal women with HER2-/HR-positive MBC. Although a combination of chemotherapy, targeted HER2 therapy, and hormone therapy were the most common first-line therapies used, contrary to treatment guidelines, a large proportion of patients received no chemotherapy in the first-line setting.
*Click on the link to the left for a PDF of the full article.
Background Within community oncology practices, the regimens used for treatment of postmenopausal women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2- and hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) may vary.
Objective A retrospective observational study was conducted to examine treatment patterns in HER2-/HR-positive patients initiating first-line treatment in a community oncology setting.
Methods Using US Oncology’s iKnowMed electronic health records (EHRs), postmenopausal HER2-/HR-positive patients who had been newly diagnosed with MBC between January 1, 2007 and June 30, 2010 were identified and stratified by visceral crisis.
Results We identified 347 postmenopausal HER2-/HR-positive patients, of whom 258 (74%) did not have evidence of visceral crisis. Chemotherapy plus targeted plus hormone therapy was the most frequently used treatment strategy (33%). Trastuzumab was the most frequently used HER2-targeted therapy (77% and 66% with and without visceral crisis, respectively); followed by lapatinib. Paclitaxel (24%, nonvisceral; 39% visceral) and letrozole (26%, nonvisceral; 28% visceral) were the most frequently used chemotherapy and endocrine therapies, respectively. Over time, trastuzumab use decreased whereas lapatinib use increased.
Limitation The heterogeneity in the regimens prescribed precluded large sample sizes for robust statistical analyses to link specific therapeutic combinations with outcomes.
Conclusion Community oncologists use a variety of treatments in postmenopausal women with HER2-/HR-positive MBC. Although a combination of chemotherapy, targeted HER2 therapy, and hormone therapy were the most common first-line therapies used, contrary to treatment guidelines, a large proportion of patients received no chemotherapy in the first-line setting.
*Click on the link to the left for a PDF of the full article.
Background Within community oncology practices, the regimens used for treatment of postmenopausal women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2- and hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) may vary.
Objective A retrospective observational study was conducted to examine treatment patterns in HER2-/HR-positive patients initiating first-line treatment in a community oncology setting.
Methods Using US Oncology’s iKnowMed electronic health records (EHRs), postmenopausal HER2-/HR-positive patients who had been newly diagnosed with MBC between January 1, 2007 and June 30, 2010 were identified and stratified by visceral crisis.
Results We identified 347 postmenopausal HER2-/HR-positive patients, of whom 258 (74%) did not have evidence of visceral crisis. Chemotherapy plus targeted plus hormone therapy was the most frequently used treatment strategy (33%). Trastuzumab was the most frequently used HER2-targeted therapy (77% and 66% with and without visceral crisis, respectively); followed by lapatinib. Paclitaxel (24%, nonvisceral; 39% visceral) and letrozole (26%, nonvisceral; 28% visceral) were the most frequently used chemotherapy and endocrine therapies, respectively. Over time, trastuzumab use decreased whereas lapatinib use increased.
Limitation The heterogeneity in the regimens prescribed precluded large sample sizes for robust statistical analyses to link specific therapeutic combinations with outcomes.
Conclusion Community oncologists use a variety of treatments in postmenopausal women with HER2-/HR-positive MBC. Although a combination of chemotherapy, targeted HER2 therapy, and hormone therapy were the most common first-line therapies used, contrary to treatment guidelines, a large proportion of patients received no chemotherapy in the first-line setting.
*Click on the link to the left for a PDF of the full article.