User login
Federation issues revised draft of telemedicine compact
The Federation of State Medical Boards has released an updated draft of a proposed interstate compact that would expand the practice of telemedicine by streamlining physician licensure. The revised text includes new requirements for physicians who wish to participate in an expedited process for gaining multiple state licenses.
Under the draft, interested physicians would need to complete a background check including biometric data (fingerprints or other) and pass all components of either the U.S. Medical Licensing Examination or the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medicine Licensing Examination within three attempts.
Additional new draft language alters specialty certification requirements of the compact to clarify that those with time-unlimited certification are eligible to participate in the compact.
"The goal of the compact is to ensure that qualified physicians are able to practice medicine in a safe and accountable manner, and that the strongest health care consumer protections are maintained," Dr. Humayun J. Chaudhry, FSMB president and CEO, said in a statement. "The revised compact helps ensure that as the practice of telemedicine continues to expand, patient protection remains a top priority. We look forward to sharing the revised compact with state medical boards across the country and look forward to working with them to achieve implementation."
The FSMB House of Delegates unanimously approved the development of an interstate compact to expedite medical licensure and facilitate multistate practice at its 2013 annual meeting. Under the proposed system, states and doctors would voluntarily enter into the compact, and approved physicians would be under the jurisdiction of the state medical board in which the patient is located at the time of the medical interaction. State boards of medicine would retain their individual authority for discipline and oversight, according to the proposed compact.
The interstate compact system is expected to significantly reduce barriers to the process of gaining licensure in multiple states, while helping to facilitate licensure portability and telemedicine. The state boards of medicine intend to present the final compact draft to state legislators for their consideration in 2015 legislative sessions.
On Twitter @legal_med
The Federation of State Medical Boards has released an updated draft of a proposed interstate compact that would expand the practice of telemedicine by streamlining physician licensure. The revised text includes new requirements for physicians who wish to participate in an expedited process for gaining multiple state licenses.
Under the draft, interested physicians would need to complete a background check including biometric data (fingerprints or other) and pass all components of either the U.S. Medical Licensing Examination or the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medicine Licensing Examination within three attempts.
Additional new draft language alters specialty certification requirements of the compact to clarify that those with time-unlimited certification are eligible to participate in the compact.
"The goal of the compact is to ensure that qualified physicians are able to practice medicine in a safe and accountable manner, and that the strongest health care consumer protections are maintained," Dr. Humayun J. Chaudhry, FSMB president and CEO, said in a statement. "The revised compact helps ensure that as the practice of telemedicine continues to expand, patient protection remains a top priority. We look forward to sharing the revised compact with state medical boards across the country and look forward to working with them to achieve implementation."
The FSMB House of Delegates unanimously approved the development of an interstate compact to expedite medical licensure and facilitate multistate practice at its 2013 annual meeting. Under the proposed system, states and doctors would voluntarily enter into the compact, and approved physicians would be under the jurisdiction of the state medical board in which the patient is located at the time of the medical interaction. State boards of medicine would retain their individual authority for discipline and oversight, according to the proposed compact.
The interstate compact system is expected to significantly reduce barriers to the process of gaining licensure in multiple states, while helping to facilitate licensure portability and telemedicine. The state boards of medicine intend to present the final compact draft to state legislators for their consideration in 2015 legislative sessions.
On Twitter @legal_med
The Federation of State Medical Boards has released an updated draft of a proposed interstate compact that would expand the practice of telemedicine by streamlining physician licensure. The revised text includes new requirements for physicians who wish to participate in an expedited process for gaining multiple state licenses.
Under the draft, interested physicians would need to complete a background check including biometric data (fingerprints or other) and pass all components of either the U.S. Medical Licensing Examination or the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medicine Licensing Examination within three attempts.
Additional new draft language alters specialty certification requirements of the compact to clarify that those with time-unlimited certification are eligible to participate in the compact.
"The goal of the compact is to ensure that qualified physicians are able to practice medicine in a safe and accountable manner, and that the strongest health care consumer protections are maintained," Dr. Humayun J. Chaudhry, FSMB president and CEO, said in a statement. "The revised compact helps ensure that as the practice of telemedicine continues to expand, patient protection remains a top priority. We look forward to sharing the revised compact with state medical boards across the country and look forward to working with them to achieve implementation."
The FSMB House of Delegates unanimously approved the development of an interstate compact to expedite medical licensure and facilitate multistate practice at its 2013 annual meeting. Under the proposed system, states and doctors would voluntarily enter into the compact, and approved physicians would be under the jurisdiction of the state medical board in which the patient is located at the time of the medical interaction. State boards of medicine would retain their individual authority for discipline and oversight, according to the proposed compact.
The interstate compact system is expected to significantly reduce barriers to the process of gaining licensure in multiple states, while helping to facilitate licensure portability and telemedicine. The state boards of medicine intend to present the final compact draft to state legislators for their consideration in 2015 legislative sessions.
On Twitter @legal_med
AMA defers action on Medicaid pay parity
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association House of Delegates voted to defer taking action on Medicaid payment policy so that the primary care societies can continue an almost-year-long lobbying effort to convince Congress to extend a Medicaid pay increase.
The pay increase, established under the Affordable Care Act, brings Medicaid pay up to the same level as Medicare reimbursement for eligible primary care physicians. Currently, family physicians, general internists, pediatricians, and subspecialists in those categories are eligible for the pay increase if they are board certified or can show that at least 60% of the codes they submitted to Medicaid in 2012 were for primary care services. The increase expires on Dec. 31.
At least a year ago, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American College of Physicians, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Osteopathic Association struck an agreement to urge Congress to extend the pay increase for at least 2 years, and to add ob.gyns. to the list of eligible specialists, Dr. Reid Blackwelder, president of the AAFP, said at the House of Delegates meeting.
He offered a resolution to the House to include ob.gyns. as eligible, but the amendment led to some confusion.
The AMA Council on Medical Service was already recommending that the AMA advocate for both an extension of the payments and to add ob.gyns. to the eligibility list, as AMA policy recognizes them as a primary care specialty.
Initially, an amendment had been offered suggesting that ob.gyns. would have to meet different requirements to get the increased pay. That upset some delegates. But Dr. Blackwelder said that his amendment would "use the same accepted threshold methodology" as for internists, pediatricians, and family physicians.
Even so, many delegates said they were not in favor of the resolution. Dr. Lisa Egbert, an ob.gyn. on the Council on Medical Service, said that for one, current legislation did not give her specialty an opportunity to receive the pay increase. The Council report gave clear directions on how the AMA could lobby Congress to change that, she said.
As debate began again the next day, delegates from the AAFP and the ACP retreated from their amendment, and instead asked that it, along with any AMA action on the pay parity issue, be deferred. They noted the ongoing joint effort by the AAFP, ACP, AAP, and ACOG to help persuade Congress that pay parity needed to be extended.
The four societies sent a letter to Senate Finance Committee leaders Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and House Energy & Commerce Committee leaders Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) on May 21, seeking the 2-year extension and also to add ob.gyns.
On June 10, it was resent to the same legislators with 16 additional signatories including other osteopathic organizations, the Society of Hospital Medicine, and the Children’s Hospital Association.
Dr. Yul Ejnes, an ACP delegate and a previous ACP board chairman, urged the AMA delegates to defer action. Otherwise, "it would be injurious to [our] effort, as well as to our AMA, if this body came out with different policy that contradicted what the four organizations are trying to do," said Dr. Ejnes.
AAFP Board Chair Jeffrey Cain agreed. "It would be injurious to the AMA’s reputation to come out against the four groups representing primary care on Capitol Hill," he said.
The delegates voted 223-174 to put off action, referring the amendments and the Council’s report for study by the AMA’s Board of Trustees.
On Twitter @aliciaault
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association House of Delegates voted to defer taking action on Medicaid payment policy so that the primary care societies can continue an almost-year-long lobbying effort to convince Congress to extend a Medicaid pay increase.
The pay increase, established under the Affordable Care Act, brings Medicaid pay up to the same level as Medicare reimbursement for eligible primary care physicians. Currently, family physicians, general internists, pediatricians, and subspecialists in those categories are eligible for the pay increase if they are board certified or can show that at least 60% of the codes they submitted to Medicaid in 2012 were for primary care services. The increase expires on Dec. 31.
At least a year ago, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American College of Physicians, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Osteopathic Association struck an agreement to urge Congress to extend the pay increase for at least 2 years, and to add ob.gyns. to the list of eligible specialists, Dr. Reid Blackwelder, president of the AAFP, said at the House of Delegates meeting.
He offered a resolution to the House to include ob.gyns. as eligible, but the amendment led to some confusion.
The AMA Council on Medical Service was already recommending that the AMA advocate for both an extension of the payments and to add ob.gyns. to the eligibility list, as AMA policy recognizes them as a primary care specialty.
Initially, an amendment had been offered suggesting that ob.gyns. would have to meet different requirements to get the increased pay. That upset some delegates. But Dr. Blackwelder said that his amendment would "use the same accepted threshold methodology" as for internists, pediatricians, and family physicians.
Even so, many delegates said they were not in favor of the resolution. Dr. Lisa Egbert, an ob.gyn. on the Council on Medical Service, said that for one, current legislation did not give her specialty an opportunity to receive the pay increase. The Council report gave clear directions on how the AMA could lobby Congress to change that, she said.
As debate began again the next day, delegates from the AAFP and the ACP retreated from their amendment, and instead asked that it, along with any AMA action on the pay parity issue, be deferred. They noted the ongoing joint effort by the AAFP, ACP, AAP, and ACOG to help persuade Congress that pay parity needed to be extended.
The four societies sent a letter to Senate Finance Committee leaders Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and House Energy & Commerce Committee leaders Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) on May 21, seeking the 2-year extension and also to add ob.gyns.
On June 10, it was resent to the same legislators with 16 additional signatories including other osteopathic organizations, the Society of Hospital Medicine, and the Children’s Hospital Association.
Dr. Yul Ejnes, an ACP delegate and a previous ACP board chairman, urged the AMA delegates to defer action. Otherwise, "it would be injurious to [our] effort, as well as to our AMA, if this body came out with different policy that contradicted what the four organizations are trying to do," said Dr. Ejnes.
AAFP Board Chair Jeffrey Cain agreed. "It would be injurious to the AMA’s reputation to come out against the four groups representing primary care on Capitol Hill," he said.
The delegates voted 223-174 to put off action, referring the amendments and the Council’s report for study by the AMA’s Board of Trustees.
On Twitter @aliciaault
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association House of Delegates voted to defer taking action on Medicaid payment policy so that the primary care societies can continue an almost-year-long lobbying effort to convince Congress to extend a Medicaid pay increase.
The pay increase, established under the Affordable Care Act, brings Medicaid pay up to the same level as Medicare reimbursement for eligible primary care physicians. Currently, family physicians, general internists, pediatricians, and subspecialists in those categories are eligible for the pay increase if they are board certified or can show that at least 60% of the codes they submitted to Medicaid in 2012 were for primary care services. The increase expires on Dec. 31.
At least a year ago, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American College of Physicians, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Osteopathic Association struck an agreement to urge Congress to extend the pay increase for at least 2 years, and to add ob.gyns. to the list of eligible specialists, Dr. Reid Blackwelder, president of the AAFP, said at the House of Delegates meeting.
He offered a resolution to the House to include ob.gyns. as eligible, but the amendment led to some confusion.
The AMA Council on Medical Service was already recommending that the AMA advocate for both an extension of the payments and to add ob.gyns. to the eligibility list, as AMA policy recognizes them as a primary care specialty.
Initially, an amendment had been offered suggesting that ob.gyns. would have to meet different requirements to get the increased pay. That upset some delegates. But Dr. Blackwelder said that his amendment would "use the same accepted threshold methodology" as for internists, pediatricians, and family physicians.
Even so, many delegates said they were not in favor of the resolution. Dr. Lisa Egbert, an ob.gyn. on the Council on Medical Service, said that for one, current legislation did not give her specialty an opportunity to receive the pay increase. The Council report gave clear directions on how the AMA could lobby Congress to change that, she said.
As debate began again the next day, delegates from the AAFP and the ACP retreated from their amendment, and instead asked that it, along with any AMA action on the pay parity issue, be deferred. They noted the ongoing joint effort by the AAFP, ACP, AAP, and ACOG to help persuade Congress that pay parity needed to be extended.
The four societies sent a letter to Senate Finance Committee leaders Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and House Energy & Commerce Committee leaders Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) on May 21, seeking the 2-year extension and also to add ob.gyns.
On June 10, it was resent to the same legislators with 16 additional signatories including other osteopathic organizations, the Society of Hospital Medicine, and the Children’s Hospital Association.
Dr. Yul Ejnes, an ACP delegate and a previous ACP board chairman, urged the AMA delegates to defer action. Otherwise, "it would be injurious to [our] effort, as well as to our AMA, if this body came out with different policy that contradicted what the four organizations are trying to do," said Dr. Ejnes.
AAFP Board Chair Jeffrey Cain agreed. "It would be injurious to the AMA’s reputation to come out against the four groups representing primary care on Capitol Hill," he said.
The delegates voted 223-174 to put off action, referring the amendments and the Council’s report for study by the AMA’s Board of Trustees.
On Twitter @aliciaault
AT THE AMA HOD MEETING
AMA calls for background checks for all gun purchases
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association said it will back legislation to require criminal background checks for all gun sales, whether they are public or private.
The House of Delegates voted at its annual meeting to approve the new policy position as a public health issue. The debate and vote took place June 10, the same day as an Oregon school shooting where a high school student and the shooter died.
The resolution to support background checks was brought forward by the Illinois delegation to the House.
Dr. Maryanne C. Bombaugh, an alternate delegate with the Massachusetts Medical Society, introduced an amendment to extend background checks to all gun transfers, as well.
Dr. Bombaugh, an ob.gyn. in Falmouth, Mass., said that adding transfers would help close many loopholes that private sellers use to skirt background checks.
But some delegates said that might be impossible to enforce, and might interfere with transfers among family members. Louisiana delegate Dr. Vincent Culotta said that he had been given a gun by his father to use for hunting when he was younger, and that he did not think that type of transfer should be subject to a background check.
Another delegate, a psychiatrist, said that background checks on transfers could potentially stop family members from taking possession of guns that relatives might use in suicide attempts.
But others said they supported more scrutiny of transfers. One delegate said it might prevent one person from buying a gun for someone else who could not pass a background check.
Another suggested that requiring checks on transfers – even for family members – made sense, just as transferring ownership of a vehicle required a check that the recipient possessed a driver’s license.
On Twitter @aliciaault
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association said it will back legislation to require criminal background checks for all gun sales, whether they are public or private.
The House of Delegates voted at its annual meeting to approve the new policy position as a public health issue. The debate and vote took place June 10, the same day as an Oregon school shooting where a high school student and the shooter died.
The resolution to support background checks was brought forward by the Illinois delegation to the House.
Dr. Maryanne C. Bombaugh, an alternate delegate with the Massachusetts Medical Society, introduced an amendment to extend background checks to all gun transfers, as well.
Dr. Bombaugh, an ob.gyn. in Falmouth, Mass., said that adding transfers would help close many loopholes that private sellers use to skirt background checks.
But some delegates said that might be impossible to enforce, and might interfere with transfers among family members. Louisiana delegate Dr. Vincent Culotta said that he had been given a gun by his father to use for hunting when he was younger, and that he did not think that type of transfer should be subject to a background check.
Another delegate, a psychiatrist, said that background checks on transfers could potentially stop family members from taking possession of guns that relatives might use in suicide attempts.
But others said they supported more scrutiny of transfers. One delegate said it might prevent one person from buying a gun for someone else who could not pass a background check.
Another suggested that requiring checks on transfers – even for family members – made sense, just as transferring ownership of a vehicle required a check that the recipient possessed a driver’s license.
On Twitter @aliciaault
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association said it will back legislation to require criminal background checks for all gun sales, whether they are public or private.
The House of Delegates voted at its annual meeting to approve the new policy position as a public health issue. The debate and vote took place June 10, the same day as an Oregon school shooting where a high school student and the shooter died.
The resolution to support background checks was brought forward by the Illinois delegation to the House.
Dr. Maryanne C. Bombaugh, an alternate delegate with the Massachusetts Medical Society, introduced an amendment to extend background checks to all gun transfers, as well.
Dr. Bombaugh, an ob.gyn. in Falmouth, Mass., said that adding transfers would help close many loopholes that private sellers use to skirt background checks.
But some delegates said that might be impossible to enforce, and might interfere with transfers among family members. Louisiana delegate Dr. Vincent Culotta said that he had been given a gun by his father to use for hunting when he was younger, and that he did not think that type of transfer should be subject to a background check.
Another delegate, a psychiatrist, said that background checks on transfers could potentially stop family members from taking possession of guns that relatives might use in suicide attempts.
But others said they supported more scrutiny of transfers. One delegate said it might prevent one person from buying a gun for someone else who could not pass a background check.
Another suggested that requiring checks on transfers – even for family members – made sense, just as transferring ownership of a vehicle required a check that the recipient possessed a driver’s license.
On Twitter @aliciaault
AT THE AMA HOD MEETING
Emergency docs worry about low pay under the ACA
Emergency departments are bracing for lower expected payments for the delivery of heath services as a result of the Affordable Care Act, according to a recent survey by the American College of Emergency Physicians.
Just over half (51%) of 1,845 current ACEP members who responded to the survey predicted that payments for emergency care will be reduced as a result of the health care reform bill, 19% expected it to remain the same, 13% forecasted an increase. And 17% were unsure.
The nature of the plans for sale in the ACA’s health care marketplaces is a key factor in the expected decline of payments to hospitals. Dr. Alexander M. Rosenau, ACEP president, noted that bronze-level plans, aimed at people with lower incomes typically come with high deductibles. Those deductibles could reach as high as $6,000, which could make it "difficult for people to actually pay these bills," he said.
The specter of lower payments comes as emergency physicians expect volume to increase. According to the survey, 45% of respondents look for volume to increase either slightly, while 41% expect it to increase greatly.
The expansion of Medicaid under the ACA also could contribute to the expected decline of payments to hospitals, Dr. Rosenau said.
Lower payments to hospitals could lead to additional issues, survey respondents noted. Almost half (42%) expressed concern that their ED would become financially unsustainable if balance billing were disallowed, while 37% forecast longer wait times for patients and 30% said they expected access to care to decline.
Marketing General Inc. conducted the survey on behalf of ACEP.
Emergency departments are bracing for lower expected payments for the delivery of heath services as a result of the Affordable Care Act, according to a recent survey by the American College of Emergency Physicians.
Just over half (51%) of 1,845 current ACEP members who responded to the survey predicted that payments for emergency care will be reduced as a result of the health care reform bill, 19% expected it to remain the same, 13% forecasted an increase. And 17% were unsure.
The nature of the plans for sale in the ACA’s health care marketplaces is a key factor in the expected decline of payments to hospitals. Dr. Alexander M. Rosenau, ACEP president, noted that bronze-level plans, aimed at people with lower incomes typically come with high deductibles. Those deductibles could reach as high as $6,000, which could make it "difficult for people to actually pay these bills," he said.
The specter of lower payments comes as emergency physicians expect volume to increase. According to the survey, 45% of respondents look for volume to increase either slightly, while 41% expect it to increase greatly.
The expansion of Medicaid under the ACA also could contribute to the expected decline of payments to hospitals, Dr. Rosenau said.
Lower payments to hospitals could lead to additional issues, survey respondents noted. Almost half (42%) expressed concern that their ED would become financially unsustainable if balance billing were disallowed, while 37% forecast longer wait times for patients and 30% said they expected access to care to decline.
Marketing General Inc. conducted the survey on behalf of ACEP.
Emergency departments are bracing for lower expected payments for the delivery of heath services as a result of the Affordable Care Act, according to a recent survey by the American College of Emergency Physicians.
Just over half (51%) of 1,845 current ACEP members who responded to the survey predicted that payments for emergency care will be reduced as a result of the health care reform bill, 19% expected it to remain the same, 13% forecasted an increase. And 17% were unsure.
The nature of the plans for sale in the ACA’s health care marketplaces is a key factor in the expected decline of payments to hospitals. Dr. Alexander M. Rosenau, ACEP president, noted that bronze-level plans, aimed at people with lower incomes typically come with high deductibles. Those deductibles could reach as high as $6,000, which could make it "difficult for people to actually pay these bills," he said.
The specter of lower payments comes as emergency physicians expect volume to increase. According to the survey, 45% of respondents look for volume to increase either slightly, while 41% expect it to increase greatly.
The expansion of Medicaid under the ACA also could contribute to the expected decline of payments to hospitals, Dr. Rosenau said.
Lower payments to hospitals could lead to additional issues, survey respondents noted. Almost half (42%) expressed concern that their ED would become financially unsustainable if balance billing were disallowed, while 37% forecast longer wait times for patients and 30% said they expected access to care to decline.
Marketing General Inc. conducted the survey on behalf of ACEP.