The e-Solutions Group

The e-Solutions Group The e-Solutions Group is an umbrella company for the businesses owned by William Edwards.

12/12/2017

Mental Health Providers Get Ready to Add Physical Care to Services
Image courtesy of the Fondo Antiguo de la Biblioteca de la Universidad de Sevilla
Related Articles
Advocates Urge More Government Oversight of Medicaid Managed Care
DHHS Reveals More Details about Medicaid Reform Plan
December 7, 2017 by Rose Hoban Leave a Comment

77Share
Tweet
2Share
At the annual meeting of the state’s mental health managed care agencies, the message was clear, the future would include taking care of the “whole” person.
By Rose Hoban

As North Carolina Medicaid changes from being the current fee-for- service system in the next two years to being a one run by large managed care organizations, leaders in the mental health system will have to rethink how they deliver care.

That was the message at the annual meeting of the state’s public mental health managed care organizations (known as LME-MCOs) in Pinehurst this week.

Right now, a behavioral health patient with Medicaid in North Carolina sees a mental health provider, but care often “stops at the neck” and the patient’s physical health needs can go unaddressed. Under the vision outlined by the General Assembly and by the Department of Health and Human Services, that’s going to change profoundly. What they’re looking for is a way to integrate behavioral and physical health care.

It’s a vision that’s being embraced by the North Carolina Council of Community Programs, which until now has been the umbrella organization for the LME-MCOs. The council is changing its name, its mission statement and its board of directors to position itself to represent all the new players who will be involved in mental health services once Medicaid transforms to managed care, probably in 2019.

“It’s a recognition that things have been changing with the LME-MCOs,” said Mary Hooper, head of the council. “In fact, it’s a recognition of the larger environmental changes that have been occurring now for five, six, seven years.”

And even as the conference hallways were filled with gossipy conversations about the DHHS takeover of Charlotte-based Cardinal Innovations, inside the meeting rooms, people were focused on the changes ahead.

“You should not be surprised this is happening here because it’s been the trend around the country for some time,” said Joe Parks, who served as Missouri’s Medicaid director as that state transitioned to managed care. Parks noted that in the past two years alone, Medicaid programs in 46 states have been reforming how they pay for Medicaid programs and changing their systems of care, usually in the direction of managed care.

“Payers want lower costs… they would like better quality,” he told a packed room. “Payers want predictability. This is a major reason that state governments like managed care, it avoids unexpected budget increases when something like hepatitis drugs get very expensive. It smooths out the costs over time.”

Parks said that state officials want integration of mental and physical health services, “but they’re not always clear what that is.”

Below the neck

Behavioral health patients are “high cost, high utilizer people who are without primary health care, who go to the emergency departments very frequently, who cost the system enormous amounts of money,” said Brian Sheitman, a psychiatrist who is the medical director of WakeBrook, the Raleigh mental health treatment center managed by UNC Healthcare. “If we can proactively treat them, it’s a win, win, win for everybody.”

Sheitman is one of the few people in North Carolina already practicing “integrated care” for people with serious mental health issues, such as bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. At Raleigh’s WakeBrook, he is part of the team that’s developed a primary care “medical home” for these patients, to not only address what happens in their heads, but in their hearts, and lower backs, and with their blood sugar levels.

Data show that people with severe mental health issues die 20 to 25 years earlier than their peers, a combination of lifestyle issues that include much higher rates of smoking, weight gain from medications, lack of self care and, for many patients, an aversion to seeing the doctor.

“I hate going to the doctor myself, I despise it,” Sheitman said, noting that 10 minute doctor visits are unsatisfying for everyone, patient and provider. This leads to burnout among primary care staff.

“People leave and turn over and go to different jobs all the time, this is annoying for most of us, but for people with serious mental illness, stability of the workforce is essential,” he said.

His practice at WakeBrook primary care allows for longer physician visits to address more of the complicated issues behavioral patients have. And everyone who works at the practice, even the receptionist, has worked with mental health patients before. Plus, if a patient shows up dealing with mental health issues at that moment, there’s someone down the hall who can help.

WakeBrook has been collecting data to show that even though this extra service in the primary care setting costs extra money up front, it saves money on the back end in the form of fewer emergency room visits, fewer behavioral health admissions and even fewer medications.

Sheitman’s budget only covers about two-thirds of the cost of the primary care costs. The rest is covered by a federal grant, which runs out in two years, and by the practice affiliation with UNC.

Sheitman is looking forward to managed care because his patients would require an extra investment of about $400 per year to make the model work. This cost would be borne by managed care companies that will become responsible for all the costs of a patient: primary care, ED visits, psychiatric admissions, medications, the works.

“You avoid one ED visit a year, you’ve saved a thousand,” he said.

But he said the current fee-for-service system doesn’t make this type of care cost effective, because it’s hard to “see” that savings.

Better business models

“When we reformed the mental health system more than a decade ago, we eliminated a community system and it became mental health services for people with Medicaid,” said Bebe Smith, a clinical social worker who once taught at the UNC Department of Psychiatry and at the School of Social Work.

“So, many of the private providers were set up to just bill Medicaid and they weren’t set up to bill Medicare or private insurance,” she said.

That has skewed the business model, Smith argued, because it’s lead to mental health agencies that have to specialize in one or two specialty services to make the numbers work, or go under and primary care, which doesn’t get reimbursed well, goes undone.

Traditionally, if an agency can bill a commercial insurance company that pays more, the higher reimbursement.

t received can help cover the costs for Medicaid patients with lower payment or the people without insurance at all.

“My hope is that at some point our larger health systems start doing more in terms of providing behavioral health services, because then people will have access to primary care and specialty care and it’ll be one integrated system,” she said.

Mike Lancaster described how his organization, SouthLight Healthcare in Raleigh, had a two-year grant to provide primary care to mental health patients, about a third had Medicaid, a third had commercial insurance and a third were uninsured.

“What we were hoping for was the expansion of Medicaid because the 35 percent of the people who were indigent would have qualified for Medicaid,” he said. “So when the legislature didn’t expand Medicaid, we had 35 percent of our population we couldn’t afford to provide primary care services to.”

He said the primary care practice “limped along” for two years after the grant ran out until the lack of reimbursement became too much. Now, the treatment rooms for that practice sit empty.

“We have a turnkey operation, we’ve got empty rooms ready to go,” Lancaster said. Those rooms are waiting for payors who will pay for the whole patient.

As for managed care?

“Bring it on,” he responded.

07/27/2017

kemanuel
On July 13, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Tom Price, M.D., announced the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) biggest-ever health care fraud takedown. 412 health care providers were charged with health care fraud. In total, allegedly, the 412 providers schemed and received $1.3 billion in false billings to Medicare, Medicaid, and TRICARE. Of the 412 defendants, 115 are physicians, nurses, and other licensed medical professionals. Additionally, HHS has begun the suspension process against 295 health care providers’ licenses.

The charges include allegations of billing for medically unnecessary treatments or services that were not really provided. The DOJ has evidence that many of the defendants had illegal kickback schemes set up. More than 120 of the defendants were charged with unlawfully or inappropriately prescribing and distributing opioids and other narcotics.

While this particular sting operation resulted from government investigations, not all health care fraud is discovered through government investigation. A great deal of fraud is uncovered through private citizens coming forward with incriminating information. These private citizens can file suit against the fraudulent parties on behalf of the government; these are known as qui tam suits.

Being a whistleblower goes against what most of us are taught as children. We are taught not to be a tattletail. I have vivid memories from elementary school of other kids acting out, but I would remain silent and not inform the teacher. But in the health care world, tattletails are becoming much more common – and they make money for blowing that metaphoric whistle.

What is a qui tam lawsuit?

Qui tam is Latin for “who as well.” Qui tam lawsuits are a type of civil lawsuit whistleblowers (tattletails) bring under the False Claims Act, a law that rewards whistleblowers if their qui tam cases recover funds for the government. Qui tam cases are a powerful weapon against Medicare and Medicaid fraud. In other words, if an employee at a health care facility witnesses any type of health care fraud, even if the alleged fraud is unknown to the provider, that employee can hire an attorney to file a qui tam lawsuit to recover money on behalf of the government. The government investigates the allegations of fraud and decides whether it will join the lawsuit. Health care entities found guilty in a qui tam lawsuit will be liable to government for three times the government’s losses, plus penalties.

The whistleblower is rewarded for bringing these lawsuits. If the government intervenes in the case and recovers funds through a settlement or a trial, the whistleblower is entitled to 15% – 25% of the recovery. If the government doesn’t intervene in the case and it is pursued by the whistleblower team, the whistleblower reward is between 25% – 30% of the recovery.

These recoveries are not low numbers. On June 22, 2017, a physician and rehabilitative specialist agreed to pay $1.4 million to resolve allegations they violated the False Claims Act by billing federal health care programs for medically unreasonable and unnecessary ultrasound guidance used with routine lab blood draws, and with Botox and trigger point injections. If a whistleblower had brought this lawsuit, he/she would have been awarded $210,000 – 420,000.

On June 16, 2017, a Pennsylvania-based skilled nursing facility operator agreed to pay roughly $53.6 million to settle charges that it and its subsidiaries violated the False Claims Act by causing the submission of false claims to government health care programs for medically unnecessary therapy and hospice services. The allegations originated in a whistleblower lawsuit filed under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act by 7 former employees of the company. The whistleblower award – $8,040,000 – 16,080,000.

There are currently two, large qui tam cases against United Health Group (UHG) pending in the Central District of California. The cases are: U.S. ex rel. Benjamin Poehling v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc. and U.S. ex rel. Swoben v. Secure Horizons, et al. Both cases were brought by James Swoben, who was an employee and Benjamin Poehling, who was the former finance director of a UHG group that managed the insurer’s Medicare Advantage Plans. On May 2, 2027, the U.S. government joined the Poehling lawsuit.

The charges include allegations that UHG:

Submitted invalid codes to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) that it knew of or should have known that the codes were invalid – some of the dates of services at issue in the case are older than 2008.
Intentionally avoided learning that some diagnoses codes or categories of codes submitted to their plans by providers were invalid, despite acknowledging in 2010 that it should evaluate the results of its blind chart reviews to find codes that need to be deleted.
Failed to follow up on and prevent the submissions of invalid codes or submit deletion for invalid codes.
Attested to CMS each year that the data they submitted was true and accurate while knowing it was not.
UHG would not be in this expensive, litigious pickle had it conducted a self audit and followed the mandatory disclosure requirements.

What are the mandatory disclosure requirements? Glad you asked…

Section 6402(a) of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) creates an express obligation for health care providers to report and return overpayments of Medicare and Medicaid. The disclosure must be made by 60 days days after the date that the overpayment was identified or the date any corresponding cost report is due, if applicable. Identification is defined as the point in which the provider has determined or should have determined through the exercise of due diligence that an overpayment exists. CMS expects the provider to proactively investigate any credible information of a potential overpayment. The consequences of failing to proactively investigate can be seen by the UHG lawsuits above-mentioned. Apparently, UHG had some documents dated in 2010 that indicated it should review codes and delete the invalid codes, but, allegedly, failed to do so.

How do you self disclose?

According to CMS:

“Beginning June 1, 2017, providers of services and suppliers must use the forms included in the OMB-approved collection instrument entitled CMS Voluntary Self-Referral Disclosure Protocol (SRDP) in order to utilize the SRDP. For disclosures of noncompliant financial relationships with more than one physician, the disclosing entity must submit a separate Physician Information Form for each physician. The CMS Voluntary Self-Referral Disclosure Protocol document contains one Physician Information Form.”

11/11/2015

Why French Kids Don't Have ADHD
French children don't need medications to control their behavior.
Posted Mar 08, 2012
SHARE
TWEET
EMAIL
MORE
In the United States, at least 9 percent of school-aged children have been diagnosed with ADHD, and are taking pharmaceutical medications. In France, the percentage of kids diagnosed and medicated for ADHD is less than .5 percent. How has the epidemic of ADHD—firmly established in the U.S.—almost completely passed over children in France?

Is ADHD a biological-neurological disorder? Surprisingly, the answer to this question depends on whether you live in France or in the U.S. In the United States, child psychiatrists consider ADHD to be a biological disorder with biological causes. The preferred treatment is also biological—psycho stimulant medications such as Ritalin and Adderall.

French child psychiatrists, on the other hand, view ADHD as a medical condition that has psycho-social and situational causes. Instead of treating children's focusing and behavioral problems with drugs, French doctors prefer to look for the underlying issue that is causing the child distress—not in the child's brain but in the child's social context. They then choose to treat the underlying social context problem with psychotherapy or family counseling. This is a very different way of seeing things from the American tendency to attribute all symptoms to a biological dysfunction such as a chemical imbalance in the child's brain.

French child psychiatrists don't use the same system of classification of childhood emotional problems as American psychiatrists. They do not use the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or DSM. According to Sociologist Manuel Vallee, the French Federation of Psychiatry developed an alternative classification system as a resistance to the influence of the DSM-3. This alternative was the CFTMEA (Classification Française des Troubles Mentaux de L'Enfant et de L'Adolescent), first released in 1983, and updated in 1988 and 2000. The focus of CFTMEA is on identifying and addressing the underlying psychosocial causes of children's symptoms, not on finding the best pharmacological bandaids with which to mask symptoms.

To the extent that French clinicians are successful at finding and repairing what has gone awry in the child's social context, fewer children qualify for the ADHD diagnosis. Moreover, the definition of ADHD is not as broad as in the American system, which, in my view, tends to "pathologize" much of what is normal childhood behavior. The DSM specifically does not consider underlying causes. It thus leads clinicians to give the ADHD diagnosis to a much larger number of symptomatic children, while also encouraging them to treat those children with pharmaceuticals.

The French holistic, psychosocial approach also allows for considering nutritional causes for ADHD-type symptoms—specifically the fact that the behavior of some children is worsened after eating foods with artificial colors, certain preservatives, and/or allergens. Clinicians who work with troubled children in this country—not to mention parents of many ADHD kids—are well aware that dietary interventions can sometimes help a child's problem. In the U.S., the strict focus on pharmaceutical treatment of ADHD, however, encourages clinicians to ignore the influence of dietary factors on children's behavior.

And then, of course, there are the vastly different philosophies of child-rearing in the U.S. and France. These divergent philosophies could account for why French children are generally better-behaved than their American counterparts. Pamela Druckerman highlights the divergent parenting styles in her recent book, Bringing up Bébé. I believe her insights are relevant to a discussion of why French children are not diagnosed with ADHD in anything like the numbers we are seeing in the U.S.

From the time their children are born, French parents provide them with a firm cadre—the word means "frame" or "structure." Children are not allowed, for example, to snack whenever they want. Mealtimes are at four specific times of the day. French children learn to wait patiently for meals, rather than eating snack foods whenever they feel like it. French babies, too, are expected to conform to limits set by parents and not by their crying selves. French parents let their babies "cry it out" (for no more than a few minutes of course) if they are not sleeping through the night at the age of four months.

French parents, Druckerman observes, love their children just as much as American parents. They give them piano lessons, take them to sports practice, and encourage them to make the most of their talents. But French parents have a different philosophy of discipline. Consistently enforced limits, in the French view, make children feel safe and secure. Clear limits, they believe, actually make a child feel happier and safer—something that is congruent with my own experience as both a therapist and a parent. Finally, French parents believe that hearing the word "no" rescues children from the "tyranny of their own desires." And spanking, when used judiciously, is not considered child abuse in France. (Author's note: I am not personally in favor of spanking children).

As a therapist who works with children, it makes perfect sense to me that French children don't need medications to control their behavior because they learn self-control early in their lives. The children grow up in families in which the rules are well-understood, and a clear family hierarchy is firmly in place. In French families, as Druckerman describes them, parents are firmly in charge of their kids—instead of the American family style, in which the situation is all too often vice versa.

Address

PO Box 1103
Kinston, SC
28503

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when The e-Solutions Group posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to The e-Solutions Group:

Share