fbpx
Connect with us

Kaiser Health News

Sign Here? Financial Agreements May Leave Doctors in the Driver’s Seat

Published

on

Katheryn Houghton
Tue, 30 Apr 2024 09:00:00 +0000

Cass Smith-Collins jumped through hoops to get the surgery that would match his chest to his gender.

Living in Las Vegas and then 50, he finally felt safe enough to come out as a transgender man. He had his wife's and a doctor's letter showing he had a long history of gender dysphoria, the psychological distress felt when one's sex assigned at birth and gender identity don't match.

Although in-network providers were available, Smith-Collins selected Florida-based surgeon Charles Garramone, who markets himself as an early developer of female-to-male top surgery and says that he does not contract with insurance. Smith-Collins said he was willing to pay more to go out-of-network.

Advertisement

“I had one shot to get the chest that I should have been born with, and I wasn't going to chance it to someone who was not an expert at his craft,” he said.

Smith-Collins arranged to spend a week in Florida and contacted friends there who could help him recover from the outpatient procedure, he said.

Garramone's practice required that the patient agree to its financial policies, according to documents shared by Smith-Collins. One document stated that “full payment” of Garramone's surgical fees is required four weeks in advance of surgery and that all payments to the practice are “non-refundable.”

Smith-Collins said he and his wife dipped into their retirement savings to cover the approximately $14,000 upfront. With prior authorization from his insurer in hand saying the procedure would be “covered,” he thought his insurance would reimburse anything he paid beyond his out-of-pocket maximum for out-of-network care: $6,900.

Advertisement

The day before surgery, Smith-Collins signed another agreement from the surgeon's practice, outlining how it would file an out-of-network claim with his insurance. Any insurance payment would be received by the doctor, it said.

The procedure went well. Smith-Collins went home happy and relieved.

Then the bill came. Or in this case: The reimbursement didn't.

The Patient: Cass Smith-Collins, now 52, who has employer-based coverage through UnitedHealthcare.

Advertisement

Medical Services: Double-incision top surgery with nipple grafts, plus lab work.

Service Provider: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Institute, doing business as The Garramone Center, which is owned by Garramone, according to Florida public records.

Total Bill: The surgeon's practice billed the patient and insurance a total of $120,987 for his work. It charged the patient about $14,000 upfront — which included $300 for lab work and a $1,000 reservation fee — and then billed the patient's insurer an additional $106,687.

The surgeon later wrote the patient that the upfront fee was for the “cosmetic” portion of the surgery, while the insurance charge was for the “reconstructive” part. Initially, the insurer paid $2,193.54 toward the surgeon's claim, and the patient received no reimbursement.

Advertisement

After KFF Health began this story, the insurer reprocessed the surgeon's claim and increased its payment to the practice to $97,738.46. Smith-Collins then received a reimbursement from Garramone of $7,245.

What Gives: Many write to Bill of the Month each year with their own tangled billing question. In many cases — including this one — the short answer is that the patient misunderstood their insurance coverage.

Smith-Collins was in a confusing situation. UnitedHealthcare said his out-of-network surgery would be “covered,” then it later told Smith-Collins it didn't owe the reimbursement he had counted on. Then, after KFF Health News began reporting, he received a reimbursement.

Adding to the confusion were the practice's financial polices, which set a pre-surgery payment deadline, gave the doctor control of any insurance payment, and left the patient vulnerable to more bills (though, fortunately, he received none).

Advertisement

Agreeing to an out-of-network provider's own financial policy — which generally protects its ability to get paid and may be littered with confusing insurance and legal jargon — can create a binding contract that leaves a patient owing. In short, it can put the doctor in the driver's seat, steering the money.

The agreement Smith-Collins signed the day before surgery says that the patient understands he is receiving out-of-network care and “may be responsible for additional costs for all services provided” by the out-of-network practice.

Federal billing protections shield patients from big, out-of-network bills — but not in cases in which the patient knowingly chose out-of-network care. Smith-Collins could have been on the hook for the difference between what his out-of-network doctor and insurer said the procedure should cost: nearly $102,000.

Emails show Smith-Collins had a of weeks to review a version of the practice's out-of-network agreement before he signed it. But he said he likely hadn't read the entire document because he was focused on his surgery and willing to agree to just about anything to get it.

Advertisement

“Surgery is an emotional experience for anyone, and that's not an ideal time for anyone to sign a complex legal agreement,” said Marianne Udow-Phillips, a health policy instructor at the of Michigan School of Public Health.

Udow-Phillips, who reviewed the agreement, said it includes complicated terms that could confuse consumers.

Another provision in the agreement says the surgeon's upfront charges are “a separate fee that is not related to charges made to your insurance.”

Months after his procedure, having received no reimbursement, Smith-Collins contacted his surgeon, he said. Garramone replied to him in an email, explaining that UnitedHealthcare had paid for the “reconstructive aspect of the surgery” — while the thousands of dollars Smith-Collins paid upfront was for the “cosmetic portion.”

Advertisement

Filing an insurance claim had initially led to a payment for Garramone, but no refund for Smith-Collins.

Garramone did not respond to questions from KFF Health News for this article or to repeated requests for an interview.

Smith-Collins had miscalculated how much his insurance would pay for an out-of-network surgeon.

Documents show that before the procedure Smith-Collins received a receipt from Garramone's practice marked “final payment” with a zero balance due, as well as prior authorization from UnitedHealthcare stating that the surgery performed by Garramone would be “covered.”

Advertisement

More from Bill of the Month


Read more

But out-of-network providers aren't limited in what they can charge, and insurers don't have a minimum they must pay.

Advertisement

An explanation of benefits, or EOB, statement shows Garramone submitted a claim to UnitedHealthcare for more than $106,000. Of that, UnitedHealthcare determined the maximum it would pay — known as the “ amount” — was about $4,400. A UnitedHealthcare representative later told Smith-Collins in an email that the total was based on what Medicare would have paid for the procedure.

Smith-Collins' upfront charges of roughly $14,000 went well beyond the price the insurer deemed fair, and UnitedHealthcare wasn't going to pay the difference. By UnitedHealthcare's math, Smith-Collins' share of its allowed amount was about $2,200, which is what counted toward his out-of-pocket costs. That meant, in the insurer's eyes, Smith-Collins still hadn't reached his $6,900 maximum for the year, so no refund.

Neither UnitedHealthcare nor the surgeon provided KFF Health News with billing codes, making it difficult to compare the surgeon's charges to cost estimates for the procedure.

Garramone's website says his fee varies depending on the size and difficulty of the procedure. The site says his prices reflect his experience and adds that “cheaper” may lead to “very poor results.”

Advertisement

Though he spent more than he expected, Smith-Collins said he'll never regret the procedure. He said he had lived with of suicide since youth, having realized at a young age that his body didn't match his identity and feared others would target him for being trans.

“It was a lifesaving thing,” he said. “I jumped through whatever hoops they wanted me to go through so I could get that surgery, so that I could finally be who I was.”

The Resolution: Smith-Collins submitted two appeals with his insurer, asking UnitedHealthcare to reimburse him for what he spent beyond his out-of-pocket maximum. The insurer denied both appeals, finding its payments were correct based on the terms of his plan, and said his case was not eligible for a third, outside review.

But after being contacted by KFF Health News, UnitedHealthcare reprocessed Garramone's roughly $106,000 claim and increased its payment to the practice to $97,738.46.

Advertisement

Maria Gordon Shydlo, a UnitedHealthcare spokesperson, told KFF Health News the company's initial determination was correct, but that it had reprocessed the claim so that Smith-Collins is “only” responsible for his patient share: $6,755.

“We are disappointed that this non-contracted provider elected to charge the member so much,” she said.

After that new payment, Garramone gave Smith-Collins a $7,245 refund in mid-April.

The Takeaway: Udow-Phillips, who worked in health insurance for decades and led provider services for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, said she had never seen a provider agreement like the one Smith-Collins signed.

Advertisement

Patients should consult a lawyer before signing any out-of-network agreements, she said, and they should make sure they understand prior authorization letters from insurers.

The prior authorization Smith-Collins received “doesn't say covered in full, and it doesn't say covered at what rate,” Udow-Phillips said, adding later, “I am sure [Smith-Collins] thought the prior authorization was for the cost of the procedure.”

Patients can seek in-network care to feel more secure about what insurance will cover and what their might charge.

But for those who have a specific out-of-network doctor in mind, there are ways to try to avoid sticker shock, said Sabrina Corlette, a research professor and co-director of the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University:

Advertisement
  • Patients should always ask insurers to define what “covered” means, specifically whether that means payment in full and for what expenses. And before making an upfront payment, patients should ask their insurer how much of that total it would reimburse.
  • Patients also can ask their provider to agree in advance to accept any insurance reimbursement as payment in full, though there's no requirement that they do so.
  • And patients can try asking their insurer to an exact dollar estimate for their out-of-pocket costs and ask if they are refundable should insurance pick up the tab.

Bill of the Month is a crowdsourced investigation by KFF Health News and NPR that dissects and explains medical bills. Do you have an interesting medical bill you want to share with us? Tell us about it!

——————————
By: Katheryn Houghton
Title: Sign Here? Financial Agreements May Leave Doctors in the Driver's Seat
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org/news/article/financial-agreements-out-of-network-doctors-top-surgery-bill-of-the-month-april-2024/
Published Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 09:00:00 +0000

Did you miss our previous article…
https://www.biloxinewsevents.com/an-arm-and-a-leg-the-hack/

Kaiser Health News

Newsom Boosted California’s Public Health Budget During Covid. Now He Wants To Cut It.

Published

on

Angela Hart
Mon, 20 May 2024 09:00:00 +0000

When a doctor in Pasadena, California, reported in October that a hospital patient was exhibiting classic symptoms of dengue fever, such as vomiting, a rash, and bone and joint pain, local disease investigators snapped into action.

The mosquito-borne virus is common in places like Southeast Asia, East Africa, and Latin America, and when Americans contract the disease it is usually while traveling. But in this case, the patient hadn't left California.

Epidemiologists and public health nurses visited 175 households to conduct blood draws and local pest control workers began fumigating the patient's neighborhood. In the process, they discovered a second infected person who hadn't traveled.

Advertisement

Both patients recovered, and in that neighborhood nearly 65% of the carrier mosquitoes, part of a genus called Aedes, were eradicated within seven days, said Matthew Feaster, an epidemiologist with the Pasadena Public Health Department.

The swift and intensive response was funded largely by a new bucket of money in the budget for public health and preparedness across California, said Manuel Carmona, Pasadena's deputy director of public health.

In the midst of the covid-19 pandemic, and facing pleas from public health who said they didn't have enough resources to track and contain the disease, California Gov. Gavin Newsom had agreed to allocate $300 million each year for the state's chronically underfunded public health system.

Two years after the money started to flow, and facing a $45 billion deficit, the second-term Democratic governor proposes to slash the entirely.

Advertisement

“This is a huge step backwards,” said Kat DeBurgh, executive director of the Health Association of California. “We can't go back to where we were before the pandemic. That future looks very scary.”

Michelle Gibbons, executive director of the County Health Executives Association of California, said about 900 public health workers have already been hired with the new funding — some of Pasadena's disease investigators — positions that are at risk should Newsom prevail.

The governor unveiled his updated budget plan for the 2024-25 fiscal year on May 10, saying it pained him to push such deep cuts to health and human services but that the state needed to make “difficult decisions” to balance its budget. Unlike the federal government, it cannot operate on a deficit.

Tense budget negotiations are underway between Newsom and the of the state Senate and Assembly, who must reach an agreement on the state's estimated $288 billion budget by June 15.

Advertisement

“We have a shortfall. We have to be sober about the reality, what our priorities are,” Newsom said after unveiling his suggested cuts. “This is a program that we wish we could continue to absorb and afford.”

Public health officials lobbied Newsom hard in 2020 and 2021 to get more resources, and secured additional annual funding of $100 million for the state Department of Public Health and $200 million for the 61 local health departments that form the backbone of California's public health system.

Now they are fighting to preserve their funding — just as cities and counties had begun using it to bolster California's public health defenses.

Some of the workers hired with the money are battling homelessness, fighting climate change, or surveying farmworkers to identify their health and social needs, but most are communicable disease specialists such as epidemiologists and public health nurses charged with investigating threats and outbreaks.

Advertisement

Measles infections are breaking out in Davis, San Diego, Humboldt County, and elsewhere. declared a public health emergency early this month over an outbreak of tuberculosis, which spreads through the air when an infected person coughs, speaks, or sneezes. Los Angeles public health authorities are investigating a spate of hepatitis A infections among homeless people.

And around the United States, the spread of bird flu from animals to humans is causing widespread concern.

“The more time this virus is out there transferring between cows and birds, the more chance it has to evolve and spread human to human,” DeBurgh said. She argues that public health agencies must have enough funding to hire workers who can halt threats as they emerge — like they did in Pasadena.

“That dengue outbreak was stopped because we had more ability to hire, and that was a huge public health success,” she said.

Advertisement

Pasadena public health authorities teamed up with the local mosquito control agency to spray pesticides and deployed 29 staffers to test residents for dengue.

“We put our best people on that case,” Carmona said, adding that four of the disease investigators were funded with about $1 million in new state money the department receives each year. “Without it, we wouldn't have a timely response and we probably would have identified dengue as Nile or some other type of viral virus.”

Rob Oldham, the interim public health officer and director of Health and Human Services for Placer County, said he's weighing the “devastating” cuts he'd have to make if Newsom's proposal passes. The county has hired 11 full-time and six part-time workers using about $1.8 million in new annual state funding, he said.

“This money was just starting to take hold,” he said. “Honestly, we're scrambling, just as we're responding to another measles case.”

Advertisement

Legislative leaders were reluctant to say whether they would try to safeguard the funding, as they face deep cuts in nearly every sector of state government, including early childhood education, public safety, energy, and transportation.

“We're knee-deep in budget negotiations but we're working like hell to protect the progress we've made,” said state Senate leader Mike McGuire, a Northern California Democrat.

Public health officials warned the state would be vulnerable to health and economic disasters should they lose the hard-won funding.

“It's tempting to go back to what we had before, because when we do our , we are invisible. Crises are averted,” Gibbons said. “But it's devastating to think of going back to this boom-and-bust cycle of public health funding that goes neglect, panic, repeat.”

Advertisement

This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation. 

——————————
By: Angela Hart
Title: Newsom Boosted California's Public Health Budget During Covid. Now He Wants To Cut It.
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org//article/gavin-newsom-california-public-health-budget-cuts/
Published Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 09:00:00 +0000

Continue Reading

Kaiser Health News

Medicaid Unwinding Deals Blow to Tenuous System of Care for Native Americans

Published

on

Jazmin Orozco Rodriguez
Mon, 20 May 2024 09:00:00 +0000

About a year into the process of redetermining eligibility after the public health emergency, more than 20 million people have been kicked off the joint federal-state program for low-income families.

A chorus of stories recount the ways the unwinding has upended people's lives, but Native Americans are proving particularly vulnerable to losing coverage and face greater obstacles to reenrolling in Medicaid or finding other coverage.

“From my perspective, it did not work how it should,” said Kristin Melli, a pediatric nurse practitioner in rural Kalispell, Montana, who also provides telehealth services to tribal members on the Fort Peck Reservation.

Advertisement

The redetermination process has compounded long-existing problems people on the reservation face when seeking care, she said. She saw several who were still eligible for benefits disenrolled. And a rise in uninsured tribal members undercuts their health systems, threatening the already tenuous access to care in Native communities.

One teenager, Melli recalled, lost coverage while seeking lifesaving care. Routine lab work raised flags, and in follow-ups Melli discovered the girl had a condition that could have killed her if untreated. Melli did not disclose details, to protect the patient's privacy.

Melli said she spent weeks working with tribal nurses to coordinate lab monitoring and consultations with specialists for her patient. It wasn't until the teen went to a specialist that Melli received a call saying she had been dropped from Medicaid coverage.

The girl's parents told Melli they had reapplied to Medicaid a month earlier but hadn't heard back. Melli's patient eventually got the medication she needed with from a pharmacist. The unwinding presented an unnecessary and burdensome obstacle to care.

Advertisement

Pat Flowers, Montana Democratic Senate minority leader, said during a political event in early April that 13,000 tribal members had been disenrolled in the state.

Native American and Alaska Native adults are enrolled in Medicaid at higher rates than their white counterparts, yet some tribal leaders still didn't know exactly how many of their members had been disenrolled as of a survey conducted in February and March. The Tribal Self-Governance Advisory Committee of the Indian Health Service conducted and published the survey. Respondents included tribal leaders from Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, and New Mexico, among other states.

Tribal leaders reported many challenges related to the redetermination, including a lack of timely information provided to tribal members, patients unaware of the process or their disenrollment, long processing times, lack of staffing at the tribal level, lack of communication from their states, concerns with obtaining accurate tribal data, and in cases in which states have shared data, difficulties interpreting it.

Research and policy experts initially feared that vulnerable populations, including rural Indigenous communities and families of color, would experience greater and unique obstacles to renewing their health coverage and would be disproportionately harmed.

Advertisement

“They have a lot at stake and a lot to lose in this process,” said Joan Alker, executive director of the Georgetown University Center for and Families and a research professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy. “I fear that that prediction is coming true.”

Cammie DuPuis-Pablo, tribal health communications director for the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes in Montana, said the tribes don't have an exact number of their members disenrolled since the redetermination began, but know some who lost coverage as far back as July still haven't been reenrolled.

The tribes hosted their first outreach event in late April as part of their effort to help members through the process. The health care resource division is meeting people at home, making calls, and planning more events.

The tribes a list of members' Medicaid status each month, DuPuis-Pablo said, but a list of those no longer insured by Medicaid would be more helpful.

Advertisement

Because of those data deficits, it's unclear how many tribal members have been disenrolled.

“We are at the mercy of state Medicaid agencies on what they're willing to share,” said Yvonne Myers, consultant on the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid for Citizen Potawatomi Nation Health Services in Oklahoma.

In Alaska, tribal health leaders struck a data-sharing agreement with the state in July but didn't begin receiving information about their members' coverage for about a month — at which point more than 9,500 Alaskans had already been disenrolled for procedural reasons.

“We already lost those people,” said Gennifer Moreau-Johnson, senior policy adviser in the Department of Intergovernmental Affairs at the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, a nonprofit organization. “That's a real impact.”

Advertisement

Because federal regulations don't require states to track or race and ethnicity data for people they disenroll, fewer than 10 states collect such information. While the data from these states does not show a higher rate of loss of coverage by race, a KFF report states that the data is limited and that a more accurate picture would require more demographic from more states.

Tribal health leaders are concerned that a high number of disenrollments among their members is financially undercutting their health systems and ability to care.

“Just because they've fallen off Medicaid doesn't mean we stop serving them,” said Jim Roberts, senior executive liaison in the Department of Intergovernmental Affairs of the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium. “It means we're more reliant on other sources of funding to provide that care that are already underresourced.”

Three in 10 Native American and Alaska Native people younger than 65 rely on Medicaid, compared with 15% of their white counterparts. The Indian Health Service is responsible for providing care to approximately 2.6 million of the 9.7 million Native Americans and Alaska Natives in the U.S., but services vary across regions, clinics, and health centers. The agency itself has been chronically underfunded and unable to meet the needs of the population. For fiscal year 2024, approved $6.96 billion for IHS, far less than the $51.4 billion tribal leaders called for.

Advertisement

Because of that historical deficit, tribal health systems lean on Medicaid reimbursement and other third-party payers, like Medicare, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and private insurance, to help fill the gap. Medicaid accounted for two-thirds of third-party IHS revenues as of 2021.

Some tribal health systems receive more federal funding through Medicaid than from IHS, Roberts said.

Tribal health leaders fear diminishing Medicaid dollars will exacerbate the long-standing health disparities — such as lower life expectancy, higher rates of chronic disease, and inferior access to care — that plague Native Americans.

The unwinding has become “all-consuming,” said Monique Martin, vice president of intergovernmental affairs for the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium.

Advertisement

“The state's really having that focus be right into the minutiae of administrative tasks, like: How do we send text messages to 7,000 people?” Martin said. “We would much rather be talking about: How do we address social determinants of health?”

Melli said she has stopped hearing of tribal members on the Fort Peck Reservation losing their Medicaid coverage, but she wonders if that means disenrolled people didn't seek help.

“Those are the ones that we really worry about,” she said, “all of these silent cases. … We only know about the ones we actually see.”

——————————
By: Jazmin Orozco Rodriguez
Title: Medicaid Unwinding Deals Blow to Tenuous System of Care for Native Americans
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org/news/article/medicaid-unwinding-endangers-native-american-health-care/
Published Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 09:00:00 +0000

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Kaiser Health News

The Lure of Specialty Medicine Pulls Nurse Practitioners From Primary Care

Published

on

Michelle Andrews
Fri, 17 May 2024 09:00:00 +0000

For many patients, seeing a nurse practitioner has become a routine part of primary care, in which these “NPs” often perform the same tasks that patients have relied on doctors for.

But NPs in specialty care? That's not routine, at least not yet. Increasingly, though, nurse practitioners and physician assistants are joining cardiology, dermatology, and other specialty practices, broadening their skills and increasing their income.

This worries some people who track the workforce, because current trends suggest primary care, which has counted on nurse practitioners to backstop physician shortages, soon might not be able to rely on them to the same extent.

Advertisement

“They're succumbing to the same challenges that we have with physicians,” said Atul Grover, executive director of the Research and Action Institute at the Association of American Medical Colleges. The rates NPs can command in a specialty practice “are quite a bit higher” than practice salaries in primary care, he said.

When nurse practitioner programs began to proliferate in the 1970s, “at first it looked great, producing all these nurse practitioners that go to work with primary care physicians,” said Yalda Jabbarpour, director of the American Academy of Family Physicians' Robert Graham Center for Policy Studies. “But now only 30% are going into primary care.”

Jabbarpour was referring to the 2024 primary care scorecard by the Milbank Memorial Fund, which found that from 2016 to 2021 the proportion of nurse practitioners who worked in primary care practices hovered between 32% and 34%, even though their numbers grew rapidly. The proportion of physician assistants, also known as physician associates, in primary care ranged from 27% to 30%, the study found.

Both nurse practitioners and physician assistants are advanced practice clinicians who, in addition to graduate degrees, must complete distinct education, , and certification steps. NPs can practice without a doctor's supervision in more than two dozen states, while PAs have similar independence in only a handful of states.

Advertisement

About 88% of nurse practitioners are certified in an area of primary care, according to the American Association of Nurse Practitioners. But it is difficult to track exactly how many work in primary care or in specialty practices. Unlike physicians, they're generally not required to be endorsed by a national standard-setting body to practice in specialties like oncology or cardiology, for example. The AANP declined to answer questions about its annual workforce survey or the extent to which primary care NPs are moving toward specialties.

Though data tracking the change is sparse, specialty practices are adding these advanced practice clinicians at almost the same rate as primary care practices, according to frequently cited research published in 2018.

The clearest evidence of the shift: From 2008 to 2016, there was a 22% increase in the number of specialty practices that employed nurse practitioners and physician assistants, according to that study. The increase in the number of primary care practices that employed these professionals was 24%.

Once more, the most recent projections by the Association of American Medical Colleges predict a dearth of at least 20,200 primary care physicians by 2036. There will also be a shortfall of non-primary care specialists, a deficiency of at least 10,100 surgical physicians and up to 25,000 physicians in other specialties.

Advertisement

When it to the actual work performed, the lines between primary and specialty care are often blurred, said Candice Chen, associate professor of health policy and management at George Washington .

“You might be a nurse practitioner working in a gastroenterology clinic or cardiology clinic, but the scope of what you do is starting to overlap with primary care,” she said.

Nurse practitioners' salaries vary widely by location, type of facility, and experience. Still, according to data from health care recruiter AMN Healthcare Physician Solutions, formerly known as Merritt Hawkins, the total annual average starting compensation, including signing bonus, for nurse practitioners and physician assistants in specialty practice was $172,544 in the year that ended March 31, slightly higher than the $166,544 for those in primary care.

According to forecasts from the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, nurse practitioner will increase faster than jobs in almost any other occupation in the decade leading up to 2032, growing by 123,600 jobs or 45%. (Wind turbine service technician is the only other occupation projected to grow as fast.) The growth rate for physician assistants is also much faster than average, at 27%. There are more than twice as many nurse practitioners as physician assistants, however: 323,900 versus 148,000, in 2022.

Advertisement

To Grover, of the AAMC, numbers like this signal that there will probably be enough NPs, PAs, and physicians to meet primary care needs. At the same time, “expect more NPs and PAs to also flow out into other specialties,” he said.

When Pamela Ograbisz started working as a registered nurse 27 years ago, she worked in a cardiothoracic intensive care unit. After she became a family nurse practitioner a few years later, she found a job with a similar specialty practice, which trained her to take on a bigger role, first running their outpatient clinic, then working on the floor, and later in the intensive care unit.

If nurse practitioners want to specialize, often “the doctors mentor them just like they would with a physician residency,” said Ograbisz, now vice president of clinical operations at temporary placement recruiter LocumTenens.com.

If physician assistants want to specialize, they also can do so through mentoring, or they can “certificates of added qualifications” in 10 specialties to demonstrate their expertise. Most employers don't “encourage or require” these certificates, however, said Jennifer Orozco, chief medical officer at the American Academy of Physician Associates.

Advertisement

There are a number of training programs for family nurse practitioners who want to develop skills in other .

Raina Hoebelheinrich, 40, a family nurse practitioner at a regional medical center in Yankton, South Dakota, recently enrolled in a three-semester post-master's endocrinology training program at Mount Marty University. She lives on a farm in nearby northeastern Nebraska with her husband and five sons.

Hoebelheinrich's new skills could be helpful in her current hospital job, in which she sees a lot of patients with acute diabetes, or in a clinic setting like the one in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, where she is doing her clinical endocrinology training.

Lack of access to endocrinology care in rural areas is a real problem, and many people may travel hundreds of miles to see a specialist.

Advertisement

“There aren't a lot of options,” she said.

——————————
By: Michelle Andrews
Title: The Lure of Specialty Medicine Pulls Nurse Practitioners From Primary Care
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org//article/nurse-practitioners-trend-primary-care-specialties/
Published Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 09:00:00 +0000

Did you miss our previous article…
https://www.biloxinewsevents.com/clean-needles-save-lives-in-some-states-they-might-not-be-legal/

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News from the South

Trending