The coming COVID financial apocalypse

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Gfunk6

And to think . . . I hesitated
Moderator Emeritus
Lifetime Donor
20+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2004
Messages
4,658
Reaction score
5,069

Our entire health care system which was predicated largely on fee-for-service has come tumbling down. It will be interesting to see how things look once we start to pick up the pieces and move forward.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 4 users
Good article thanks for sharing! There will be a contraction of healthcare services in some parts of the country, but to what extent is difficult to say. Continuation of two sided risk value based care models will present for many organizations an even higher risk. The modest margins on healthcare services make small shifts in volume of patients, case mix, payer mix have disproportionate impacts, and post covid it’ll be really difficult to compare performance and cost metrics to pre covid time periods with favorable results.
 
payer mix

This feels like the piece people just don't get. If even a third your patients end up converting from a commercial insurance policy to medicade and you loose 1/3 of your reimbursement for just those patients this one change could leave you about 10% down for providing the same volume of service pre-covid. That doesn't sound so bad (to some), but if you also have another 10% not even going to the doctors (which is on the low end of the estimates) just those 2 issues could have you down 20%.

Does anyone have a sense of if the APM is projected to have a significant impact on the differences in reimbursement from medicade/medicare vs private insurance? I have given it almost 0 attention. Im not proud of it, I am just so far removed from the financial side of things it has not made it high on my personal to-do list.
 
  • Hmm
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
Is this really the death sentence for fee-for-service and RVU-based compensation? People has delivered eulogies for them in the past. It will make many US RadOncs redundant, true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
This feels like the piece people just don't get. If even a third your patients end up converting from a commercial insurance policy to medicade and you loose 1/3 of your reimbursement for just those patients this one change could leave you about 10% down for providing the same volume of service pre-covid. That doesn't sound so bad (to some), but if you also have another 10% not even going to the doctors (which is on the low end of the estimates) just those 2 issues could have you down 20%.

Does anyone have a sense of if the APM is projected to have a significant impact on the differences in reimbursement from medicade/medicare vs private insurance? I have given it almost 0 attention. Im not proud of it, I am just so far removed from the financial side of things it has not made it high on my personal to-do list.

It really depends on your area. Where I work we would welcome a shift to APM even for private payors. There are geographies where private payors pay LESS than medicare rates and even then they still try to nickel and dime you wherever they can. It's amazing how often they just "forget" to pay for a random week of treatment. You can spend a year chasing a week of claims going back and forth with a different ****** every day, repeatedly sending medical records they claim they never received, etc. Getting involved in this stuff has seriously been detrimental to my mental health. You think arguing with an Evicore rad onc is bad...If you line item your EOBS, you'll find you almost never get fully reimbursed, (even the ones you were preauth'd for), so you aren't even getting the say 90% of Medicare you're contracted at.
 
  • Angry
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 7 users
This feels like the piece people just don't get. If even a third your patients end up converting from a commercial insurance policy to medicade and you loose 1/3 of your reimbursement for just those patients this one change could leave you about 10% down for providing the same volume of service pre-covid. That doesn't sound so bad (to some), but if you also have another 10% not even going to the doctors (which is on the low end of the estimates) just those 2 issues could have you down 20%.

Does anyone have a sense of if the APM is projected to have a significant impact on the differences in reimbursement from medicade/medicare vs private insurance? I have given it almost 0 attention. Im not proud of it, I am just so far removed from the financial side of things it has not made it high on my personal to-do list.

With COVID, would expect greater shift to Medicaid and some increased bad debt (patients not being able to pay co-pays/co-insurance). With 2 sided risk APMs (single bundle amount, no adjustments even if your costs are above or below actual amount in FFS environment), the devil would be in the details. Most bundles I've been a part of with commercial insurers have NOT been favorably constructed initially and have required a lot of work/pushback from me/my team and walking away from the deal multiple times. Some of these bundles have pegged your practice's bundle reimbursement to your own practice's historical costs, and rarely have allowed for a meaningful blending with say national payment rates or hospital rates. Over time, such a bundle would continue to erode margins. One theoretical benefit with bundles would be gold carding so no prior auths needed, but that hasn't always been agreed upon by payers, or no claims submissions (again, payers still want to see the FFS claims despite paying a bundle). It would be interesting to hear about others' commercial APM experiences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Our entire health care system which was predicated largely on fee-for-service has come tumbling down. It will be interesting to see how things look once we start to pick up the pieces and move forward.

The govt has been trying to kill FFS for a while now. COVID is just gonna accelerate whatever policies were in place.

It’s gonna destroy the job market especially if your field has questionable demand to begin with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
With COVID, would expect greater shift to Medicaid and some increased bad debt (patients not being able to pay co-pays/co-insurance). With 2 sided risk APMs (single bundle amount, no adjustments even if your costs are above or below actual amount in FFS environment), the devil would be in the details. Most bundles I've been a part of with commercial insurers have NOT been favorably constructed initially and have required a lot of work/pushback from me/my team and walking away from the deal multiple times. Some of these bundles have pegged your practice's bundle reimbursement to your own practice's historical costs, and rarely have allowed for a meaningful blending with say national payment rates or hospital rates. Over time, such a bundle would continue to erode margins. One theoretical benefit with bundles would be gold carding so no prior auths needed, but that hasn't always been agreed upon by payers, or no claims submissions (again, payers still want to see the FFS claims despite paying a bundle). It would be interesting to hear about others' commercial APM experiences.

Honestly after seeing what bundling has done and is doing in the other specialties. Sometimes it works out financially but most of the time you end up holding the bag.

.the wave of patients that will be without health insurance is insane. The ones with any money They’ll all be buying ****ty policies on the exchanges all while clamoring for a public option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
"Three months of COVID-19 may mean 80,000 missed cancer diagnoses... Screening and monitoring tests for breast, prostate, colorectal, cervical, and lung cancer were down 39%-90% in early April." There are about ~500-600,000 new dx XRT patients/year in the U.S. to put the 80,000 number in context. (also see here.)

If we multiply the effects of:
1) A spate of new rad oncs now entering the workforce
2) Massive, significant decrease in routine cases being treated per day due to hypofx
3) Significant decrease in cancer diagnosis rate due to COVID

We are maybe talking an apocalypse. Stay tuned.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 1 users
Urologist (Currently at the VA) here. Current guidance is unless you’re very high risk (think 50 year old with PSA >10) you’re not getting a prostate biopsy. The run of the mill 65 year old with PSA of 6 is put on hold. Even when we ramp back up there will be a 1-2 month lag until treatments pick back up for both of us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
The country is screwed if reopening continues the way it is. People just crowd back in and ignore all good practices for not spreading the virus.

This Colorado cafe opened in defiance of the state, and the video of the Mother’s Day crowd is disheartening to say the least.

Castle Rock business draws crowd against public health orders (VIDEO)

it’s infuriating. I want to reopen as much as the next guy where it’s safe to do so, but this kind of blatant disregard for social distancing will spike cases leading to no choice but to shut things down again. Cases will increase when we reopen, but if we do so carefully (masking in public, social distancing in restaurants/stores, limiting mass gatherings) hopefully we can keep R0 to a level where things stay manageable.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
it’s infuriating. I want to reopen as much as the next guy where it’s safe to do so, but this kind of blatant disregard for social distancing will spike cases leading to no choice but to shut things down again. Cases will increase when we reopen, but if we do so carefully (masking in public, social distancing in restaurants/stores, limiting mass gatherings) hopefully we can keep R0 to a level where things stay manageable.

Not wearing a mask has become a political statement so I think that mask-wearing will never get above 60-70% of the population. That means at least a third of the country could at some point be an asymptomatic spreader.
 
Honestly after seeing what bundling has done and is doing in the other specialties. Sometimes it works out financially but most of the time you end up holding the bag.

It would depend on the set point right? Hypothetically, if the bundled payment were somewhere between the costs of conventional and hypofrac, bundling could theoretically buffer community centers against the continuous march towards hypofractionation right? Or would the loss of other FFS revenue sources (like daily IGRT etc) make that point moot?

Of course if they decide to bundle at less than or close to the current cost of a hypofrac course then everyone looses :(

And I am going to assume the math is difficult if not impossible to sort out until after changes are implemented in which case its too late to really do anything other than accept your fate?

Not wearing a mask has become a political statement so I think that mask-wearing will never get above 60-70% of the population.

Correct. For good or for bad, a core tenant of the American Constitution is respect for the individual as a measure against government tyranny and over reach. A lot of courts (most notably the Wisc Supreme Court) have indicated they are going to side with individuals against government over reach even as we speak. Our system is unfortunately not designed to deal with something like this and we do not have the political landscape necessary (on either side) to navigate this. We are going to be dealing with this for many months and have to enviously watch other developed countries start getting closer to normal as we slide further backwards. I want more than anything to be wrong about this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
When physicians take jobs they are missing major items to investigate. Do they know about the culture of management at a hospital? Do they know about the direction of the organization,the financial health, the strategic vision? They generally do not. For those in PP and academics do they realize they are signing up to be part of a capitated system in which the insurance company has dropped all liability of exactly this situation squarely on their heads; does that factor in to the decision at all? Probably just too busy worrying about a 5 vs 6 mm CTV expansion.

The saving grace here is that the medical establishment has become too big to fail. The Fed is busy printing cash to save the financial system and pumping that liquidity into the markets; this has been a major saving grace more for some than others but it has stabilized the entire Covid situation. Not unlikely they’ll do something similar for hospitals. Doesn’t mean it’ll go to you but maybe it’ll avert an apocalypse
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 6 users
When physicians take jobs they are missing major items to investigate. Do they know about the culture of management at a hospital? Do they know about the direction of the organization,the financial health, the strategic vision? They generally do not. For those in PP and academics do they realize they are signing up to be part of a capitated system in which the insurance company has dropped all liability of exactly this situation squarely on their heads; does that factor in to the decision at all? Probably just too busy worrying about a 5 vs 6 mm CTV expansion.

The saving grace here is that the medical establishment has become too big to fail. The Fed is busy printing cash to save the financial system and pumping that liquidity into the markets; this has been a major saving grace more for some than others but it has stabilized the entire Covid situation. Not unlikely they’ll do something similar for hospitals. Doesn’t mean it’ll go to you but maybe it’ll avert an apocalypse

Bingo


Florida Cancer Specialists’ $67 million in funding was more money than the total given by HHS to any of Miami-Dade County’s five congressional districts, even though Miami-Dade has the state’s highest COVID-19 infection and death rates of any large county.
 
When physicians take jobs they are missing major items to investigate. Do they know about the culture of management at a hospital? Do they know about the direction of the organization,the financial health, the strategic vision? They generally do not. For those in PP and academics do they realize they are signing up to be part of a capitated system in which the insurance company has dropped all liability of exactly this situation squarely on their heads; does that factor in to the decision at all? Probably just too busy worrying about a 5 vs 6 mm CTV expansion.

The saving grace here is that the medical establishment has become too big to fail. The Fed is busy printing cash to save the financial system and pumping that liquidity into the markets; this has been a major saving grace more for some than others but it has stabilized the entire Covid situation. Not unlikely they’ll do something similar for hospitals. Doesn’t mean it’ll go to you but maybe it’ll avert an apocalypse

DING DING DING DING! BINGO!
 
better to work for a larger hospital system now, compared to an independent place
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
When physicians take jobs they are missing major items to investigate. Do they know about the culture of management at a hospital? Do they know about the direction of the organization,the financial health, the strategic vision? They generally do not. For those in PP and academics do they realize they are signing up to be part of a capitated system in which the insurance company has dropped all liability of exactly this situation squarely on their heads; does that factor in to the decision at all? Probably just too busy worrying about a 5 vs 6 mm CTV expansion.

The saving grace here is that the medical establishment has become too big to fail. The Fed is busy printing cash to save the financial system and pumping that liquidity into the markets; this has been a major saving grace more for some than others but it has stabilized the entire Covid situation. Not unlikely they’ll do something similar for hospitals. Doesn’t mean it’ll go to you but maybe it’ll avert an apocalypse
You can ask all these questions of a potential employer if you want, but who are we kidding here: if the job is in a good location, you’re going to take it in this market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
When physicians take jobs they are missing major items to investigate. Do they know about the culture of management at a hospital? Do they know about the direction of the organization,the financial health, the strategic vision? They generally do not. For those in PP and academics do they realize they are signing up to be part of a capitated system in which the insurance company has dropped all liability of exactly this situation squarely on their heads; does that factor in to the decision at all? Probably just too busy worrying about a 5 vs 6 mm CTV

You are totally right but it’s worse than that. Residency at academic center so ill prepares residents for anything other than the physical doing of rad onc that even if most graduate residents ask the right questions, their understanding of the intricacies involved in answering said questions is so inadequate they can’t really gauge the quality of the answer in a meaningful way ☹️
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 3 users
It would depend on the set point right? Hypothetically, if the bundled payment were somewhere between the costs of conventional and hypofrac, bundling could theoretically buffer community centers against the continuous march towards hypofractionation right? Or would the loss of other FFS revenue sources (like daily IGRT etc) make that point moot?

Of course if they decide to bundle at less than or close to the current cost of a hypofrac course then everyone looses :(

For prostate, the reimbursement is quite generous under the APM. At least it was in the most recent version. If your center is already doing hypofx/sbrt/brachy, then you'll come out way ahead. If your center is doing 1.8 Gy fractions for everyone and everything... then your reimbursement will drop substantially.
 
For prostate, the reimbursement is quite generous under the APM. At least it was in the most recent version. If your center is already doing hypofx/sbrt/brachy, then you'll come out way ahead. If your center is doing 1.8 Gy fractions for everyone and everything... then your reimbursement will drop substantially.

Not true I think but we'll have to see in the final rule. In the proposal, the reimbursement starts at that high national base rate, but then is adjusted SIGNIFICANTLY based on your historical baseline costs. That will factor in your baseline historical use of hypofx/sbrt/brachy/standardfx/protons etc. Practices that were already low cost at baseline will have their bundle payment adjusted downwards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Not true I think but we'll have to see in the final rule. In the proposal, the reimbursement starts at that high national base rate, but then is adjusted SIGNIFICANTLY based on your historical baseline costs. That will factor in your baseline historical use of hypofx/sbrt/brachy/standardfx/protons etc. Practices that were already low cost at baseline will have their bundle payment adjusted downwards.

No good deed goes unpunished
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
No good deed goes unpunished

Now just imagine if protons get an exemption*.

The difference between what I do (SBRT and 70/28) versus a standard frac proton prostate (which is still a real thing out there).....is major amounts of money.

*I'm fine with exemption for patients enrolled in P3 trials, peds, and typical indications. I'm probably even OK with head/neck, esophagus...but I"m not OK with proton prostate exemptions.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Proton for prostate ridiculous

Even some of the GU team at MDACC agree :

 
Proton for prostate ridiculous

Even some of the GU team at MDACC agree :



Then they need to talk to their marketing team and get them to take down the "Protons for all cancer" billboards they have up all over the state.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 4 users
0BB967B0-05ED-42EB-A622-6A5151899401.jpeg
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Now just imagine if protons get an exemption*.

The difference between what I do (SBRT and 70/28) versus a standard frac proton prostate (which is still a real thing out there).....is major amounts of money.

*I'm fine with exemption for patients enrolled in P3 trials, peds, and typical indications. I'm probably even OK with head/neck, esophagus...but I"m not OK with proton prostate exemptions.

At this point though, we will all become proton ****** if APM hits only linac based systems.

Honestly I don’t care anymore and if people want proton more power to them. My employer has already drawn up plans for one. Im tired of taking on the weight of health system efficiency and getting kicked in the balls everytime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Not true I think but we'll have to see in the final rule. In the proposal, the reimbursement starts at that high national base rate, but then is adjusted SIGNIFICANTLY based on your historical baseline costs. That will factor in your baseline historical use of hypofx/sbrt/brachy/standardfx/protons etc. Practices that were already low cost at baseline will have their bundle payment adjusted downwards.

The most recent version has prostate reimbursement at 22k. How much 40+ fraction IMRT are you doing for you to say that my statement isn't true?

Furthermore, the "significant" adjustment you mentioned appears to be a maximum of 30% reduction from 22k. Happy to be wrong.
 
Last edited:
At this point though, we will all become proton ****** if APM hits only linac based systems.

Honestly I don’t care anymore and if people want proton more power to them. My employer has already drawn up plans for one. Im tired of taking on the weight of health system efficiency and getting kicked in the balls everytime.

Sounds familiar. I think our cancer center/network buys a proton unit if there's an APM exemption.

I'm fine with that, but I draw my wimpy line in the sand at treating off protocol prostate only patients on a P3 trial only. To their credit, they've never told me what to do or bucked or flinched when I took over for the older partner and started doing things like hypofrac (or APBI) breast/prostate that wasn't anywhere on their radar six years ago when i started.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Exempting protons from APM is the ultimate "penny wise, pound foolish"

Would you expect anything less?

This is the same govt that refuses to negotiate drug prices and had a built in punishment in APM for those that were already cheaper.

I actually would like to see an exemption for all those on P3 proton trials. None of this registry BS, real comparative trials.

Then as the trials come out, more exemptions get added based upon results. But as of 2020, quit.paying.for.prostate.protons (above IMRT rates).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Would you expect anything less?

This is the same govt that refuses to negotiate drug prices and had a built in punishment in APM for those that were already cheaper.

I actually would like to see an exemption for all those on P3 proton trials. None of this registry BS, real comparative trials.

Then as the trials come out, more exemptions get added based upon results. But as of 2020, quit.paying.for.prostate.protons (above IMRT rates).
Or... just make treating pediatric cases insanely profitable. Currently, they pay like crap, but are (obviously) the most difficult thing we do and "should" be treated on protons if available. Adult cases? Meh, regardless of whatever trend toward a composite outcome shows. Pay the same for each type in any setting with any machine for any fractions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
I mean, 30% is pretty significant IMO

Right but that's the theoretical maximum... the actual number is going to be some sort of black box calculation. For HDR brachy we collect 6k per implant (total of 2 implants). So this will be a very large increase even when factoring in the maximum 30% reduction.
 
There are two issues with protons:
1) Whether or not they are clinically superior
2) If they are better, is it worth the cost?

Regarding issue 1)... I would go so far as to say that, AT SOME POINT, protons will be *better* than photons (meaning more effective, less toxic, or will facilitate treatments that were otherwise not safe to even attempt) for most disease sites treated definitively (pelvis may always be iffy). Once the uncertainties have been better quantified, and once the impact of LET on RBE in the Bragg peak is better understood, protons will allow us to hit the target with less low dose RT to surrounding tissues. Be happy to debate this point.

Regarding issue 2)... the more people who get protons, the more streamlined the manufacturing and the cheaper it will become.
 
2)... the more people who get protons, the more streamlined the manufacturing and the cheaper it will become.
It will never come close to the 3D/IMRT differential at least not any time soon. Even the single vault units are still a minimum of 5-6x the cost of a fully decked out linac. Price and value matter, more so with each passing year.

Fraction shamers should be proton shamers if they are truly believers in the data. There's zero data to justify the cost differential in bread and butter adult rad onc at this point
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Exempting protons from APM is the ultimate "penny wise, pound foolish"
It will never come close to the 3D/IMRT differential at least not any time soon. Even the single vault units are still a minimum of 5-6x the cost of a fully decked out linac. Price and value matter, more so with each passing year.

Fraction shamers should be proton shamers if they are truly believers in the data. There's zero data to justify the cost differential in bread and butter adult rad onc at this point
Exempting protons would be a reasonably effective and stealthy way to further smother rural care, private practices, etc. What was long a stable pie is now obviously shrinking. Can we blame proton centers for wanting a bigger piece of it? Hate the game and not the player(s)? Until the extraradiotherapeutic powers that be realize the protonistas are doping their results to enhance overall propaganda performance we may see the haves (vs have nots) continue to win the Tour de Rad Onc. #LiveStrong
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Exempting protons would be a reasonably effective and stealthy way to further smother rural care, private practices, etc. What was long a stable pie is now obviously shrinking. Can we blame proton centers for wanting a bigger piece of it? Hate the game and not the player(s)? Until the extraradiotherapeutic powers that be realize the protonistas are doping their results to enhance overall propaganda performance we may see the haves (vs have nots) continue to win the Tour de Rad Onc. #LiveStrong
May the best lobbyists win
 
It will never come close to the 3D/IMRT differential at least not any time soon. Even the single vault units are still a minimum of 5-6x the cost of a fully decked out linac. Price and value matter, more so with each passing year.

Fraction shamers should be proton shamers if they are truly believers in the data. There's zero data to justify the cost differential in bread and butter adult rad onc at this point

Honest question as someone fairly new to the field... right now, the technical reimbursement for IMRT is about twice that of 3D. Was the ratio the same in the golden era of IMRT?
 
Honest question as someone fairly new to the field... right now, the technical reimbursement for IMRT is about twice that of 3D. Was the ratio the same in the golden era of IMRT?
@scarbrtj may be able to answer that better as i trained during the golden era but didn't practice during it.

I think that's less relevant than what the input costs are regardless, esp if go towards APM/bundles. The cost difference for the machines and tech was far less than the several fold difference between photons and protons, esp now, i would think imrt and 3d aren't that far off in cost to deliver
 
@scarbrtj may be able to answer that better as i trained during the golden era but didn't practice during it.

I think that's less relevant than what the input costs are regardless, esp if go towards APM/bundles. The cost difference for the machines and tech was far less than the several fold difference between photons and protons, esp now, i would think imrt and 3d aren't that far off in cost to deliver

...but if proton reimbursement were to priced based upon the differential cost between the units so that owners could cover their leases (i.e. 5-6x as you said), and that ratio is similar to what used to be the ratio of original reimbursement of IMRT/3D (and I don't know that it is... I was honestly asking), wouldn't the cost ratio be similar?
 
Honest question as someone fairly new to the field... right now, the technical reimbursement for IMRT is about twice that of 3D. Was the ratio the same in the golden era of IMRT?
6:1 or more. At some academic centers it would approach 10:1.
 
...but if proton reimbursement were to priced based upon the differential cost between the units so that owners could cover their leases (i.e. 5-6x as you said), and that ratio is similar to what used to be the ratio of original reimbursement of IMRT/3D (and I don't know that it is... I was honestly asking), wouldn't the cost ratio be similar?
6:1 or more. At some academic centers it would approach 10:1.
Pretty sure that was never the cost differential though which is why those rates have come down
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Old enough to be there in the beginning when IMRT was only available in "academic' places..8:1 in our "mid-tier" place...
 
Why stop at protons? There is very limited P3 data supporting the use of IMRT, IGRT, 3D planning, modern linacs. Maybe we should go back to X-ray simulators and wax pencils. Load up the colbalt unit with new isotopes and start melting aperture blocks. That will save more money than just going after protons.

Why stop at modalities? Most of what we radiate doesn’t even have a survival benefit (breast conservation and prostate).
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Why stop at protons? There is very limited P3 data supporting the use of IMRT, IGRT, 3D planning, modern linacs. Maybe we should go back to X-ray simulators and wax pencils. Load up the colbalt unit with new isotopes and start melting aperture blocks. That will save more money than just going after protons.

Why stop at modalities? Most of what we radiate doesn’t even have a survival benefit (breast conservation and prostate).

This is a classic logical fallacy - Slippery slope - Wikipedia

Let's keep going with your argument - all humans will die eventually. Why even bother to have medicine? It's like trying to swim up a waterfall.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 4 users
Top