D
deleted941485
Also, doesn’t CMS every now and then make these ridiculous proposed cuts like 15-20% across the board and then after a comment period walk it back to like 1-2% just so they can come back next year and repeat again?
i thought they were only testing it out in 5 regions which have not yet been named. the chances of you being in one of 5 regions is probably low, so to go ahead and pre-emptively reduce salaries based on this excuse is just an example of exploitation taking place because of oversaturation of residents.My malignant "academic" employer is already increasing my RVU expectations for the same (low) salary and lowering my (meager) bonus potential next year in preparation for the reimbusement changes. Is this happening to anyone else?
I thought it was mandatory for 40% of the specialty?i thought they were only testing it out in 5 regions which have not yet been named. the chances of you being in one of 5 regions is probably low, so to go ahead and pre-emptively reduce salaries based on this excuse is just an example of exploitation taking place because of oversaturation of residents.
Yeah you're probably right. Got a 5% pay raise last year and a 10% bonus because I had exceptional productivity by all metrics and perfect patient satisfaction scores.
I think they're mad that happened, so now they're cutting my benefits to offset the pay increase and getting me back down in bonus.
The national changes are probably a false alarm, red herring, etc.
Rad onc: a great specialty in which to waste your talent.
The purpose of the model is to reduce expenditures - no doubt about that. It'll hurt both the slow adopters of hypofx and the early/appropriate adopters (as written, may hurt the early adopters/efficient practices more). However, financial exposure in the model may not be great as it's only straight Medicare patients and no MA. Looking at my payer mix, this is actually a relative small proportion of my patients, as majority of my medicare patients have a secondary/MA plan. How about the rest of you?
I think its naive to think this wont impact commercial rates. Many payors reimburse as a percentage of prevailing medicare rates.
Most of the shops (PP and community) I have talked to have already cancelled any plans for new hires regardless of weather or not they are selected for the payment model They fully expect that no
Matter What happens with this program. there is more downside risk than upside. Even if they find the program ineffective CMS will just continue to reduce payments across he board anyway.
Yo this sounds like bs lol
No name calling please. I agree this will eventually impact rates, but not immediately. Also, the adjustments on this Model are hard to follow and I already have APM bundled payment relationships with several commercial payers. I've been discussing this Model with them as well. However, it's unclear how quickly those other will follow suit.
Evicore and payors like Cigna, Humana etc couldn't adopt breast Hypofx fast enough when Astro updated its guidelines, yet still continue to deny approvals for imrt in locally advanced/stage III lung despite the data coming out from 0617.Definitely didnt intend for it to be a disparaging comment...at the same time, do any of us believe the payors we bemoan here who use evicore, deny evidence based imrt, find any way they can not to pay us, etc. arent going to take their golden opportunity to cut rates in response to medicare cuts?
ASTRO has finally issued a draft response to CMS regarding the RO APM.
Document attached
Here is the TL;DR version:
1. In general ASTRO agrees with the spirit and intent of the RO APM. Therefore the crux of their response is to make it better/delay implementation rather than get rid of it.
2. Don't make participation mandatory - make it voluntary up-front like OCM
3. The case rates per ICD-10 code are flawed. For instance, brain mets or bone mets takes into account palliative, two-beam treatment rather than SRS/SBRT. These case rates need to be bumped up a bit.
4. If practices have already adopted hypofractionation, then they will be penalized because the RO APM is trying to reduce existing costs by provider. These practices/providers should therefore not be penalized for "doing the right thing."
5. Eliminate 5% waiver on incentive payments to freestanding centers [not certain what this is, could nof find it in original APM proposal. Anyone with insights?]
6. New technology (e.g. MRI guided linacs) should be paid fee-for-service for a limited time so as to not hurt programs that upgrade.
7. Delay most requirements until at least July 2020.
Hell you might not even have a practice by the end of 2021.
Private practice still exists in the UK and Canada
Tell me about all those Canadian doctors living under bridges. Have you even met one? Lol give me a break.Hahahahaha. Yeah I’ll send my resume right over. Cant wait to enter “private” practice in the Medical socialist paradise so many lucrative opportunities. Give me a break.
Medgator, I respect you but don’t insult the collective intelligence of the people on this board with nonsense like this.
Similar compensation structure, as opposed to being salaried with some unattainable rvu bonus structureI would say private practice RO is essentially nil in Canada. FFS does not necessarily mean PP.
Tell me about all those Canadian doctors living under bridges. Have you even met one? Lol give me a break.
Btw, pmh is one of the few listings on the ASTRO site that actually lists a salary range (FFS compensation structure?!?!?) Not exactly going to be signing up for medicaid with that
American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), ASTRO Radiation Oncology Career Center|Find Your Career Here
American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) - Find your next career at ASTRO Radiation Oncology Career Center. Check back frequently as new jobs are posted every day.careers.astro.org
Canada figured out long ago that private needed to exist alongside its government run UHC
![]()
Canada's Private Clinics Surge as Public System Falters (Published 2006)
The Cambie Surgery Center, Canada's most prominent private hospital, may be considered a rogue enterprise. Accepting money from patients for operations they would otherwise receive free of charge in a public hospital is technically prohibited in this country, even in cases where patients...www.nytimes.com
Quit trolling with the FUD until you have something to back it up
Ok so you like the salaried structure with a possible rvu bonus working for an MBA here. Got it.Lol. Dude I don’t know what you took this morning or the screed you just posed. Or what it supposedly proves.
They’re ain’t no PP rad Onc in Canada. Quit trolling.
Doctors under bridges? Red herring man totally beneath you.
Ok so you like the salaried structure with a possible rvu bonus working for an MBA here. Got it.
Not sure how FFS in Canada is some awful socialist situation to work in compared to that
Did you even click on the posting for PMH that I linked to? They aren't exactly making peanuts treating everyone with radium needles and Cobalt machines run by horsesCome on. You made a ridiculous statement about PP in socialized countries. Just own it. Most if not all rad oncs in the UK or Canada will
Never see anything like what we have in the US. They just don’t happen.
Did you even click on the posting for PMH that I linked to?
PP RO is not a thing in Canada.
But good ol capitalist FFS is. Glad we cleared that up
Says the guy who started it all by ranting about "socialist" medical systems he's never actually experiencedYou are all over the place.
You made a false statement about PP in Canada for rad Onc then went on a rampage about FFS and then capitalism.
Take the night off seriously.
ASTRO has finally issued a draft response to CMS regarding the RO APM.
Document attached
Here is the TL;DR version:
1. In general ASTRO agrees with the spirit and intent of the RO APM. Therefore the crux of their response is to make it better/delay implementation rather than get rid of it.
2. Don't make participation mandatory - make it voluntary up-front like OCM
3. The case rates per ICD-10 code are flawed. For instance, brain mets or bone mets takes into account palliative, two-beam treatment rather than SRS/SBRT. These case rates need to be bumped up a bit.
4. If practices have already adopted hypofractionation, then they will be penalized because the RO APM is trying to reduce existing costs by provider. These practices/providers should therefore not be penalized for "doing the right thing."
5. Eliminate 5% waiver on incentive payments to freestanding centers [not certain what this is, could nof find it in original APM proposal. Anyone with insights?]
6. New technology (e.g. MRI guided linacs) should be paid fee-for-service for a limited time so as to not hurt programs that upgrade.
7. Delay most requirements until at least July 2020.