Neil Caesar, J.D.

Neil Caesar, J.D.

Deselection of physicians from managed care plans and provider alliances is a significant problem. When a physician member of a medical group is deselected from one or more plans or alliances, he or she can no longer work with patients covered by these contracts unless they pay full fees personally. If the physicians' compensation formula does not allocate income according to individual productivity, the deselected physician's partners will become dissatisfied with the arrangement. Worse, the deselection may prevent the physician from seeing enough of the remaining practice patients to justify a full-time work load and income entitlement. What should the group do?

Modification of the compensation arrangement is one solution. This often leads to bickering, but it must be done. The larger issue, however, is to deal with the long-term implications of the deselection. Is the physician a troublemaker who resists conforming to the managed care plan's protocols? Is this an isolated incident or part of a pattern?

In many cases, deselection may be grounds for a medical group's termination of a physician. Most employment contracts allow the group to terminate a physician's employment if he or she loses staff privileges or medical licensure. But deselection is not a license loss or privileges loss. It is therefore crucial that the co-owners' employment arrangement make clear when a group may terminate a physician who loses his or her ability to continue seeing the practice's patients. Each group must decide for itself when this termination right shall apply. You will probably want to build some discretion into the contract so that deselection doesn't automatically result in termination. But be careful with too much discretion, as it can open the door for the terminated physician to argue bias or bad faith in the termination decision.

Problem physicians

I have negotiated many contracts where a hospital, independent practice association, physician-hospital organization or health plan sought the right to terminate a medical practice if any of its members lost his or her license, was convicted of certain crimes, got in trouble with Medicare or violated a noncompete contract. Usually I can negotiate a modification to this provision so that the group can avoid termination if it promptly gets rid of the offending physician. (Sometimes it is enough to make sure the offender has no more involvement with the contract.)

But many groups can't get rid of a problem physician easily. For this reason I recommend the "global termination" clause. Built into the employment contract or corresponding documents, this clause should provide that the physician employee must abide by the terms of all contracts or other arrangements entered into by the medical group, and that willful or reckless failure to do so will give the group the right to terminate the physician.

Neil B. Caesar is president of The Health Law Center (Neil B. Caesar Law Associates, PA), a national health law/consulting practice in Greenville, S.C.

Managed Care’s Top Ten Articles of 2016

There’s a lot more going on in health care than mergers (Aetna-Humana, Anthem-Cigna) creating huge players. Hundreds of insurers operate in 50 different states. Self-insured employers, ACA public exchanges, Medicare Advantage, and Medicaid managed care plans crowd an increasingly complex market.

Major health care players are determined to make health information exchanges (HIEs) work. The push toward value-based payment alone almost guarantees that HIEs will be tweaked, poked, prodded, and overhauled until they deliver on their promise. The goal: straight talk from and among tech systems.

They bring a different mindset. They’re willing to work in teams and focus on the sort of evidence-based medicine that can guide health care’s transformation into a system based on value. One question: How well will this new generation of data-driven MDs deal with patients?

The surge of new MS treatments have been for the relapsing-remitting form of the disease. There’s hope for sufferers of a different form of MS. By homing in on CD20-positive B cells, ocrelizumab is able to knock them out and other aberrant B cells circulating in the bloodstream.

A flood of tests have insurers ramping up prior authorization and utilization review. Information overload is a problem. As doctors struggle to keep up, health plans need to get ahead of the development of the technology in order to successfully manage genetic testing appropriately.

Having the data is one thing. Knowing how to use it is another. Applying its computational power to the data, a company called RowdMap puts providers into high-, medium-, and low-value buckets compared with peers in their markets, using specific benchmarks to show why outliers differ from the norm.
Competition among manufacturers, industry consolidation, and capitalization on me-too drugs are cranking up generic and branded drug prices. This increase has compelled PBMs, health plan sponsors, and retail pharmacies to find novel ways to turn a profit, often at the expense of the consumer.
The development of recombinant DNA and other technologies has added a new dimension to care. These medications have revolutionized the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and many of the other 80 or so autoimmune diseases. But they can be budget busters and have a tricky side effect profile.

Shelley Slade
Vogel, Slade & Goldstein

Hub programs have emerged as a profitable new line of business in the sales and distribution side of the pharmaceutical industry that has got more than its fair share of wheeling and dealing. But they spell trouble if they spark collusion, threaten patients, or waste federal dollars.

More companies are self-insuring—and it’s not just large employers that are striking out on their own. The percentage of employers who fully self-insure increased by 44% in 1999 to 63% in 2015. Self-insurance may give employers more control over benefit packages, and stop-loss protects them against uncapped liability.