Medicare Pilot Program Could Deny Coverage of Pain Treatments

By Grace Mackleby and Jeff Marr

Medicare has launched a six-year pilot program that could eventually transform access to health care for some of the millions of people across the U.S. who rely on it for their health insurance coverage.

Traditional Medicare is a government-administered insurance plan for people over 65 or with disabilities. About half of the 67 million Americans insured through Medicare have this coverage. The rest have Medicare Advantage plans administered by private companies.

The pilot program, dubbed the Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction Model, is an experimental program that began to affect people enrolled in traditional Medicare from six states in January 2026.

During this pilot, medical providers must apply for permission, or prior authorization, before giving 14 kinds of health procedures and devices. The program uses artificial intelligence software to identify treatment requests it deems unnecessary or harmful and denies them. This is similar to the way many Medicare Advantage plans work.

As health economists who have studied Medicare and the use of AI in prior authorization, we believe this pilot could save Medicare money, but it should be closely monitored to ensure that it does not harm the health of patients enrolled in the traditional Medicare program.

Prior Authorization Required

The pilot marks a dramatic change.

Unlike other types of health insurance, including Medicare Advantage, traditional Medicare generally does not require health care providers to submit requests for Medicare to authorize the treatments they recommend to patients.

Requiring prior authorization for these procedures and devices could reduce wasteful spending and help patients by steering them away from unnecessary treatments. However, there is a risk that it could also delay or interfere with some necessary care and add to the paperwork providers must contend with.

Prior authorization is widely used by Medicare Advantage plans. Many insurance companies hire technology firms to make prior authorization decisions for their Medicare Advantage plans.

Pilots are a key way that Medicare improves its services. Medicare tests changes on a small number of people or providers to see whether they should be implemented more broadly.

The six states participating are Arizona, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas and Washington. The 14 services that require prior authorization during this pilot include steroid injections for pain management and incontinence-control devices. The pilot ends December 2031.

If the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which administers Medicare, deems the pilot successful, the Department of Health and Human services could expand the program to include more procedures and more states.

An Extra Hurdle for Providers

This pilot isn’t changing the rules for what traditional Medicare covers. Instead, it adds an extra hurdle for medical providers before they can administer, for example, arthroscopic treatment for an osteoarthritic knee.

If Medicare issues a denial rather than authorizing the service, the patient goes without that treatment unless their provider files an appeal and prevails.

Medicare has hired tech companies to do the work of denying or approving prior authorization requests, with the aid of artificial intelligence.

Many of these are the same companies that do prior authorizations for Medicare Advantage plans.

The government pays the companies a percentage of what Medicare would have spent on the denied treatments. This means companies are paid more when they deny more prior authorization requests.

Medicare monitors the pilot program for inappropriate denials.

‘Low Value’ Treatments Targeted

Past research has shown that when insurers require prior authorization, the people they cover get fewer services. This pilot is likely to reduce treatments and Medicare spending, though how much remains unknown.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services chose the services targeted by the pilot because there is evidence they are given excessively in many cases.

If the program denies cases where a health service is inappropriate, or of “low value” for a patient’s health, people enrolled in traditional Medicare could benefit.

But for each treatment targeted by the pilot, there are some cases where that kind of health care is necessary.

If the program’s AI-based decision method has trouble identifying these necessary cases and denies them, people could lose access to care they need.

The pilot also adds to the paperwork that medical providers must do. Paperwork is already a major burden for providers and contributes to burnout.

AI’s Role

No matter how the government evaluates prior authorizations, we think this pilot is likely to reduce use of the targeted treatments.

The impact of using AI to evaluate these prior authorizations is unclear. AI could allow tech companies to automatically approve more cases, which could speed up decisions. However, companies could use time saved by AI to put more effort into having people review cases flagged by AI, which could increase denials.

Many private insurers already use AI for Medicare Advantage prior authorization decisions, although there has been limited research on these models, and little is known about how accurate AI is for this purpose.

What evidence there is suggests that AI-aided prior authorization leads to higher denial rates and larger reductions in health care use than when insurers make prior authorization decisions without using AI.

Winners and Losers

Any money the government saves during the pilot will depend on whether and how frequently these treatments are used inappropriately and how aggressively tech companies deny care.

In our view, this pilot will likely create winners and losers. Tech companies may benefit financially, though how much will depend on how big the treatment reductions are. But medical providers will have more paperwork to deal with and will get paid less if some of their Medicare requests are denied.

The impact on patients will depend on how well tech companies identify care that probably would be unnecessary and avoid denying care that is essential.

Taxpayers, who pay into Medicare during their working years, stand to benefit if the pilot can cut long-term Medicare costs, an important goal given Medicare’s growing budget crisis.

Like in Medicare Advantage, savings from prior authorization requirements in this pilot are split with private companies. Unlike in Medicare Advantage, however, this split is based on a fixed, observable percentage so that payments to private companies cannot exceed total savings, and the benefits of the program are easier for Medicare to quantify.

In our view, given the potential trade-offs, Medicare will need to evaluate the results of this pilot carefully before expanding it to more states – especially if it also expands the program to include services where unnecessary care is less common.

Grace Mackleby, PhD, is a research scientist of Health Policy and Economics at the University of Southern California. She is also a visiting scholar at the University of Utah Department of Population Health Sciences in Salt Lake City.

Jeff Marr, PhD, is an Assistant Professor of Health Services, Policy, and Practice at Brown University. His current work focuses on Medicare, prior authorization, and the use of AI in healthcare. 

This article originally appeared in The Conversation and is republished with permission.

Medicare Plans to End Most Telehealth Coverage Soon

By Crystal Lindell

Telehealth access was greatly expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic, but that expansion is slated to end this month for many older patients. Medicare is planning to end most coverage for telehealth appointments as of January 31, 2026.

There are some exceptions to the new policy. Telehealth appointments for those living in a rural area or seeking care in a rural area will still be covered. So will appointments for monthly home dialysis for end-stage renal disease; appointments for acute stroke; and appointments for behavioral health disorders.

The new policy only applies to Original Medicare plans. Medicare Advantage Plans may still cover telehealth appointments.

It’s baffling that this type of policy is being implemented for Medicare patients at all, seeing as how most people on Medicare are senior citizens — a demographic that is more likely to have mobility issues as well as a higher risk of falls.

The American Medical Association is calling on the federal government to make telehealth coverage permanent ahead of this month’s deadline. Congress has repeatedly extended the telehealth flexibilities for Medicare patients, but often at the last moment. The AMA says the constant procrastination creates uncertainty for millions of patients and their physicians.

“As the current waiver deadline approaches, Congress must finally act decisively to prevent a disruptive and abrupt halt to the expanded telehealth services that have improved care continuity, chronic disease management, and access for rural and underserved communities,” said AMA President Bobby Mukkamala, MD.

The AMA says telehealth offers the potential for long-term savings through early medical intervention, improved chronic disease management, and reduced use of expensive emergency care and inpatient services. Telehealth also has higher appointment completion rates and reduces hospital readmissions. In short, it helps our complex healthcare system work more efficiently and at a lower cost. 

“Now is the time for lawmakers to secure innovation, modernize care delivery, and protect access to telehealth for all Medicare beneficiaries by passing comprehensive, forward-looking reform,” the AMA said.

Speaking from personal experience, I am reminded of the time my grandma fell on the ice in front of her home a few years ago and broke her hip. The injury led to a months-long recovery process that included an extended stay at a rehabilitation facility. Aside from how inconvenient the entire episode was, it was also an extremely painful injury for her to endure.

Today, we limit how often she leaves the house to reduce the risk of her falling again. And we are especially cautious whenever the temperatures drop low enough to create icy patches on the ground.

Thus, whenever possible, we opt for telehealth appointments to keep grandma safe. Aside from reducing her fall risk, they also lower the risk of her being exposed to viruses at an in-person doctor’s office.

It seems like common sense that seniors in particular would have easy access to telehealth services, and my hope is that Congress will act and extend that access before the deadline. 

3 New Year’s Resolutions on Behalf of Pain Patients

By Crystal Lindell

It’s now 2026, which means I’ve spent too many decades making mostly failed New Year’s resolutions for myself. So this year, I’m not going to bother.

Instead, I have some New Year’s resolutions for other people. Specifically, they’re for people with power, like doctors and healthcare policy makers.

After all, it really seems like they need to make some policy changes, given the current state of things for people in pain. Perhaps they are just waiting for someone to tell them what those changes should be. 

Below is a look at three of my 2026 New Year’s resolutions on behalf of pain patients..

Resolution # 1: Fully Legalize 7-OH and Develop New Edibles

There’s so many conflicting local regulations when it comes to kratom and 7-OH, despite the fact that neither one is as harmful as health officials and lawmakers often claim.

For those unfamiliar, 7-OH is short for 7-hydroxymitragynine, an alkaloid that occurs naturally in kratom in trace amounts. Some kratom vendors now sell concentrated versions of 7-OH to boost its potency as a pain reliever and mood enhancer.

A lot of pain patients find both 7-OH and kratom to be effective at treating chronic pain. And while I am glad that both are still legal in most places in the United States, I would really like to see them fully legalized across the country, as municipalities and states realize just how beneficial these products can be.

I also would really like to see 7-OH vendors come out with some new edible formats, like chocolates, gummies and even seltzer.

I think 7-OH in particular has the potential to help a lot of people who have been denied adequate pain treatment. However, many of them may not be comfortable figuring out where to buy and correctly dose a 7-OH chewable tablet, especially if they are among one of the largest demographic of pain patients: the elderly.  

I think of my grandma trying to get 7-OH tablets at a local smoke shop, or having to figure out how to order them online. Both options are bad. 

Ideally, regular grocery stores and local pharmacies would have a display of low-dose 7-OH chocolates available over-the-counter for pain patients like her.

Resolution # 2: Stop Prescribing Gabapentin and Tramadol for Pain

This would be such a relatively easy change for doctors to make, and there’s so much science to back it up.

In October of 2025, PNN covered a study showing that tramadol is often not effective for chronic pain. And PNN has long been covering how ineffective gabapentin is for most pain conditions.  

However, despite the evidence, doctors still regularly prescribe gabapentin and tramadol for chronic pain. 

It doesn’t have to be that way. Doctors have alternatives that actually work, most notably low-dose hydrocodone. Yes, there are more regulations around that medication, making it more difficult to prescribe. But actually giving pain patients real options shouldn’t be so difficult.  

So, I would like doctors and other healthcare professionals to make it their goal to stop prescribing ineffective medications. Instead, offer pain treatments that actually work. Your patients will thank you.

Resolution # 3: Implement Medicare for All

Yes, I know this one is kind of unrealistic. But that’s what New Year’s magic is all about —  putting whimsical ideas out into the universe with the hope of seeing them come to fruition. 

After all, it can’t happen if we never ask for it.

Unfortunately, as the year starts off, we are actually heading in the opposite direction, with many Americans seeing their health insurance premiums soar or even deciding not to buy coverage. 

But I’m hoping that may be the catalyst we need for the public to start demanding real change. Right now, millions of people are losing their health insurance because the Trump administration ended federal subsidies for coverage under the Affordable Care Act. 

It’s an awful and unnecessary situation that our policy leaders have the power to fix, if only they worked together on the issue.

Every human should have the right to healthcare, and Medicare for All would go a long way to making that happen.

I know a lot of these resolutions probably won’t come to fruition in 2026, but I do think they could realistically happen before we start the next decade. And all of them have the potential to vastly improve the lives of millions of people living with chronic pain.

Happy New Year everyone. May your 2026 be filled with low-pain days, too much joy, and lots of love.

Medicare May Stop Paying for Peripheral Nerve Blocks

By Pat Anson

A public comment period will end soon on a proposal that could dramatically limit coverage of peripheral nerve blocks (PNB) and nerve ablation procedures for Medicare patients suffering from chronic nerve pain.

A PNB generally involves the injection of an anesthetic or corticosteroid into an injured area to block the transmission of pain signals. Under the proposal, all PNBs and nerve ablation procedures would no longer be covered for any pain condition, and the number of steroid injections and radiofrequency ablation procedures for nerve pain and trigeminal neuralgia would be limited.    

Five Medicare administrative contractors (MACs) representing 24 states made the proposal in September and public comments will be accepted until November 22. MACs are private insurers that process Medicare claims and determine what coverage is “reasonable and necessary.” 

In this case, they’ve determined that PNB’s and other nerve procedures have little or no benefit, and “therefore are not considered medically reasonable and necessary.” If approved, the proposal could be adopted by MACs in other states and become de facto Medicare policy nationwide.

Not surprisingly, there is opposition to the MAC proposal from healthcare providers who perform the procedures, who claim denial of coverage would force millions of chronic pain patients “to turn to opioids or less effective treatments.”       

“For decades, chronic pain patients have received treatment from PNBs and ablation techniques that provide rapid and durable pain relief, enhance function and quality of life, and decrease reliance on systemic pain medications, including opioids,” said Patrick Giam, MD, President of the American Society of Anesthesiologists. 

“We urge Medicare to consider the compelling clinical and functional evidence that supports coverage of PNBs and related procedures.” 

“Unless the MACs want more Americans to be unable to work, reliant on opioids, and suffering in pain, it’s hard to understand their motivation here,” Tricia Pendergrast, MD, an anesthesiology resident at the University of Michigan, wrote in a recent STAT News op/ed 

“Eliminating peripheral nerve block coverage will not result in meaningful cost savings from these patients, and may lead to more frequent emergency department and clinic visits, increased use of opioids and other pharmacologic interventions.” 

As an alternative to injections and nerve blocks, the MAC proposal suggest the use of anti-depressants, gabapentin, topical lidocaine and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) as first-line treatments for neuropathic pain.

Pregabalin, tramadol, capsaicin patches, Botox injections, and psychotherapy would be considered second-line treatments. 

Opioids should only be considered as a third-line treatment, according to the MAC proposal, “as a last resort.”

Another effort to limit coverage of chronic pain treatments for Medicare patients begins in January. That is when Medicare is launching a 6-year pilot program in six states that will use artificial intelligence (AI) to review prior authorization claims for epidural steroid injections, cervical fusions, spinal cord stimulators, arthroscopic knee surgery, and other pain treatments. 

Medicare considers the treatments to be “low value,” potentially unsafe, and ripe for fraud and wasteful spending. 

The Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction Model will cover Medicare patients in New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Arizona, and Washington who seek treatment for chronic pain, impotence, incontinence, and burns or wounds needing skin and tissue substitutes. 

Government Shutdown Highlights Absurd Cost of Health Insurance

By Crystal Lindell

Health insurance has gotten so expensive that it almost makes sense to ask, “Is it worth the price?”

Insurance is sold to consumers through a “worst-case scenario” framework. Companies tell people they have to have health insurance or risk disaster.

“What if you suddenly need millions of dollars in ICU care? You need to have our health insurance to pay that bill!” is how they frame it.

Naturally, the insurance companies follow that up with, “If we are saving you millions of dollars in medical expenses, then tens of thousands of dollars for your policy is actually quite a bargain, right?”

“Tens of thousands of dollars” might seem like an exaggeration if you haven’t been paying close attention to health insurance prices lately, but it’s not.

According to data recently released by KFF, a health policy nonprofit, family premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance reached an average of $26,993 this year.

Their data shows that workers pay $6,850 of that out of their own paychecks. As such, that’s the price most people associate with their plans.

But in reality, employees are paying the full $26,993, because every penny that companies spend on your health insurance is a penny that could be in your paycheck instead. Hiding those costs behind “employer contributions” is just a neat trick insurance companies use to hide the real price you’re paying.

And if you’re buying insurance on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace, then the real cost of your plan is hidden in a different way: behind federal subsidies. Some of those subsidies will expire at the end of the year, and it’s forcing people to confront just how expensive insurance has gotten. 

The ACA subsidies are at the heart of why our federal government is currently shut down. Democrats want them to continue, and Republicans do not.

The potentially devastating effects of ending them for the 24 million people currently enrolled through the ACA are becoming apparent. Open enrollment for 2026 coverage begins Nov.1, and people have to make their decisions soon.

The Washington State Standard reports that individual insurance in that state bought through the ACA are set to rise an average of 21% next year. 

As of now, the subsidies save ACA enrollees an average of $1,330 per year, according to Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson’s office. For seniors, those savings jump to more than $1,900 annually.

Going Without Coverage

NBC News reports that some people are planning to forego health insurance, rather than pay higher prices. They shared the story of Arkansas residents Ginny Murray and her husband, Chaz. The couple plans to drop coverage and pay out of their own pocket if an unexpected illness strikes.

“Our plan is to keep putting the money we’re already paying towards health care in savings,” Ginny explained. “And really just hoping that we don’t have a stroke or we don’t have a heart attack.”

It’s a plan I myself adopted years ago after getting laid off and deciding to make a go of it as a freelancer who does odds and ends on the side to survive. When I tried to look into health insurance plans, I quickly realized that it was much cheaper to just pay cash out of pocket for my doctor appointments and prescriptions.

Especially since even if I pay for insurance, deductibles and co-pays mean I could still end up with thousands of dollars of medical debt. 

Yes, I live under the constant fear that I will be one of the people that health insurance companies warn about. That someday I will find myself in the ICU in need of millions of dollars of care that I can’t pay for.

But it’s a risk I have to take at this stage of my life because I just cannot afford to buy my own health insurance, even with the ACA subsidies. 

Last I checked, I did not qualify for Medicaid, although that too brings its own set of problems. Currently my primary care doctor is across the state line at the closest university hospital to my house. He’s well equipped to handle the chronic, complex health problems that I face But if I got onto Medicaid in my state, I may not be able to see him anymore.

Mine is just one story among millions who are trying to figure out how to pay for their health care under a private health insurance system where companies have every incentive to raise prices to eternal heights.

That’s why, in reality, we should be striving for more than just some ACA subsidies for health insurance. Medical expenses and health insurance costs should not constantly loom over people’s heads. 

We could be implementing universal Medicare at the very least. A program like Medicare for All would be life changing for me. I’m sick, but not sick enough for disability. And since I am only 42, I can’t get Medicare yet.

It doesn’t have to be that way. What if I could get the same health insurance my grandma has? Why do I have to wait until I’m 65 to do that? Why is 65 the arbitrary number?

Other developed countries have better alternatives, such as universal healthcare coverage, than the current U.S. system. We should have better access to health insurance too – or at least something more affordable.

Medicare Pilot Program Will Use AI To Decide If Pain Treatments Are Worth the Cost

By Pat Anson

Medicare patients in six states who need epidural steroid injections, cervical fusions, spinal cord stimulators, arthroscopic knee surgery and other treatments for chronic pain will soon have their prior authorization requests reviewed by artificial intelligence (AI) to decide whether the treatments are worth the cost.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is launching a 6-year pilot program on January 1, 2026 called the Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction Model --- known as “WISeR” for short.

WISeR will cover Original Medicare patients in New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Arizona, and Washington who seek treatment for chronic pain, impotence, incontinence, and burns or wounds needing skin and tissue substitutes.

WISeR will review over a dozen treatments that CMS considers low-value, potentially unsafe, or suspicious because of prior reports of fraud and wasteful spending. The low-value treatments alone cost Medicare nearly $6 billion in 2022.

“CMS is committed to crushing fraud, waste, and abuse, and the WISeR Model will help root out waste in Original Medicare,” CMS Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz said in a press release. “Combining the speed of technology and the experienced clinicians, this new model helps bring Medicare into the 21st century by testing a streamlined prior authorization process, while protecting Medicare beneficiaries from being given unnecessary and often costly procedures.”

Under traditional or Original Medicare, most covered services do not require prior authorization, but Medicare Advantage (MA) plans often do. For that reason, CMS is partnering with private MA plans that have more experience using AI and other advanced technologies to process prior authorization requests. If a request is denied by WISeR, the agency says it will then be reviewed before a final decision “by licensed clinicians, not machines.”

CMS claims that WISeR will “expedite decision making” and not change coverage for traditional Medicare beneficiaries, who “retain the freedom to seek care from their provider or supplier of choice.”

Those providers, however, will be incentivized with higher Medicare payments if they participate in WISeR and show they can reduce the use of low value treatments and help lower Medicare spending.  

Pain treatments that will be reviewed under the WISeR Model include these procedures:

• Electrical Nerve Stimulation  

• Deep Brain Stimulation for Essential Tremor and Parkinson's Disease

• Vagus Nerve Stimulation

• Surgical Removal or Ablation of Nerves

• Epidural Steroid Injections (excluding facet joint injections)

• Percutaneous Vertebral Augmentation (PVA) for Vertebral Compression Fractures

• Cervical Fusions  

• Arthroscopic Surgery for Knee Osteoarthritis

• Percutaneous Image-Guided Lumbar Decompression for Spinal Stenosis

Many of these treatments have already drawn scrutiny for being ineffective or costly. Studies have found that spinal cord stimulation, for example, has no benefit for back pain; while epidural steroid injections, nerve blocks and nerve ablation have been found to have little or no benefit.

‘Perverse Incentives’

Not surprisingly, the WISeR Model has drawn criticism from physicians who perform the procedures, who decry the use of AI and algorithms to make healthcare decisions.

“We firmly believe that (WISeR) will jeopardize patient access to care, create more administrative burdens for physicians, offer perverse payment incentives for third-party vendors, and represent a substantial reversal of progress toward this Administration’s goal of prioritizing patients over paperwork,” a coalition of 23 neurosurgeon organizations wrote in a letter to Dr. Oz.

“Decision criteria to be used by participating vendors — including algorithms, scoring models, and evidence-based guidelines — remain a “black box,” leaving stakeholders with little to no insight into how prior authorization determinations will be made.”

Patient rights groups and some politicians say WISeR will create new roadblocks for Medicare patients needing treatment.

“While prior authorization is often described as a cost-containment strategy, in practice it increases provider burden, takes time away from patients, limits patients’ access to life-saving care, and creates unnecessary administrative burden,” Rep. Ami Bera (D) and Rep. Suzan DelBene (D) said in a recent letter to Dr. Oz.

“The use of prior authorization in Medicare Advantage shows us that, in practice, WISeR will likely limit beneficiaries’ access to care, increase burden on our already overburdened health care work force, and create perverse incentives to put profit over patients.”

About 12% of prior authorization denials by Medicare Advantage insurers were appealed in 2023, and more than 80% of them were overturned, according to the Center for Medicare Advocacy.

An HHS Inspector General's report in 2018 found “widespread and persistent” problems involving denials of care by Medicare Advantage. Another report in 2022 found 13% of denied requests actually met Medicare’s rules and should have been approved.

“(WISeR) is) a backdoor way of putting everybody in a Medicare Advantage plan,” Carrie Graham, executive director of the Medicare Policy Initiative told Cleveland.com. “It’s a first step to getting rid of, or downgrading, the freedom that traditional Medicare provides.”

Trump’s Early Moves Could Raise Drug Costs and Reduce Insurance Coverage

By Julie Appleby and Stephanie Armour, KFF Health News

President Donald Trump’s early actions on health care signal his likely intention to wipe away some Biden-era programs to lower drug costs and expand coverage under public insurance programs.

The orders he issued soon after reentering the White House have policymakers, health care executives, and patient advocates trying to read the tea leaves to determine what’s to come. The directives, while less expansive than orders he issued at the beginning of his first term, provide a possible road map that health researchers say could increase the number of uninsured Americans and weaken safety-net protections for low-income people.

However, Trump’s initial orders will have little immediate impact. His administration will have to take further regulatory steps to fully reverse Biden’s policies, and the actions left unclear the direction the new president aims to steer the U.S. health care system.

“Everyone is looking for signals on what Trump might do on a host of health issues. On the early EOs, Trump doesn’t show his cards,” said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF, the health policy research, polling, and news organization that includes KFF Health News.

A flurry of executive orders and other actions Trump issued on his first day back in office included rescinding directives by his predecessor, former President Joe Biden, that had promoted lowering drug costs and expanding coverage under the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid.

Executive orders “as a general matter are nothing more than gussied up internal memoranda saying, ‘Hey, agency, could you do something?’” said Nicholas Bagley, a law professor at the University of Michigan. “There may be reason to be concerned, but it’s down the line.”

That’s because making changes to established law like the ACA or programs like Medicaid generally requires new rulemaking or congressional action, either of which could take months.

Trump has yet to win Senate confirmation for any of his picks to lead federal health agencies, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the anti-vaccine activist and former Democratic presidential candidate he has nominated the lead the Department of Health and Human Services. On Monday, he appointed Dorothy Fink, a physician who directs the HHS Office on Women’s Health, as acting secretary for the department.

During Biden’s term, his administration did implement changes consistent with his health orders, including lengthening the enrollment period for the ACA, increasing funding for groups that help people enroll, and supporting the Inflation Reduction Act, which boosted subsidies to help people buy coverage. After falling during the Trump administration, enrollment in ACA plans soared under Biden, hitting record highs each year. More than 24 million people are enrolled in ACA plans for 2025.

The drug order Trump rescinded called on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to test ways to lower drug costs, such as setting a flat $2 copay for some generic drugs in Medicare, the health program for people 65 and older, and having states try to get better prices by banding together to buy certain expensive cell and gene therapies.

That might indicate Trump expects to do less on drug pricing this term or even roll back drug price negotiation in Medicare.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Biden’s experiments in lowering drug prices didn’t fully get off the ground, said Joseph Antos of the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning research group. Antos said he’s a bit puzzled by Trump’s executive order ending the pilot programs, given that he has backed the idea of tying drug costs in the U.S. to lower prices paid by other nations.

“As you know, Trump is a big fan of that,” Antos said. “Lowering drug prices is an easy thing for people to identify with.”

In other moves, Trump also rescinded Biden orders on racial and gender equity and issued an order asserting that there are only two sexes, male and female. HHS under the Biden administration supported gender-affirming health care for transgender people and provided guidance on civil rights protections for transgender youths. Trump’s missive on gender has intensified concerns within the LGBTQ+ community that he will seek to restrict such care.

“The administration has forecast that it will fail to protect and will seek to discriminate against transgender people and anyone else it considers an ‘other,’” said Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, senior counsel and health care strategist at Lambda Legal, a civil rights advocacy group.

“We stand ready to respond to the administration’s discriminatory acts, as we have previously done to much success, and to defend the ability of transgender people to access the care that they need, including through Medicaid and Medicare.”

Trump also halted new regulations that were under development until they are reviewed by the new administration. He could abandon some proposals that were yet to be finalized by the Biden administration, including expanded coverage of anti-obesity medications through Medicare and Medicaid and a rule that would limit nicotine levels in tobacco products, Katie Keith, a Georgetown University professor who was deputy director of the White House Gender Policy Council under Biden, wrote in an article for Health Affairs Forefront.

“Interestingly, he did not disturb President Biden’s three executive orders and a presidential memorandum on reproductive health care,” she wrote.

However, Trump instructed top brass in his administration to look for additional orders or memorandums to rescind. (He revoked the Biden order that created the Gender Policy Council.)

Democrats criticized Trump’s health actions. A spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, Alex Floyd, said in a statement that “Trump is again proving that he lied to the American people and doesn’t care about lowering costs — only what’s best for himself and his ultra-rich friends.”

Medicaid Cuts

Trump’s decision to end a Biden-era executive order aimed at improving the ACA and Medicaid probably portends coming cuts and changes to both programs, some policy experts say. His administration previously opened the door to work requirements in Medicaid — the federal-state program for low-income adults, children, and people with disabilities — and previously issued guidance enabling states to cap federal Medicaid funding. Medicaid and the related Children’s Health Insurance Program cover more than 79 million people.

“Medicaid will be a focus because it’s become so sprawling,” said Chris Pope, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative policy group. “It’s grown after the pandemic. Provisions have expanded, such as using social determinants of health.”

The administration may reevaluate steps taken by the Biden administration to allow Medicaid to pay for everyday expenses some states have argued affect its beneficiaries’ health, including air conditioners, meals, and housing.

One of Trump’s directives orders agencies to deliver emergency price relief and “eliminate unnecessary administrative expenses and rent-seeking practices that increase healthcare costs.” (Rent-seeking is an economic concept describing efforts to exploit the political system for financial gain without creating other benefits for society.)

“It is not clear what this refers to, and it will be interesting to see how agencies respond,” Keith wrote in her Health Affairs article.

Policy experts like Edwin Park at Georgetown University have also noted that, separately, Republicans are working on budget proposals that could lead to large cuts in Medicaid funding, in part to pay for tax cuts.

Sarah Lueck, vice president for health policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning research group, also pointed to Congress: “On one hand, what we see coming from the executive orders by Trump is important because it shows us the direction they are going with policy changes. But the other track is that on the Hill, there are active conversations about what goes into budget legislation. They are considering some pretty huge cuts to Medicaid.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

What Will Trump’s White House Return Mean for Healthcare?

By Stephanie Armour, KFF Health News

Former President Donald Trump’s election victory and looming return to the White House will likely bring changes that scale back the nation’s public health insurance programs — increasing the uninsured rate, while imposing new barriers to abortion and other reproductive care.

The reverberations will be felt far beyond Washington, DC, and could include an erosion of the Affordable Care Act’s consumer protections, the imposition of work requirements in Medicaid and funding cuts to the safety net insurance, and challenges to federal agencies that safeguard public health. Abortion restrictions may tighten nationwide with a possible effort to restrict the mailing of abortion medications.

And with the elevation of vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to Trump’s inner circle of advisers, public health interventions with rigorous scientific backing — whether fluoridating public water supplies or inoculating children — could come under fire.

Trump defeated Vice President Kamala Harris with 277 Electoral College votes, The Associated Press declared at 5:34 a.m. ET on Wednesday. He won 51% of the vote nationally to Harris’ 47.5%, the AP projected.

Trump’s victory will give a far broader platform to skeptics and critics of federal health programs and actions. Worst case, public health authorities worry, the U.S. could see increases in preventable illnesses; a weakening of public confidence in established science; and debunked notions — such as a link between vaccines and autism — adopted as policy.

Trump said in an NBC News interview on Nov. 3 that he would “make a decision” about banning some vaccines, saying he would consult with Kennedy and calling him “a very talented guy.”

‘Concepts of a Plan’

While Trump has said he will not try again to repeal the Affordable Care Act, his administration will face an immediate decision next year on whether to back an extension of enhanced premium subsidies for Obamacare insurance plans. Without the enhanced subsidies, steep premium increases causing lower enrollment are projected. The current uninsured rate, about 8%, would almost certainly rise.

Policy specifics have not moved far beyond the “concepts of a plan” Trump said he had during his debate with Harris, though Vice President-elect JD Vance later said the administration would seek to inject more competition into ACA marketplaces.

Republicans were projected to claim a Senate majority, in addition to the White House, while control of the House was not yet resolved early Wednesday.

Polls show the ACA has gained support among the public, including provisions such as preexisting condition protections and allowing young people to stay on family health plans until they are 26.

Trump supporters and others who have worked in his administration say the former president wants to improve the law in ways that will lower costs. They say he has already shown he will be forceful when it comes to lowering high health care prices, pointing to efforts during his presidency to pioneer price transparency in medical costs.

“On affordability, I’d see him building on the first term,” said Brian Blase, who served as a Trump health adviser from 2017 to 2019. Relative to a Democratic administration, he said, there will be “much more focus” on “minimizing fraud and waste.”

Efforts to weaken the ACA could include slashing funds for enrollment outreach, enabling consumers to purchase more health plans that don’t comply with ACA consumer protections, and allowing insurers to charge sicker people higher premiums.

Democrats say they expect the worst.

“We know what their agenda is,” said Leslie Dach, executive chair of Protect Our Care, a health care policy and advocacy organization in Washington, D.C. He worked in the Obama administration helping to implement the ACA. “They’re going to raise costs for millions of Americans and rip coverage away from millions and, meanwhile, they will give tax breaks to rich people.”

Theo Merkel, director of the Private Health Reform Initiative at the right-leaning Paragon Health Institute, which Blase leads, said the enhanced ACA subsidies extended by the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022 do nothing to improve plans or lower premiums. He said they paper over the plans’ low value with larger government subsidies.

Other Trump supporters say the president-elect may support preserving Medicare’s authority to negotiate drug prices, another provision of the IRA. Trump has championed reducing drug prices, and in 2020 advanced a test model that would have tied the prices of some drugs in Medicare to lower costs overseas, said Merkel, who worked in Trump’s first White House. The drug industry successfully sued to block the program.

Within Trump’s circles, some names have already been floated as possible leaders for the Department of Health and Human Services. They include former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Seema Verma, who ran the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services during the Trump administration.

Kennedy, who suspended his independent presidential run and endorsed Trump, has told his supporters that Trump promised him control of HHS. Trump said publicly before Election Day that he would give Kennedy a big role in his administration, but he may have difficulty winning Senate confirmation for a Cabinet position.

While Trump has vowed to protect Medicare and said he supports funding home care benefits, he’s been less specific about his intentions for Medicaid, which provides coverage to lower-income and disabled people. Some health analysts expect the program will be especially vulnerable to spending cuts, which could help finance the extension of tax breaks that expire at the end of next year.

Possible changes include the imposition of work requirements on beneficiaries in some states. The administration and Republicans in Congress could also try to revamp the way Medicaid is funded. Now, the federal government pays states a variable percentage of program costs. Conservatives have long sought to cap the federal allotments to states, which critics say would lead to draconian cuts.

“Medicaid will be a big target in a Trump administration,” said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News.

Less clear is the potential future of reproductive health rights.

Trump has said decisions about abortion restrictions should be left to the states. Thirteen states ban abortion with few exceptions, while 28 others restrict the procedure based on gestational duration, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy organization focused on advancing reproductive rights. Trump said before the election that he would not sign a national abortion ban.

State ballot measures to protect abortion rights were adopted in four states, including Missouri, which Trump won by about 18 points, according to preliminary AP reports. Abortion rights measures were rejected by voters in Florida and South Dakota.

Trump could move to restrict access to abortion medications, used in more than half of abortions, either by withdrawing the FDA’s authorization for the drugs or by enforcing a 19th-century law, the Comstock Act, that abortion opponents say bans their shipment. Trump has said he generally would not use the law to ban mail delivery of the drugs.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Rates of Cannabis Use Disorder Rising for Medicare Patients

By Pat Anson

A new FDA study is documenting the growing use of cannabis by seniors and how some are being diagnosed as having “cannabis use disorder” by their doctors.

A research team led by FDA epidemiologist Silvia Perez-Vilar, PharmD, analyzed the health data of nearly 56 million Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older. They looked for Medicare claims that included at least one of the many billable diagnostic codes for cannabis use disorder (CUD).

There are over three dozen such codes, which include everything from cannabis intoxication and dependence to delusions, psychosis and “perceptual disturbance” – a diagnosis that can mean anything from not being able to recognize words to seeing things that aren’t there. There are even CUD codes for “unspecified” symptoms of cannabis use and for being in remission.

The research findings, recently published in JAMA Network Open, found that Medicare claims for CUD have steadily risen in recent years, especially in states where cannabis was legalized for medical or adult recreational use.

“Rates of cannabis-related disorder encounters increased from 2017 through 2022 among US Medicare-insured older adults. We observed the highest rates in states or territories that legalized adult and medical use of cannabis,” they wrote. “Overall, data suggest that increasing rates of health care encounters documenting cannabis-related disorders among older adults might be associated with the type of cannabis legalization.”

What were these “increasing rates” documenting CUD? In states where cannabis is legal, about 45 CUD cases were filed in 2022 for every 10,000 Medicare claims. That’s about 0.45% of all claims – not a large amount by any means. The CUD rate was even lower in states where cannabis is illegal, less than 0.28%.

Those may be rock bottom rates, but the researchers noted that “differences in cannabis use patterns and perception of risk may influence policy changes.” Exactly what kind of policy changes are warranted aren’t spelled out, but it implies there should be more screening for CUD.  

Another recent JAMA study called for U.S. primary care physicians to start screening all patients for CUD, regardless of age or even whether they currently use cannabis. Patients identified as high risk cannabis users should then be referred for “possible addiction treatment.”

Treatments for CUD are currently limited to counseling and cognitive behavioral therapies. Unlike opioid use disorder, there are no FDA-approved pharmaceutical treatments for CUD, although there are several such drugs in the pipeline. One is being tested in clinical studies by Indivior, the company that makes Suboxone for opioid use disorder.

Cannabis vs. Opioids

Many patients who live with pain are turning to cannabis as an alternative to opioids, which are increasingly difficult to obtain. In a recent PNN survey, over 30% of pain patients said they had used cannabis for pain relief. Many did so because they couldn’t get an opioid prescription or had problems getting one filled.

“I have a medical marijuana referral and my doctor at the Cleveland Clinic flat out refuses to write me any prescriptions for any opioids. Bunch of BS,” one patient told us.

“I am very lucky. My pain management doctor supports medical cannabis,” said another. “Since my (opioid) dose has been cut in half, it does provide a bit of relief and helps me sleep a few hours.”

“My pharmacy ran out of oxycodone & hydrocodone. My pain doctor switched me over to hydromorphone and so far I've been able to get that filled. If I'm no longer able to get that, I'll have to consider medical marijuana,” wrote another pain patient.

About 10% of U.S. adults over age 50 reported using cannabis within the past year, a number that’s expected to rise when the federal government reschedules cannabis as a less dangerous drug. As more seniors experiment with cannabis, they’ll have to get used to the fact that it carries a stigma, just like opioids. And there’s a good chance their doctor will be evaluating them for signs of CUD.  

“Many older adults are turning to cannabis for help with increased pain syndromes—osteoarthritis, degenerative joint diseases, as well as insomnia,” Brooke Worster, MD, an associate professor and cannabis expert at Thomas Jefferson University, told Fortune.   

“The question really is, how do we recognize and avoid abuse or CUD, which is important and only now being recognized and discussed in the medical community more regularly.” 

Few Take Advantage of Medicare’s Chronic Care Program

By Phil Galewitz and Holly Hacker, KFF Health News

Carrie Lester looks forward to the phone call every Thursday from her doctors’ medical assistant, who asks how she’s doing and if she needs prescription refills. The assistant counsels her on dealing with anxiety and her other health issues.

Lester credits the chats for keeping her out of the hospital and reducing the need for clinic visits to manage chronic conditions including depression, fibromyalgia, and hypertension.

“Just knowing someone is going to check on me is comforting,” said Lester, 73, who lives with her dogs, Sophie and Dolly, in Independence, Kansas.

At least two-thirds of Medicare enrollees have two or more chronic health conditions, federal data shows. That makes them eligible for a federal program that, since 2015, has rewarded doctors for doing more to manage their health outside office visits.

But while early research found the service, called Chronic Care Management, reduced emergency room and in-patient hospital visits and lowered total health spending, uptake has been sluggish.

Federal data from 2019 shows just 4% of potentially eligible enrollees participated in the program, a figure that appears to have held steady through 2023, according to a Mathematica analysis.

About 12,000 physicians billed Medicare under the CCM mantle in 2021, according to the latest Medicare data analyzed by KFF Health News. By comparison, federal data shows about 1 million providers participate in Medicare.

Even as the strategy has largely failed to live up to its potential, thousands of physicians have boosted their annual pay by participating, and auxiliary for-profit businesses have sprung up to help doctors take advantage of the program. The federal data showed about 4,500 physicians received at least $100,000 each in CCM pay in 2021.

Through the CCM program, Medicare pays to develop a patient care plan, coordinate treatment with specialists, and regularly check in with beneficiaries. Medicare pays doctors a monthly average of $62 per patient, for 20 minutes of work with each, according to companies in the business.

Without the program, providers often have little incentive to spend time coordinating care because they can’t bill Medicare for such services.

‘It Was Put Together Wrong’

Health policy experts say a host of factors limit participation in the program. Chief among them is that it requires both doctors and patients to opt in. Doctors may not have the capacity to regularly monitor patients outside office visits. Some also worry about meeting the strict Medicare documentation requirements for reimbursement and are reluctant to ask patients to join a program that may require a monthly copayment if they don’t have a supplemental policy.

“This program had potential to have a big impact,” said Kenneth Thorpe, an Emory University health policy expert on chronic diseases. “But I knew it was never going to work from the start because it was put together wrong.”

He said most doctors’ offices are not set up for monitoring patients at home. “This is very time-intensive and not something physicians are used to doing or have time to do,” Thorpe said.

For patients, the CCM program is intended to expand the type of care offered in traditional, fee-for-service Medicare to match benefits that — at least in theory — they may get through Medicare Advantage, which is administered by private insurers.

But the CCM program is open to both Medicare and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries.

The program was also intended to boost pay to primary care doctors and other physicians who are paid significantly less by Medicare than specialists, said Mark Miller, a former executive director of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, which advises Congress. He’s currently an executive vice president of Arnold Ventures, a philanthropic organization focused on health policy. (The organization has also provided funding for KFF Health News.)

Despite the allure of extra money, some physicians have been put off by the program’s upfront costs.

“It may seem like easy money for a physician practice, but it is not,” said Namirah Jamshed, a physician at UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas.

Jamshed said the CCM program was cumbersome to implement because her practice was not used to documenting time spent with patients outside the office, a challenge that included finding a way to integrate the data into electronic health records. Another challenge was hiring staff to handle patient calls before her practice started getting reimbursed by the program.

Only about 10% of the practice’s Medicare patients are enrolled in CCM, she said.

Jamshed said her practice has been approached by private companies looking to do the work, but the practice demurred out of concerns about sharing patients’ health information and the cost of retaining the companies. Those companies can take more than half of what Medicare pays doctors for their CCM work.

Physician Jennifer Bacani McKenney, who runs a family medicine practice in Fredonia, Kansas, with her father — where Carrie Lester is a patient — said the CCM program has worked well.

She said having a system to keep in touch with patients at least once a month has reduced their use of emergency rooms — including for some who were prone to visits for nonemergency reasons, such as running out of medication or even feeling lonely. The CCM funding enables the practice’s medical assistant to call patients regularly to check in, something it could not afford before.

For a small practice, having a staffer who can generate extra revenue makes a big difference, McKenney said.

While she estimates about 90% of their patients would qualify for the program, only about 20% are enrolled. One reason is that not everyone needs or wants the calls, she said.

Outsourcing Chronic Care

While the program has captured interest among internists and family medicine doctors, it has also paid out hundreds of thousands of dollars to specialists, such as those in cardiology, urology, and gastroenterology, the KFF Health News analysis found. Primary care doctors are often seen as the ones who coordinate patient care, making the payments to specialists notable.

A federally funded study by Mathematica in 2017 found the CCM program saves Medicare $74 per patient per month, or $888 per patient per year — due mostly to a decreased need for hospital care.

The study quoted providers who were unhappy with attempts to outsource CCM work. “Third-party companies out there turn this into a racket,” the study cited one physician as saying, noting companies employ nurses who don’t know patients.

Nancy McCall, a Mathematica researcher who co-authored the 2017 study, said doctors are not the only resistance point. “Patients may not want to be bothered or asked if they are exercising or losing weight or watching their salt intake,” she said.

Still, some physician groups say it’s convenient to outsource the program.

UnityPoint Health, a large integrated health system based in Iowa, tried doing chronic care management on its own, but found it administratively burdensome, said Dawn Welling, the UnityPoint Clinic’s chief nursing officer.

For the past year, it has contracted with a Miami-based company, HealthSnap, to enroll patients, have its nurses make check-in calls each month, and help with billing. HealthSnap helps manage care for over 16,000 of UnityHealth’s Medicare patients — a small fraction of its Medicare patients, which includes those enrolled in Medicare Advantage.

Some doctors were anxious about sharing patient records and viewed the program as a sign they weren’t doing enough for patients, Welling said. But she said the program has been helpful, particularly to many enrollees who are isolated and need help changing their diet and other behaviors to improve health.

“These are patients who call the clinic regularly and have needs, but not always clinical needs,” Welling said.

Samson Magid, CEO of HealthSnap, said more doctors have started participating in the CCM program since Medicare increased pay in 2022 for 20 minutes of work, to $62 from $41, and added billing codes for additional time.

To help ensure patients pick up the phone, caller ID shows HealthSnap calls as coming from their doctor’s office, not from wherever the company’s nurse might be located. The company also hires nurses from different regions so they may speak with dialects similar to those of the patients they work with, Magid said.

He said some enrollees have been in the program for three years and many could stay enrolled for life — which means they can bill patients and Medicare long-term.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Older Americans Feel Trapped in Medicare Advantage Plans

By Sarah Jane Tribble, KFF Health News  

In 2016, Richard Timmins went to a free informational seminar to learn more about Medicare coverage.

“I listened to the insurance agent and, basically, he really promoted Medicare Advantage,” Timmins said. The agent described less expensive and broader coverage offered by the plans, which are funded largely by the government but administered by private insurance companies.

For Timmins, who is now 76, it made economic sense then to sign up. And his decision was great, for a while.

Then, three years ago, he noticed a lesion on his right earlobe.

“I have a family history of melanoma. And so, I was kind of tuned in to that and thinking about that,” Timmins said of the growth, which doctors later diagnosed as malignant melanoma. “It started to grow and started to become rather painful.”

Timmins, though, discovered that his enrollment in a Premera Blue Cross Medicare Advantage plan would mean a limited network of doctors and the potential need for preapproval, or prior authorization, from the insurer before getting care. The experience, he said, made getting care more difficult, and now he wants to switch back to traditional, government-administered Medicare.

But he can’t. And he’s not alone.

RICHARD TIMMINS

“I have very little control over my actual medical care,” he said, adding that he now advises friends not to sign up for the private plans. “I think that people are not understanding what Medicare Advantage is all about.”

Low Premiums and Extra Benefits

Enrollment in Medicare Advantage plans has grown substantially in the past few decades, enticing more than half of all eligible people, primarily those 65 or older, with low premium costs and perks like dental and vision insurance. And as the private plans’ share of the Medicare patient pie has ballooned to 30.8 million people, so too have concerns about the insurers’ aggressive sales tactics and misleading coverage claims.

Enrollees, like Timmins, who sign on when they are healthy can find themselves trapped as they grow older and sicker.

“It’s one of those things that people might like them on the front end because of their low to zero premiums and if they are getting a couple of these extra benefits — the vision, dental, that kind of thing,” said Christine Huberty, a lead benefit specialist supervising attorney for the Greater Wisconsin Agency on Aging Resources.

“But it’s when they actually need to use it for these bigger issues,” Huberty said, “that’s when people realize, ‘Oh no, this isn’t going to help me at all.’”

Medicare pays private insurers a fixed amount per Medicare Advantage enrollee and in many cases also pays out bonuses, which the insurers can use to provide supplemental benefits. Huberty said those extra benefits work as an incentive to “get people to join the plan” but that the plans then “restrict the access to so many services and coverage for the bigger stuff.”

Switching Plans

David Meyers, assistant professor of health services, policy, and practice at the Brown University School of Public Health, analyzed a decade of Medicare Advantage enrollment and found that about 50% of beneficiaries — rural and urban — left their contract by the end of five years. Most of those enrollees switched to another Medicare Advantage plan rather than traditional Medicare.

In the study, Meyers and his co-authors muse that switching plans could be a positive sign of a free marketplace but that it could also signal “unmeasured discontent” with Medicare Advantage.

“The problem is that once you get into Medicare Advantage, if you have a couple of chronic conditions and you want to leave Medicare Advantage, even if Medicare Advantage isn’t meeting your needs, you might not have any ability to switch back to traditional Medicare,” Meyers said.

Traditional Medicare can be too expensive for beneficiaries switching back from Medicare Advantage, he said. In traditional Medicare, enrollees pay a monthly premium and, after reaching a deductible, in most cases are expected to pay 20% of the cost of each nonhospital service or item they use. And there is no limit on how much an enrollee may have to pay as part of that 20% coinsurance if they end up using a lot of care, Meyers said.

To limit what they spend out-of-pocket, traditional Medicare enrollees typically sign up for supplemental insurance, such as employer coverage or a private Medigap policy. If they are low-income, Medicaid may provide that supplemental coverage.

But, Meyers said, there’s a catch: While beneficiaries who enrolled first in traditional Medicare are guaranteed to qualify for a Medigap policy without pricing based on their medical history, Medigap insurers can deny coverage to beneficiaries transferring from Medicare Advantage plans or base their prices on medical underwriting.

Only four states — Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, and New York — prohibit insurers from denying a Medigap policy if the enrollee has preexisting conditions such as diabetes or heart disease.

Paul Ginsburg is a former commissioner on the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, also known as MedPAC. It’s a legislative branch agency that advises Congress on the Medicare program. He said the inability of enrollees to easily switch between Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare during open enrollment periods is “a real concern in our system; it shouldn’t be that way.”

The federal government offers specific enrollment periods every year for switching plans. During Medicare’s open enrollment period, from Oct. 15 to Dec. 7, enrollees can switch out of their private plans to traditional, government-administered Medicare.

Medicare Advantage enrollees can also switch plans or transfer to traditional Medicare during another open enrollment period, from Jan. 1 to March 31.

“There are a lot of people that say, ‘Hey, I’d love to come back, but I can’t get Medigap anymore, or I’ll have to just pay a lot more,’” said Ginsburg, who is now a professor of health policy at the University of Southern California.

Timmins is one of those people. The retired veterinarian lives in a rural community on Whidbey Island just north of Seattle. It’s a rugged, idyllic landscape and a popular place for second homes, hiking, and the arts. But it’s also a bit remote.

While it’s typically harder to find doctors in rural areas, Timmins said he believes his Premera Blue Cross plan made it more challenging to get care for a variety of reasons, including the difficulty of finding and getting in to see specialists.

Nearly half of Medicare Advantage plan directories contained inaccurate information on what providers were available, according to the most recent federal review. Beginning in 2024, new or expanding Medicare Advantage plans must demonstrate compliance with federal network expectations or their applications could be denied.

Amanda Lansford, a Premera Blue Cross spokesperson, declined to comment on Timmins’ case. She said the plan meets federal network adequacy requirements as well as travel time and distance standards “to ensure members are not experiencing undue burdens when seeking care.”

Traditional Medicare allows beneficiaries to go to nearly any doctor or hospital in the U.S., and in most cases enrollees do not need approval to get services.

Timmins, who recently finished immunotherapy, said he doesn’t think he would be approved for a Medigap policy, “because of my health issue.” And if he were to get into one, Timmins said, it would likely be too expensive. For now, Timmins said, he is staying with his Medicare Advantage plan.

“I’m getting older. More stuff is going to happen.”

There is also a chance, Timmins said, that his cancer could resurface: “I’m very aware of my mortality.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Back Pain? Bum Knee? Be Prepared to Wait for Physical Therapy

By Mark Kreidler, KFF Health News

At no point along his three-year path to earning a degree in physical therapy has Matthew Lee worried about getting a job.

Being able to make a living off that degree? That’s a different question — and the answer is affecting the supply of physical therapists across the nation: The cost of getting trained is out of proportion to the pay.

“There’s definitely a shortage of PTs. The jobs are there,” said Lee, a student at California State University-Sacramento who is on track to receive his degree in May. “But you may be starting out at $80,000 while carrying up to $200,000 in student debt. It’s a lot to consider.”

As many patients seeking an appointment can attest, the nationwide shortage of PTs is real. According to survey data collected by the American Physical Therapy Association, the job vacancy rate for therapists in outpatient settings last year was 17%.

Wait times are generally long across the nation, as patients tell of waiting weeks or even months for appointments while dealing with ongoing pain or post-surgical rehab. But the crunch is particularly acute in rural areas and places with a high cost of living, like California, which has a lower ratio of therapists to residents — just 57 per 100,000, compared with the national ratio of 72 per 100,000, according to the association.

The reasons are multifold. The industry hasn’t recovered from the mass defection of physical therapists who fled as practices closed during the pandemic. In 2021 alone, more than 22,000 PTs — almost a tenth of the workforce — left their jobs, according to a report by the health data analytics firm Definitive Healthcare.

Growing Demand for PT

And just as baby boomers age into a period of heavy use of physical therapy, and covid-delayed procedures like knee and hip replacements are finally scheduled, the economics of physical therapy are shifting. Medicare, whose members make up a significant percentage of many PT practices’ clients, has cut reimbursement rates for four years straight, and the encroachment of private equity firms — with their bottom-line orientation — means many practices aren’t staffing adequately.

According to APTA, 10 companies, including publicly held and private equity-backed firms, now control 20% of the physical therapy market.

“What used to be small practices are often being bought up by larger corporate entities, and those corporate entities push productivity and become less satisfying places to work,” said James Gordon, chair of the Division of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy at the University of Southern California.

There’s a shortage of physical therapists in all settings, including hospitals, clinics, and nursing homes, and it’s likely to continue for the foreseeable future, said Justin Moore, chief executive of the physical therapy association. “Not only do we have to catch up on those shortages, but there are great indicators of increasing demand for physical therapy,” he said.

The association is trying to reduce turnover among therapists, and is lobbying Congress to stop cutting Medicare reimbursement rates. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services plans a 3.4% reduction for 2024 to a key metric that governs pay for physical therapy and other health care services. According to the association, that would bring the cuts to a total of 9% over four years.

Several universities, meanwhile, have ramped up their programs — some by offering virtual classes, a new approach for such a hands-on field — to boost the number of graduates in the coming years.

“But programs can’t just grow overnight,” said Sharon Gorman, interim chair of the physical therapy program at Oakland-based Samuel Merritt University, which focuses on training health care professionals. “Our doctoral accreditation process is very thorough. I have to prove I have the space, the equipment, the clinical sites, the faculty to show that I’m not just trying to take in more tuition dollars.”

Rising Cost of PT Education

All of this also comes at a time when the cost of obtaining a physical therapy doctorate, which typically takes three years of graduate work and is required to practice, is skyrocketing. Student debt has become a major issue, and salaries often aren’t enough to keep therapists in the field.

According to the APTA’s most recent published data, median annual wages range from $88,000 to $101,500. The association said wages either met or fell behind the rate of inflation between 2016 and 2021 in most regions.

A project underway at the University of Iowa aims to give PT students more transparency about tuition and other costs across programs. According to an association report from 2020, at least 80% of recent physical therapy graduates carried educational debt averaging roughly $142,000.

Gordon said USC, in Los Angeles’ urban core, has three PT clinics and 66 therapists on campus, several of whom graduated from the school’s program. “But even with that, it’s a challenge,” he said. “It’s not just hard to find people, but people don’t stay, and the most obvious reason is that they don’t get paid enough relative to the cost of living in this area.”

Fewer therapists plus growing demand equals long waits. When Susan Jones, a Davis, California, resident, experienced pain in her back and neck after slipping on a wet floor in early 2020, she went to her doctor and was referred for physical therapy. About two months later, she said, she finally got an appointment at an outpatient clinic.

“It was almost like the referral got lost. I was going back and forth, asking, ‘What’s going on?’” said Jones, 57. Once scheduled, her first appointment felt rushed, she said, with the therapist saying he could not identify an issue despite her ongoing pain. After one more session, Jones paid out-of-pocket to see a chiropractor. She said she’d be hesitant to try for a physical therapy referral in the future, in part because of the wait.

Universities and PT programs graduate about 12,000 therapists a year, Moore said, and representatives of several schools told KFF Health News they’re studying whether and how to expand. In 2018, USC added a hybrid model in which students learn mostly online, then travel to campus twice a semester for about a week at a time for hands-on instruction and practice.

That bumped USC’s capacity from 100 students a year to 150, and Gordon said many of the hybrid students’ professional skills are indistinguishable from those of students on campus full time.

Natalia Barajas received her PT doctorate from USC last year and was recently hired at a clinic in nearby Norwalk, with a salary of $95,000, a signing bonus, and the opportunity to earn more in incentives.

She’s also managing a lot of debt. Three years of tuition for the USC physical therapy program comes to more than $211,000, and Barajas said she owes $170,000 in student loans.

“If it were about money alone, I probably would have shifted to something else a while ago,” Barajas said. “I’m OK with my salary. I chose to do this. But it might not be the perfect situation for everybody.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Medicare May Cover Training for Family Caregivers

By Judith Graham, KFF Health News

Even with extensive caregiving experience, Patti LaFleur was unprepared for the crisis that hit in April 2021, when her mother, Linda LaTurner, fell out of a chair and broke her hip.

LaTurner, 71, had been diagnosed with early-onset dementia seven years before. For two years, she’d been living with LaFleur, who managed insulin injections for her mother’s Type 1 diabetes, helped her shower and dress, dealt with her incontinence, and made sure she was eating well.

In the hospital after her mother’s hip replacement, LaFleur was told her mother would never walk again. When LaTurner came home, two emergency medical technicians brought her on a stretcher into the living room, put her on the bed LaFleur had set up, and wished LaFleur well.

That was the extent of help LaFleur received upon her mother’s discharge.

She didn’t know how to change her mother’s diapers or dress her since at that point LaTurner could barely move. She didn’t know how to turn her mother, who was spending all day in bed, to avoid bedsores.

Even after an occupational therapist visited several days later, LaFleur continued to face caretaking tasks she wasn’t sure how to handle.

“It’s already extremely challenging to be a caregiver for someone living with dementia. The lack of training in how to care for my mother just made an impossible job even more impossible,” said LaFleur, who lives in Auburn, Washington, a Seattle suburb. Her mother passed away in March 2022.

LINDA AND PATTI LAFLEUR

A new proposal from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services addresses this often-lamented failure to support family, friends, and neighbors who care for frail, ill, and disabled older adults. For the first time, it would authorize Medicare payments to health care professionals to train informal caregivers who manage medications, assist loved ones with activities such as toileting and dressing, and oversee the use of medical equipment.

The proposal, which covers both individual and group training, is a long-overdue recognition of the role informal caregivers — also known as family caregivers — play in protecting the health and well-being of older adults. About 42 million Americans provided unpaid care to people 50 and older in 2020, according to a much-cited report.

“We know from our research that nearly 6 in 10 family caregivers assist with medical and nursing tasks such as injections, tube feedings, and changing catheters,” said Jason Resendez, president and CEO of the National Alliance for Caregiving. But fewer than 30% of caregivers have conversations with health professionals about how to help loved ones, he said.

Even fewer caregivers for older adults — only 7% — report receiving training related to tasks they perform, according to a June 2019 report in JAMA Internal Medicine.

Nancy LeaMond, chief advocacy and engagement officer for AARP, experienced this gap firsthand when she spent six years at home caring for her husband, who had amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, a neurological condition also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease. Although she hired health aides, they weren’t certified to operate the feeding tube her husband needed at the end of his life and couldn’t show LeaMond how to use it. Instead, she and her sons turned to the internet and trained themselves by watching videos.

“Until very recently, there’s been very little attention to the role of family caregivers and the need to support caregivers so they can be an effective part of the health delivery system,” she told me.

Training Coverage Could Begin Next Year

Several details of CMS’ proposal have yet to be finalized. Notably, CMS has asked for public comments on who should be considered a family caregiver for the purposes of training and how often training should be delivered.

If you’d like to let CMS know what you think about its caregiving training proposal, you can comment on the CMS site until 5 p.m. ET on Sept. 11. The expectation is that Medicare will start paying for caregiver training next year, and caregivers should start asking for it then.

Advocates said they favor a broad definition of caregiver. Since often several people perform these tasks, training should be available to more than one person, Resendez suggested. And since people are sometimes reimbursed by family members for their assistance, being unpaid shouldn’t be a requirement, suggested Anne Tumlinson, founder and chief executive officer of ATI Advisory, a consulting firm in aging and disability policy.

As for the frequency of training, a one-size-fits-all approach isn’t appropriate given the varied needs of older adults and the varied skills of people who assist them, said Sharmila Sandhu, vice president of regulatory affairs at the American Occupational Therapy Association.

Some caregivers may need a single session when a loved one is discharged from a hospital or a rehabilitation facility. Others may need ongoing training as conditions such as heart failure or dementia progress and new complications occur, said Kim Karr, who manages payment policy for AOTA.

When possible, training should be delivered in a person’s home rather than at a health care institution, suggested Donna Benton, director of the University of Southern California’s Family Caregiver Support Center and the Los Angeles Caregiver Resource Center. All too often, recommendations that caregivers get from health professionals aren’t easy to implement at home and need to be adjusted, she noted.

Nancy Gross, 72, of Mendham, New Jersey, experienced this when her husband, Jim Kotcho, 77, received a stem cell transplant for leukemia in May 2015.

Once Kotcho came home, Gross was responsible for flushing the port that had been implanted in his chest, administering medications through that site, and making sure all the equipment she was using was sterile.

Although a visiting nurse came out and offered education, it wasn’t adequate for the challenges Gross confronted.

“I’m not prone to crying, but when you think your loved one’s life is in your hands and you don’t know what to do, that’s unbelievably stressful,” she told me.

NANCY AND JIM KOTCHO

For her part, Cheryl Brown, 79, of San Bernardino, California — a caregiver for her husband, Hardy Brown Sr., 80, since he was diagnosed with ALS in 2002 — is skeptical about paying professionals for training. At the time of his diagnosis, doctors gave Hardy five years, at most, to live. But he didn’t accept that prognosis and ended up defying expectations.

HARDY AND CHERYL BROWN

Today, Hardy’s mind is fully intact, and he can move his hands and his arms but not the rest of his body. Looking after him is a full-time job for Cheryl, who is also chair of the executive committee of California’s Commission on Aging and a former member of the California State Assembly.

She said hiring paid help isn’t an option, given the expense. And that’s what irritates Cheryl about Medicare’s training proposal.

“What I need is someone who can come into my home and help me,” she told me. “I don’t see how someone like me, who’s been doing this a very long time, would benefit from this. We caregivers do all the work, and the professionals get the money? That makes no sense to me.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Pain Clinic Chain to Pay $11M to Settle Fraud Claims

By Don Thompson, KFF Health News

The owner of one of California’s largest chains of pain management clinics has agreed to pay nearly $11.4 million to California, Oregon, and the federal government to settle allegations of Medicare and Medicaid fraud.

The U.S. Department of Justice and the states’ attorneys general say Francis Lagattuta, a physician, and his Lags Medical Centers performed — and billed for — medically unnecessary tests and procedures on thousands of patients over more than five years.

It was “a brazen scheme to defraud Medicare and Medicaid of millions of dollars by inflicting unnecessary and painful procedures on patients whom they were supposed to be relieving of pain,” Phillip Talbert, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of California, said in a statement this month.

The federal Medicare program suspended reimbursements to Lags Medical in June 2020, and Medi-Cal, California’s Medicaid program, followed in May 2021. Lags Medical shut down the same day the state suspended reimbursements. The company, based in Lompoc, California, had more than 30 pain clinics, most of them in the Central Valley and the Central Coast.

A KFF Health News review last year found the abrupt closure left more than 20,000 California patients — mostly working-class people on government-funded insurance — struggling to obtain their medical records or continue receiving pain prescriptions, which often included opioids.

Lagattuta and Lags Medical did not admit liability under the settlement. Lagattuta denied the governments’ claims, saying in a statement he was “pleased” to announce the settlement of a “long-standing billing dispute.” As part of the agreement, Lagattuta will be barred for at least five years from receiving Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements.

“Since the Centers have been closed for a couple of years, it made sense for Dr. Lagattuta to settle the dispute and continue to move forward with his other business interests and practice,” Malcolm Segal, an attorney for Lagattuta and the centers, said in the statement.

According to state officials, the federal government will receive the bulk of the money, about $8.5 million. California will receive about $2.7 million, and an additional $130,000 will go to Oregon. The settlement amount is based in part on Lagattuta’s and Lags Medical’s “ability to pay.” It does not cover the governments’ full losses, which the U.S. attorney’s office in Sacramento said are not public record.

Blanket Orders for Unnecessary Tests

A nearly four-year investigation by federal officials and the California Department of Justice found that from March 2016 through August 2021, Lagattuta and his company submitted reimbursement claims for unneeded skin biopsies, spinal cord stimulation procedures, urine drug tests, and other tests and procedures.

Lagattuta began requiring all his clinics to perform various medical procedures on every patient, the officials said, no matter if they were needed or requested by patients’ medical providers. Patients who refused were told they would have their pain medication reduced and could suffer adverse medical consequences.

U.S. and California investigators piggybacked on a federal claim filed in late 2018 by a whistleblower, Steven Capeder, Lags Medical’s former operations and marketing director, who will receive more than $2 million of the settlement.

As part of the settlement, Lagattuta and his company acknowledged that in mid-2016 he began requiring his providers to do at least two to three skin biopsies on Medicare patients each day and told providers to quit if they wouldn’t comply. Such biopsies are used to measure small-fiber neuropathy, which causes burning pain with numbness and tingling in the feet and lower extremities.

According to the settlement, a monthly report in early 2018 set a goal of performing 250 biopsies a week. Lagattuta created a separate team that was required to order at least 150 biopsies weekly, often overruling providers. And the company’s chief executive officer in late 2019 texted Lagattuta to report a particularly high number of biopsies, illustrating the text with emojis of a money bag and a smiley face.

Authorities said Lagattuta violated regulations requiring that skin biopsy results be interpreted by a trained pathologist or neurologist. Instead, they say, Lagattuta had the biopsies read by a family member who had no formal medical training and by a former clinic executive’s spouse, who was trained as a respiratory therapist.

Lags Medical clinics performed more than 22,000 biopsies on Medi-Cal patients from 2016 through 2019.

The settlement also alleges Lagattuta encouraged unsuitable patients to undergo spinal cord stimulation. It describes the procedure as “an invasive surgery of last resort,” in which implants placed near the spinal cord apply low-voltage electrical pulses to nerve fibers.

Lagattuta paid a psychiatrist $3,000 each month to falsely certify that every Lags Medical candidate for the procedure had no psychological or substance use disorders that would negatively affect the outcome, according to the settlement. For instance, the settlement says the psychiatrist overruled a Lags Medical social worker to OK the procedure for a young woman who had bipolar disorder with hallucinations that included hearing a man’s voice ordering her out of bed.

He also issued blanket orders for every patient to have urine drug testing, a policy the company’s CEO said “should be a big money maker.”

KFF Health News found that from 2017 through 2019 nearly 60,000 of the most extensive urine drug tests were billed to Medicare and Medi-Cal under Lagattuta’s provider number. Medicare reimbursed Lagattuta $5.4 million for those tests.

The clinics “carefully examined, tested, and treated” more than 60,000 patients during the time covered by the settlement, “when others might have been content to prescribe medication to mask pain,” said Lagattuta’s statement. 

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Opioid Prescriptions Down Sharply for Medicare Patients

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The number of Medicare beneficiaries receiving opioid prescriptions has declined significantly since 2016, according to a new government report that also found steep declines in the number of beneficiaries receiving high doses or who appear to be doctor shopping.

The report by the Department of Health and Human Service’s Office of Inspector General found that over 21 million people -- 23% of Medicare Part D beneficiaries -- received at least one opioid prescription in 2021, down from 33% of beneficiaries in 2016. Over 51 million people are currently enrolled in Part D.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) adopted new safety rules in 2018 that discourage high dose prescribing and limit the initial supply of opioids to 7 days. The rules also allowed pharmacists and insurers to flag Medicare patients deemed to be at high risk, as well as their prescribers.

The rules appear to have had a major impact on prescribing. In 2016, over half a million Medicare beneficiaries received a daily opioid dose of at least 120 MED (morphine milligram equivalent). By 2021, that fell to less than 200,000 patients, a 60 percent decrease in high dose prescribing.   

MEDICARE PATIENTS RECEIVING HIGH DOSE OPIOIDS

HHS Office of Inspector General

Since 2016, the number of Medicare beneficiaries who appeared to be doctor shopping dropped from 22,300 to 1,800; while the number of doctors with “questionable” prescribing patterns fell from 401 to just 98.  Patients were flagged for doctor shopping if they were on high doses and received opioids from four or more prescribers or four or more pharmacists.

“The opioid epidemic continues to grip the nation. There is clearly still cause for concern and vigilance, even as some positive trends emerge,” the OIG report found. “The number of Medicare Part D beneficiaries who received opioids in 2021 decreased to approximately a quarter of a million beneficiaries, extending a downward trend from prior years. Further, fewer Part D beneficiaries were identified as receiving high amounts of opioids or at serious risk of misuse or overdose. The number of prescribers ordering opioids for large numbers of beneficiaries at serious risk was steady.”

But there is little evidence that less prescribing is reducing addiction and overdoses.  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates there were nearly 81,000 opioid-related deaths in 2021, nearly twice the number reported in 2016, when the CDC’s opioid guideline was released. The vast majority of deaths involved illicit fentanyl and other street drugs, not prescription opioids.

The OIG report found that 50,391 Part D beneficiaries experienced an opioid overdose (either fatal or non-fatal) in 2021, but did not break down how many were linked to illicit or prescription opioids.

Over one million Medicare beneficiaries were diagnosed with opioid use disorder (OUD) last year, but only one in five received a medication like Suboxone or methadone to treat their condition. Medicare patients were far more likely to receive naloxone, an overdose reversal drug. Over 445,000 beneficiaries received a prescription for naloxone, an 18% increase from 2020.