Cellular / Tissue-Based Products (CTPs)
Many physicians are either leaving practice or making the difficult decision to stop seeing Medicare patients.
Many thanks to Sharon Hannan, Executive VP of Integumetrix, for her insightful reaction to our “Package Pricing” article.
Salve Lucrum: The Existential Threat of Greed in US Healthcare – and Some Thoughts About Cellular Tissue Products (CTP’s) / Skin Substitutes
I have to agree with the final sentence of this article: Healthcare should not be an engine for excessive private gain.
How Playing by the Rules with Cellular Tissue-Based Products / Skin Substitutes Can LOSE Money in the Doctor’s Office
I thought people should understand what happens to doctors who play by the rules when it comes to the use of CTP/skin subs in their private office.
We’ve spent a lot of time talking about what is broken, now is the time to collaborate in a positive way about how to make it better.
The Medicare trust fund is bankrupt and this “profit” is funded by our tax dollars. How does that make you feel?
Alliance Advisory Panel Recommendations to CMS to Help With the Skin Substitute / Cellular-Based Tissue Products Problems
If you have other ideas that might address the long list of problems identified so far, feel free to send them to me.
I am told that this case is cited in training programs for pharmaceutical sales reps to highlight the fact that “Selling the Spread” is a violation of Federal law etc.
You should read the whole report (it’s not very long), but I am going to provide some excerpts.
I previously posted the list of issues as I see them in this industry. Now I’d like to create a list of the attributes of a good solution.
. If CMS or the MACs try to “fix” the situation without input from us, we have seen how unfortunate the results can be.
We could figure this out if we wanted to, but right now there’s so much money to be made that it’s an uphill battle.
A physician who is a walking saint with regard to clinical practice, but whose documentation failed in one subjective area, could end up paying back a small fortune.
…with a question about the per cm sq price variations for Cellular / Tissue-Based Products (CTPs).
$180,000 for In-Home Application of Cellular / Tissue-Based Products (CTPs)… I Have Run Out of Words for This
I could provide the names of the companies involved, but I can’t afford the legal bills.
Disparities in Access to Care for CTPs / Skin Subs (and How Package Pricing in the Doctor’s Office Might Actually Improve Access to Them)
Everywhere I turn, there seems to be an issue that is ethically worrisome about Cellular / Tissue Based Products (CTPs).
Wound Care, the “Rodney Dangerfield” of Specialties – At Least Partly Due to the CTP Payment Methodology
Do you think that the [current CTP payment system] supports thoughtful patient care and the medically appropriate use of CTPs in the physician’s office?
Here’s another message that I agreed to post anonymously that asks many questions we are asking.
“Research Not Rebates”… and “Our IRB Status with the Department of Health and Human Services…” Hmmmmmm……..
I worry that this is a thinly disguised rebate program, and it would be a shame if that approach backfires on legitimate research initiatives.
With these answers, perhaps we can begin talk about what kind of policies would FIX this mess, pretending we could get anyone to listen.
Where I come from, we’d say that something about this seems as crooked as a dog’s hind leg. However, it’s possible that I just don’t understand it, so I hope you will explain it to me.
The Other Side of the CTP/Skin Substitute Story – How Poorly-Crafted CMS Policies for Package Pricing in HOPDs Created This Mess
HOPDs lose money on CTP/Skin Substitute applications, while doctor’s offices make huge profits from the product. Why is this OK?
If you want to send me a message to post anonymously, email me and I will review it and perhaps discuss it with you further.
Can anyone tell me why no invoice is needed to submit these claims and exactly how these profits are being realized?