Blog Archives

Medicare Advantage Plan Hits Speed Bump in Effort to Recover Against Medicare Beneficiary and Her Attorneys

March 22, 2018

Case law supporting Medicare Advantage Plans (MAPs) reimbursement rights against primary plans (WC, Liability, No-Fault) continues to accumulate with a recent decision from the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut in Aetna Life Insurance Company vs. Nellina Guerrera, et al., Civil Action No. 3:17-cv-621 (3/13/2018). Consistent with other recent decisions on the issue, the court found that the MAP, Aetna, has a right of reimbursement against the primary plan, Big Y, including double damages, if a suit is filed under the Private Cause of Action (PCA) provision of the Medicare Secondary Payer Act. In determining the rights of Aetna under the PCA provision, the court was persuaded by prior appellate court decisions in In Re Avandia, 685 F.3d 353 (3rd Cir. 2012) and Humana v. Western Heritage, 832 F.3d 1229 (11th Cir. 2016).

While the decision represents the first federal court in the Second Circuit to fully address the use of the PCA provision by a MA plan against a primary plan, what is potentially more significant is the court’s holding that MAPs cannot utilize the PCA to sue Medicare beneficiaries or their attorneys, a decision that is inconsistent with other federal court rulings.

Case Background

The case arose as follows:

The Medicare beneficiary, Nellina Guerrera, allegedly sustained personal injuries at a Big Y store on 2/20/2015.
Ms. Guerrera was enrolled in an Aetna MAO Plan which paid for injury-related medical in the amount of $9,854.16.
Ms. Guerrera retained the law firm Carter Mario to represent her in a liability claim against Big Y.
Beginning on 9/22/2015, a year before a settlement agreement, Aetna made multiple attempts to provide notice to defendants of their lien.
On 3/10/2016 Big Y agreed that it would not send the full amount of any settlement to Ms. Guerrera and her attorneys without first dealing with Aetna’s lien (We assume this may have been an agreement with Aetna).
Case was settled for $30,000 with full amount paid to Ms. Guerrera and her attorneys on 9/15/2016 without addressing the reimbursement claim of Aetna.
Aetna files suit not only against Big Y, but also Ms. Guerrera, and Ms. Guerrera’s attorneys under the PCA provision of the MSP Act.

Court Decision

The primary questions for the court were whether the PCA provision of the MSP Act is available to MAPs, who may be sued under the PCA (primary plans, Medicare beneficiaries, attorneys) and under what circumstances a suit may be brought. The PCA states as follows:

There is established a private cause of action for damages (which shall be in an amount double the amount otherwise provided) in the case of a primary plan which fails to provide for primary payment (or appropriate reimbursement) in accordance with paragraphs [(b)](1) and [(b)](2)(A).

The court reached the following conclusions on each question.

Why May Sue Under the PCA?

In reaching its decision regarding who may be sued under the PCA the court cited the appellate court decisions In Re Avandia and Western Heritage as being persuasive in concluding the PCA unambiguously permits suits by MAPs. The court went on to find that even if the PCA was interpreted to be ambiguous, CMS regulations stating MAPs may sue under the PCA would be given deference, thus leading to the same conclusion.

Who May Be Sued Under the PCA?

While the court notes the PCA does not specify against whom a suit may be filed, it cites to Second Circuit precedent which has interpreted primary plans or payers as entities which may be sued under the PCA. The court also finds that Big Y meets the definition of a primary plan under the MSP Act and as such the suit can proceed against it.

Aetna though not only filed suit against the primary plan, Big Y, but also Ms. Guerrera, the Medicare beneficiary, and her attorneys. As to these defendants the court reaches a different conclusion. While admitting that the PCA language is vague, the court nonetheless interprets the Congressional intent as only permitting suits against primary plans. It cites the language “a primary plan . . . fails to provide for primary payment” as what not only triggers the ability to sue under the PCA, but also limits recovery to solely primary plans. The court finds that had Congress intended the PCA to apply to Medicare beneficiaries and their attorneys, it would have created such a cause of action similar to that applicable to primary plans. While the court notes its ruling conflicts with CMS’s interpretation, which would provide MAPs with a right of reimbursement against a Medicare beneficiary and their attorney, the court held it will not defer to CMS’s interpretation in this regard.

In finding that the PCA does not provide for a suit against a Medicare beneficiary or the beneficiary’s attorneys, the court declined to follow other federal court decisions which have found such an action to be viable under the PCA, such as Humana Insurance Company v. Paris Blank LLP.

When is a Suit Proper under the PCA?

In regard to the question as to when a suit is proper under the PCA, the court looks to the term “appropriate reimbursement” and determines that Big Y’s payment to Ms. Guerrera and her attorneys did not amount to appropriate reimbursement when the primary plan has notice of a claim for reimbursement from a MAP. The court goes on to again cite the Western Heritage decision which in turn cites Medicare regulations:

If a beneficiary or other party fails to reimburse Medicare within 60 days of receiving a primary payment, the primary plan ‘must reimburse Medicare even though it has already reimbursed the beneficiary or other party.’ 42 C.F.R. § 411.24(i)(1)

Accordingly, once 60 days passed from the date of payment by Big Y to Ms. Guerrera and her attorneys and no repayment was made to Aetna, Big Y became obligated to reimburse Aetna and subject to a suit by Aetna under the PCA.

Practical Implications of Decision

This decision is at the district court level, thus does not have precedential value which would make it binding precedent as we have in the 3rd (Pennsylvania, New Jersey & Delaware) and 11th (Florida, Alabama & Georgia) Circuits. Nonetheless, it represents the first decision in the 2nd Circuit (Connecticut, New York and Vermont) to completely address MAP reimbursement under the PCA, thus will be used as persuasive authority in future cases both in and out of the 2nd Circuit. While the decision in this case continues the trend of court decisions finding in favor of MAPs rights of reimbursement against primary plans under the PCA, it has diverged with prior decisions in finding suits against Medicare beneficiaries and their attorneys are not allowed under the PCA.

What this means for primary plans is they have a target firmly planted on their backs, especially if future court decisions find MAPs cannot recover against Medicare beneficiaries or their attorneys. We suspect that this issue will eventually be addressed at the appellate court level, if not in this case, then in future litigation.

What steps then can you take as a primary plan to eliminate this risk:

Identify Medicare eligible claimants.
Determine whether Medicare eligible claimants are or were enrolled in a MAP since the date of injury.
If enrolled in a MAP, then investigate whether the plan is seeking reimbursement stemming from the injury.
Make arrangements to directly reimburse the MAP for injury-related payments.

Tower MSA is readily available to assist you with our MA Plan investigation, negotiation and resolution service. Please contact us at (888) 331-4941 or info@towermsa.com for further information or questions.

New CMS MSA Review Contractor: Different Name, Same Policy and Procedures

March 7, 2018

While the review contractor is changing, the Workers’ Compensation Medicare Set-Aside (WCMSA) review policies and procedures remain the same. This was the message related to attendees of the Workers Compensation Review Contractor (WCRC) transition webinar held by CMS, yesterday, March 7, 2018. The purpose of the webinar was to introduce the WCMSA community to the new WCRC and provide information on the transition from Provider Resources, which ceases its work on March 16, 2018, to Capitol Bridge, which commences its work on March 19, 2018.

John Jenkins, CMS’s Health Insurance Specialist overseeing the WCRC contract, led off the presentation and then turned it over to Holly Haven, Capitol Bridge’s WCRC Project Director. Ms. Havens provided the following key information:

What is Not Changing

As our program matures, we will strive to improve both the quality of our work and the timeliness in which cases are completed through automation and our continual improvement focus.

The review and decision making process will remain the same.

WCMSA proposals will continue to be submitted through the portal or by mail to the same Oklahoma City address.

All established timeframes remain the same.

All inquiries will be handled by staff in our Pittsford, NY office, and customer service will be a priority.

Inquiries may still be communicated via telephone.

In summary, Capitol Bridge will continue to be guided by the guidelines laid out in the CMS WCMSA Reference Guide and maintain the 20-business day turnaround time for review of a WCMSA as required by CMS.

What is Changing

Processing of all cases will be handled out of their facility in Pittsford, NY.
New phone number for the WCRC is (833) 295-3773 with customer service hours from 9am to 5pm EST.
Email address for the WCRC is WCRC@capitolbridgellc.com
Fax number is (585) 425-5390

In the Q&A session following the formal presentation additional information was provided:

WCMSAs will be reviewed by RNs with the MSCC credential.
The WCRC staff includes attorneys, physicians and pharmacists.
WCMSA proposals which have not been reviewed by the outgoing contractor by March 16 will be transferred to the new contractor for review.
In response to a question as whether to expect an MSA backlog such that review times will lengthen, CMS noted that the outgoing contractor was typically completing its reviews in less than the required timeframe of 20 days.The implication then is the new contractor may be using the full 20 business days to complete its review.
A question was raised regarding Liability MSAs, but no answer was given as the webinar was not for the purpose of addressing policy questions.

While the CMS WCMSA policy remains the same, the interpretation and implementation of that policy will soon be in new hands. Tower MSA will be closing monitoring WCMSA reviews through Capitol Bridge to ascertain what, if any, differences can be identified in the allocation of care in the WCMSA compared to the prior contractor. Variances outside of established CMS guidelines will be challenged.

If you have any questions, please contact Dan Anders, Chief Compliance Officer, at 888.331.4941 or Daniel.anders@towermsa.com.

What Do Medicare Part D, Medicare Set-Asides and Parenting Have in Common?

March 2, 2018

parenting - father hugging two young children

For those who have raised children, or are in the process of doing so, one of our biggest challenges is to instill in our children some sort of positive decision-making paradigm in our children. You can call it religious values, moral absolutes, grounding, or just plain common sense, but as parents, we set boundaries (rules) from the earliest age, and try to be consistent in our enforcement. Our children may think we’re just mean, but this is a price we’re willing to pay if it helps establish an internal barometer to use when approached by people, thoughts and ideas that challenge them.

In raising my three children, one of the techniques I used was a simple, banded bracelet with the acronym, “WWJD” that is, What Would Jesus Do? This was a popular phrase in the Bible Belt where we lived. I asked that they look at the bracelet each time they were faced with an obstacle or asked to do something that didn’t quite feel right. One afternoon, my son was telling a story about something that happened at his elementary school that caused him to look at his bracelet. I was so pleased when he said he actually looked at it! He then responded, “Mom, I tried to decide what Jesus would do, but had a little bit of a tough time, so I switched it in my head to “WWMD”, and I knew exactly what Mom would do!” I couldn’t help laughing, but based on his response to the situation, my simple reinforcement worked. At the same time, this also reminded me that our actions speak much louder than our words….children will “do as we do” long before they will ”do as we say.”

How does this relate to Medicare Part D and Medicare Set Asides?

Each day, one of my first activities is to review my Google Alerts to look for news about NGHPs, Medicare Secondary Payer issues and opioids. This morning, the article that drew my attention was from MedPageToday.com entitled “CMS Proposes Opioid Prescribing Limits for Medicare Enrollees.” My first thought in reading the article was that this was great news.

“We are proposing important new actions to reduce seniors’ risk of being addicted to or overdoing it on opioids while still having access to important treatment options,” said Demetrios Kouzoukas, CMS deputy administrator and director of the Center for Medicare.

“We believe these actions will reduce the oversupply of opioids in our communities.”

Key components of the proposal include:

Hard formulary levels at pharmacies that would restrict the amount of opioids beneficiaries could receive
Establishment of a safety level of 90 morphine mg equivalent (MME)
Limiting the # of pills and days supply in an initial prescription for acute pain

According to Kouzoukas, “these are triggers … [that] can prompt conversations between physicians, patients, and plans about appropriate opioid use and prescribing.”

I then realized what CMS was doing. CMS was setting boundaries to help physicians, patients and plans make better decisions about opioid use…. the same type of boundaries I set for my children so they would make better decisions as adults. What a great idea! If physicians, patients and plans (both Medicare and workers’ compensation) can dialogue before Rxs are filled, better decisions about opioids are inevitable and the frequency of opioid addiction will diminish.

So what’s the problem?

Unfortunately, there remains a problem in the world of workers’ compensation and the WCMSA review process. While I applaud CMS’s effort, there remains a strong disconnect between CMS’s proactive stance on opioid limitations with Medicare Part D and its opioid-friendly review process for WCMSAs. At the same time, I must also admit to a similar disconnect between what happens with prescription opioids during the life of a workers’ compensation claim and what we are asking CMS to do when reviewing the MSA at settlement time. Are we asking CMS to “do as I say,” instead of providing the example of “do as I do?”

Can we ‘connect the dots’?

After reading the article, I realized that as an MSP compliance company that has integrated opioid triggers into its Pre-MSA Triage and review process since Day #1, Tower now has a new weapon in its arsenal to assist clients to identify pharmacy obstacles as early possible, and to address issues of inappropriate drug use. By advising clients to establish and enforce “CMS-like” boundaries at Rx fill time, we have the potential to reduce opioid use in workers’ compensation just as CMS seeks to accomplish with Medicare Part D. Through such efforts, we can reinforce dialogue between physicians, claimants and workers’ compensation plans before the Rx is filled, and hopefully facilitate better decisions about the first opioid Rx.

And as for the disconnect between Medicare Part D and the WCMSA review process, we cannot force CMS to change its WCMSA prescription drug review process. We can, however, leverage CMS’s expertise to support better outcomes with Medicare beneficiaries, MSAs and settlements by mirroring their Medicare Part D policies and processes within the workers’ compensation PBM model. In doing so, we provide CMS with a positive example of their own recommendations implemented successfully, and can hopefully encourage them to “do as we do.”

Conclusion

So how do we affect change in opioid prescribing habits in workers’ compensation? It’s as simple as the bracelet I gave my children. From Day #1 of a claim involving an active or soon to be active Medicare beneficiary, we continually ask the question, “What Would Medicare Do?” and we execute.

Tower MSA Partners to Sponsor Workers’ Compensation Institute (WCI) – TV

August 1, 2017

Tower MSA Partners is sponsoring WCI-TV, the televised coverage of Workers’ Compensation Institute’s Workers’ Compensation Education Conference, and is dedicating its TV segments to examining opioids.

“Tower is pleased to partner with WCI to sponsor WCI-TV for the 3rd consecutive year and participate in the interview process throughout the conference. With opioid use in the forefront of issues facing workers’ compensation payers, we will explore prescribing habits, addiction and interventions from different disciplines within the system,” said Rita Wilson, CEO of Tower MSA Partners.

Some of the perspectives and industry leaders featured in Tower’s interviews are:

Claims Management – Carrie Struzynski, RN, LHRM, CHRM, MSN, PhDc, Quarterback/Senior Manager, Risk Management, Safety & Insurance, Randstad North America, Inc.
MSP Compliance – Dan Anders, Chief Compliance Officer, Tower MSA Partners
Peer Review – Mark Pew, Senior Vice President, PRIUM
Physician – Mel Pohl, MD, FASAM, Chief Medical Officer, Las Vegas Recovery Center
Pharmacy Benefit Management – Phil Walls, RPh, Chief Clinical & Compliance Officer, myMatrixx
Public Policy – Mark Walls, Safety National’s Vice President of Communications, and Kimberly George, Senior Healthcare Advisor, Sedgwick Claims Management Services

From its studios near the exhibit hall, WCI-TV’s programming will be aired throughout the conference area, in conference hotels’ guest rooms, on shuttles, WCI’s website, e-blasts, and on You Tube. It is produced by CNTV, a Winter Park, Florida-based company that delivers a news approach to the convention television business.

The 2017 WCI WCEC will be held August 6-9 at the Orlando World Center Marriott.

The full article may be found here.

WorkersCompensation.com: Tower MSA Partners’ Rita Wilson Predicts CMS Re-Review Changes Will Help Payers

January 27, 2017

Tower MSA Partners CEO, Rita Wilson, was recently interviewed by WorkersCompensation.com following her participation in a January 24, 2017 “State of MSP” webinar presented by the National Alliance of Medicare Set-Aside Professionals (NAMSAP).

Workerscompensation.com asked Rita to comment on CMS’s December 21, 2016 announcement regarding its plans to update its WCMSA re-review process in 2017. This includes expansion of the process to previously approved MSAs where there has been a substantial change in the claimant’s medical condition and the case has not settled (For details see Tower MSA blog on the announcement: CMS Announces Plans for 2017 Expansion of MSA Re-Review Process & New Policy Regarding URs in MSAs)

Rita’s comments to WorkersCompensation.com follow:

“CMS will need to establish the parameters for re-review and define ‘substantial changes.’ We expect costly procedures such as surgeries and spinal cord stimulators to be included,” Wilson said. “A WCMSA involving patients who have weaned off expensive polypharmacy regimens could also qualify.”

“Tower’s workflow and decision-tree software application identifies recommended, not-yet-performed procedures and intervenes to address inappropriate treatment prior to submitting an MSA,” Wilson said, “But this could be a game-changer for payers with CMS-approved MSAs that they were unable to settle.”

The full article may be found here.

Christmas Miracles Can Happen in Workers’ Compensation

December 23, 2016

For those of us who deal with MSAs, it’s all too common to see claims at settlement time that started out as basic and simple, then spiraled downward as a result of bad prescribing habits, increased drug use and opioid addiction. We hope for a different ending, but can miracles really happen?

Background

In late 2015, Tower completed a pharmacy project for a small employer in California. In the course of the project, drug triggers were identified, physicians were contacted and claimants were challenged to settle or make changes in treatment. As you might imagine, many of the physicians fought the request for change. But through perseverance, and working in tandem with the client, we pushed forward.

The Story as Shared by our Client

Dear Hany,

A few weeks ago, I was looking over the case for one of the California claimants and wanted to share the amazing results we have achieved with this gentleman.

This case involved a 26 year old man at time of injury. He sustained a minor back injury but was taking Hydrocodone, Testosterone, Celecoxib, Lyrica, Nortriptyline, Methocarbamol, and FENTANYL. With the recommendations and assistance from the Tower MSA Partners team, as well as support from his wife, we were able to get him into a new treating physician who agreed with our goal. He was weaned off of the Fentanyl, Methocarbamol, testosterone, hydrocodone, and Celecoxib. He has even started an exercise program. He is now both proud and happy to report how well he is doing.

The injured worker is now 51 years old and he sadly notes that he missed out on 25 years of his life and his children’s lives because he was so “drugged”. On a positive note, however, his new treating physician has been wonderful to work with and we see only good things for this claimant.

On the financial side we have now realized a reduction in the monthly Rx spend from $1,200 per month down to $600. The injured worker is now only taking Nortriptyline, Lyrica and Celebrex and we expect to reduce reserves next year and approach him for a settlement in June, 2018. None of this would have been possible if not for the Rx project and your team’s expertise, guidance and follow up assistance.

While we have had great success with many of the claims that we partnered on, this particular claim was really about improving his quality of life. So please share my THANK YOU and gratitude with your team. Let them know that what they do can save a life and that is priceless.

It’s True….Miracles Can Happen in Workers’ Compensation

What a wonderful way to end the day and begin our holiday celebrations!

From all of us at Tower MSA Partners, our best wishes for a wonderful holiday, and a safe and prosperous 2017!

CMS Hits ‘Reset’ Button With Workers’ Compensation Review Contractor Procedures and Request for Approval of Zero-Dollar Medicare Set-Aside Amounts

November 2, 2016

In an announcement distributed on November 1, 2016, CMS acknowledged the receipt of many inquiries from the MSP industry regarding procedural changes in the way CMS’s Workers’ Compensation Review Contractor (WCRC) reviews proposed zero-dollar Workers’ Compensation Medicare Set-Aside Arrangement (WCMSA) amounts. CMS further acknowledged that as a result of these inquiries, it has determined that changes had transpired without prior notification, and that effective immediately, the WCRC will utilize (the) procedures that were previously in effect, further noting that CMS continually evaluates all policy and procedures related to WCMSA reviews and will publish any pending changes when or before they go into effect.

Background

Prior to October, 2016, the Workers’ Compensation Review Contractor’s procedure with Zero Dollar WCMSAs in cases where evidence of a complete denial of the claim was handled as follows:

The carrier’s complete denial would be evidenced by
- a claim payment history documenting no payments for medical treatment and indemnity and
- a letter from the adjuster or defense attorney confirming such full denial.
The MSA must be submitted to CMS for approval PRIOR to obtaining a court-approved settlement.

When these conditions were met, the settlement would be recognized as a strict compromise and CMS would issue a determination letter staying no MSA is needed.

While CMS never published this procedure as an official policy in the WCMSA Reference Guide, the policy was exercised regularly and consistently. As such, Tower, as well as many other MSP companies, incorporated this “policy” into its standard CMS submission procedure for Zero WCMSAs for denied claims.

The October ‘Surprise’

Beginning in October, 2016, with no notice, CMS responses for denied claims took a complete 180 degree turn in terms of the WCRC’s review process. No longer was the carrier’s evidence of complete denial of the claim sufficient to obtain CMS’s approval of a Zero WCMSA.

When questioned regarding its rationale for this drastic change, CMS noted only that there was a ‘NEW‘ procedure being followed by the WCRC, and in order to obtain approval of a Zero WCMSA one of the following would be required:

A court ruling regarding the compensability of the claim; or,
Treatment records (i.e. a letter from the treating physician) which demonstrate/indicate that no further treatment for the alleged industrial condition(s) will be required.

Unfortunately for the industry, there was no advanced notice of the change in procedure, no documentation of the change and no explanation of CMS’s rationale for making such a drastic change. We, along with everyone else in our industry, basically learned about this through development letters and undesirable dialogue with WCRC & CMS representatives.

Industry Reaction and CMS’s ‘Reset’

As expected, companies reacted immediately, contacting CMS to request answers, and seeking to determine how WCMSAs currently being reviewed would be handled. Tower clients with cases pending with CMS were advised to wait to see if the case would be developed or if CMS would follow its original policies. If developed, the case could be withdrawn.

In an effort to further clarify, NAMSAP (National Alliance of MSA Professionals) also intervened on behalf of its constituent members to confirm why the change was made, to ‘demand’ the courtesy of notice, and to offer its expertise to assist CMS in setting future policy to simplify the process rather than creating confusion and chaos.

As a result of the avalanche of questions, concerns and complaints, CMS has now taken a very positive step back, announcing that it will revert to its original, established procedure for reviewing Zero WCMSA for denied claims until such time as it can analyze, define policy, establish review procedures, communicate to the MSP industry and provide ample notice.

What’s Next?

With today’s announcement that the WCRC will revert to its original procedure for reviewing Zero WCMSAs for denied claims, the industry can return to its internal policies for setting settlement strategy with a clear understanding of the review process that will be executed by CMS’s review contractor when evaluating Zero WCMSAs.

As a reasonable next step, NAMSAP has offered to serve as a resource to CMS to provide industry experiences, to identify the perceived impact of the WCRC’s shift in policy, and to open dialogue regarding both our goals and the unintended consequences of CMS’s shift in review practices. I trust CMS will consider this offer, and will engage in conversations that will lead to a seamless

Stay tuned….

CMS: Workers’ Compensation Medicare Set Aside Arrangements

FDA Mandates New Warnings for Opioid and Benzodiazepines

September 20, 2016

In a statement released on September 1, 2016 (FDA Black Box Warning), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that “after an extensive review of the latest scientific evidence, it is requiring class-wide changes to drug labeling, including patient information, to help inform health care providers and patients of the serious risks associated with the combined use of certain opioid medications and a class of central nervous system (CNS) depressant drugs called benzodiazepines.”

Background

Benzodiazepine medications are most commonly prescribed to treat anxiety and mood disorders, such as depression and insomnia. The drugs also are used to treat seizures. According to the FDA, the number of individuals who were prescribed both opioids and benzodiazepines grew by 41 percent, or 2.5 million, between 2002 and 2014.

States submitted a petition to FDA calling for the agency to add black-box warnings about the potentially fatal combination of opioid painkillers and benzodiazepines to the drugs. The officials said prescription opioids and benzodiazepines often are used together, and data show that almost one in three unintentional overdose deaths from prescription opioids also involved benzodiazepines.

What drugs are impacted?

The agency is requiring that black box warnings, the strongest available, be added to nearly 400 products (of which more than 200 are opioid painkillers) alerting doctors and patients that combining opioids and benzodiazepines can cause extreme sleepiness, slowed breathing, coma, and death.

The FDA is warning patients and their caregivers about the serious risks of taking opioids along with benzodiazepines or other central nervous system (CNS) depressant medicines, including alcohol. Serious risks include unusual dizziness or lightheadedness, extreme sleepiness, slowed or difficult breathing, coma, and death. These risks result because both opioids and benzodiazepines impact the CNS, which controls most of the functions of the brain and body.

The bigger picture

The agency said the move is one of a number of steps the FDA is taking as part of the agency’s Opioids Action Plan, which focuses on policies aimed at reversing the prescription opioid abuse epidemic, while still providing patients in pain access to effective and appropriate pain management. For those who may not know what’s in play or want more information about the national effort, go to TurnTheTideRx.Org to access the U.S. Surgeon General’s plans to curb the epidemic.

In responding to the announcement, FDA commissioner Robert Califf noted, “It is nothing short of a public health crisis when you see a substantial increase of avoidable overdose and death related to two widely used drug classes being taken together,” He further added, “We implore health care professionals to heed these new warnings and more carefully and thoroughly evaluate, on a patient-by-patient basis, whether the benefits of using opioids and benzodiazepines … together outweigh these serious risks.”

What does this mean to you?

In dealing with workers’ compensation claims for Class I and Class II Medicare beneficiaries, the combination of opioid pain killers and benzodiazepines is a common occurrence. When we see it, we immediately notify the claims handler that this is a dangerous combination and certainly not intended for long term use. For the elderly, drug combinations such as this are even more dangerous as their effects are exacerbated due to the rate at which they metabolize in an elderly person. For those who may not be familiar, there is an excellent resource (2015 Beers Criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Older Adults) that focuses on commonly used drugs and the risks and potential dangers when prescribed to the elderly. According to the guide,

“Older adults have increased sensitivity to benzodiazepines and decreased metabolism of long-acting agents; in general, all benzodiazepines increase risk of cognitive impairment, delirium, falls, fractures, and motor vehicle crashes in older adults and should be avoided”.

One of many pieces of the opioid puzzle

As stated within the “TurnTheTideRx” campaign literature, it is truly “All hands on deck” if we hope to change the course of the opioid epidemic. It will take patient, family members, friends, and in the case of workers’ compensation claims, claims handlers, nurse case managers, employers, carriers and even MSP compliance providers to help change prescribing habits. While legislative, regulatory and compliance entities can assist by setting policy, it is the physician who writes the first script. When I see that one of the largest emergency rooms in the country (One of Nation’s Largest ERs Kicks the Opioid Habit) can function without writing opioids as first line pain management for acute pain, I am convinced that a change is possible if we can engage our physicians.

We are but one piece of this very complicated puzzle, and “Big Pharma” has deep pockets. Through education of all stakeholders, advocacy to those in positions of power and influence, and our respective collaborative efforts to optimize claims and treatment, we can make a difference in the lives of our patients.

Age Is More Than Just a Number… Protecting Older Workers to Help the Bottom Line

May 18, 2016

Older workers can be a valuable asset to any company. The institutional knowledge they bring, combined with their years of experience and a solid work ethic make them an integral component of any organization seeking to move forward successfully. Employers can realize the most benefit from their aging workers by ensuring they stay safe and healthy and recover quickly when they do become injured.

Due to elements of the natural aging process and often the presence of co-morbid conditions, older workers typically take longer to heal from their injuries than younger employees. With the prediction that 25 percent of the workforce will be at least 55 years of age by 2020, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has developed a variety of materials to help employers understand and address some of the unique characteristics of older workers.

A primary focus of NIOSH is roadway crashes — the leading cause of occupational fatalities for older workers in the U.S. Older workers are more likely to be injured in a crash and more likely to die if they are injured. In fact, they have twice the risk of dying in a work-related motor vehicle crash than younger workers. According to the government, death rates for work-related roadway accidents increase steadily beginning around age 55.

Driving ability can be affected by a variety of physical factors; such as reduced vision, slower reaction times, declines in cognitive functioning, and chronic health conditions. The good news is that the effects of these and many other conditions can be greatly reduced or resolved with treatment. Employers are advised to work with their employees do develop safety and health programs that consider older drivers’ needs. Some companies are taking this advice to heart, and seeing great results.

“The safety of older drivers in the workplace is a shared responsibility of employers and their employees,” NIOSH states on its website. “Forward-thinking safety programs, reasonable accommodations, and open lines of communication between employers and workers can help protect valued older employees from death or disability due to roadway crashes.”

Effects of aging

Becoming aware of bodily changes that can affect a worker’s driving ability is the first order of business for employers that seek to protect their older workers. According to NIOSH, the following are among those changes:

Diminished eyesight and the need for more light can affect driving ability in some people. Older workers affected may find it especially difficult to drive at dawn, dusk, and at night. Cataracts and macular degeneration may make it harder to read signs and see colors.
Diabetes can make blood sugar levels too high or low, which can lead to drowsiness, dizziness, confusion, loss of consciousness, or seizures. Arthritis may cause stiff joints, limiting movement of shoulders, hands, head, and neck and making it difficult to grasp the steering wheel or apply brake and gas pedals. And sleep apnea can increase the risk of drowsy driving. Medications can interfere with sleep quality, also increasing the risk for drowsiness.
Motor skills.As they decline with age, it can become more difficult to have the strength to step on the brake or gas pedal. A decrease in flexibility makes it harder to see all angles of the car. A lack of coordination can make it more difficult for the upper and lower body to work together while simultaneously braking and turning.
Mental abilities.Attention span, memory, judgment, and the ability to make decisions and react quickly may be affected. Older drivers may feel overwhelmed by signs, signals, pedestrians, and vehicles around them.

What you can do

So what can an employer do? For one thing, employers can instruct all workers regarding driving best practices… use caution at intersections, especially when making left-hand turns, often a trouble spot for aging drivers. Helping older workers — as well as all employees — maintain their overall health is key to preventing tragic accidents.

What one company has done

One national transportation company, and a client of Tower MSA Partners, is protecting its aging drivers in a variety of ways. For one thing, the company employs a nurse who routinely calls all employees — whether they have company-sponsored health insurance or not. The nurse discusses annual physical exams and ways employees can take better care of their health. That strategy alone has resulted in a significant number of employees having at least a primary-care-physician.

The company’s focus on health and safety has also led many employees with chronic conditions to get treatment for their hypertension, diabetes, and sleep apnea.

For older workers that do become injured, the company’s key focus is on actions that will bring the worker back to function and work in a timely and positive way. Sometimes that means temporarily covering a medication, for example, to allow surgery to move forward.

Return to work is also a challenge when drivers are injured. For this company, a key step in the rehabilitation process is to engage a Return-to-Work company as soon as the injured worker is released to some level of activity. Keeping the employee active and involved in the recovery process is critical to maintaining forward progress. As the employer states, “the preventive work we are doing and our focus on return-to-work should help alleviate healing delays when/if a workers’ comp injury occurs.”

NIOSH suggests companies also develop and enforce a comprehensive driver safety policy, offer refresher driver training and encourage older workers to attend, and keep complete and accurate records of workers’ driving performances. Also, have policies that ban texting and hand-held phone use to prevent distracted driving, make sure work schedules allow workers to obey speed limits, and allow employees to take naps of less than 30 minutes or stop in a safe location if they are tired.

Tower’s perspective

As an MSP compliance company, Tower MSA Partners has a laser focus on best practices in claims management and settlement optimization when dealing with an aging workforce. We identify the co-morbid conditions that exacerbate injury severity, increase the cost of treatment and add time to rehabilitation, and seek to educate our clients as to potential exposure when these conditions exist. Injuries are inevitable. Our goal is to know where claim cost can spiral out of control and assist clients to identify, intervene and mitigate before the MSA.

The pursuit of positive health choices to minimize accident frequency, and optimize recovery when injuries do occur, is paramount to improving claim, settlement and MSA outcomes.

For more information visit www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2016-116/default.html/?s_cid=3ni7d2employerblog032016.

Growing Press Surrounds Tower MSA’s Groundbreaking MSP Automation Suite

January 25, 2016

An article today posted by Yahoo! Finance discusses the new MSP Automation Suite by Tower MSA. The article cited the groundbreaking and sophisticated technology developed by Tower MSA that drives the MSP process.

Describing the MSP Automation Suite:

“The sophisticated technology drives all the processes Tower has perfected to proactively manage Section 111 Mandatory Insurer Reporting, the recently implemented Conditional Payment Notice process, and to stage workers’ compensation claims for Medicare Set-Asides and closure.”

Our CEO Rita Wilson offered many insights about the new MSP Automation Suite:

“Essentially, it automates our best practices for Medicare Secondary Payer compliance, claims optimization and MSA preparation.”

“Our Pre-MSA Triage identifies barriers to settlement and recommends claim-specific interventions, like physician peer review and clinical oversight, to remove those barriers long before preparing an MSA.”

“Clients don’t need to manually diary activities or call to check on things.”

“The system shows exactly when a phone call was made, and follow-up is due.”

“Automation frees claims professionals to address issues that require a human touch.”

The article went on to say:

“The MSP Automation Suite can track a claim from Medicare beneficiary identification through final settlement. It records every claim activity performed by Tower or its network of practicing physicians and pharmacists and provides clients with 24/7, end-to-end visibility into claims. The system prompts for missing data, conditional payment searches, and medical/pharmaceutical interventions and sends electronic updates to clients at appropriate data points.”

If you would like to read the full article, it is available here on Yahoo! Finance.