Really, An undertaker. Yea, theres definately a conflict here, you. No since in wasting my time.
Nicole Start with reading Dr. Schneider's post. Then read Richard Cartun's > post. Those should deal will what you are talking about very well. > > These in-office labs should not exist, for the very same reason the > undertaker is no longer the ambulance driver. There is a very real, and > significant conflict of interest. > > Sent from my Windows Phone > From: Nicole Tatum > Sent: 4/10/2012 6:45 AM > To: Davide Costanzo; histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu > Subject: Re: [Histonet] Aetna and In-Office Lab Accreditation > Money is at the root of all finicial decisions, in-house labs and > hospitals. There are many over utilization of resources within the health > care field. Many gallbladder surgerious are performed unneccesarly by > general surgeous who's practice are within hospitals walls. Tonsilectomy. > etc. How are those specimens not self reffered to the hospitals AP lab. > David you made the comment about specialities staying with there specialty > and not branching out. A dermatopathologist specializes in derm specimens > so why is it so far fetched that he would read derm specimens from all > sources, hospitals or in-house labs. My in-house lab has a higher turn > around rate, lower overhead, and cuts courier fees out. We also do a > service to our patients by allowing them one stop shopping. We can service > all there needs and they do not have to have multiple appointments at > different facilities. This cuts down on their copay and billing from > multiple doctors. Also, it would cost more for a person to have Mohs > surgery in a hospital setting. As we all know cost are higher at a > hospital because they have higher overhead. The hospital is self reffering > when they let a surgery center or group be affiliated with them. The > surgery center was allowed to join the hospital so the hospital could reep > the revenue generated and process their specimens. Either way, we are all > joined by a common form of employment, and one facility is not better than > another. My field provides jobs and creates revenue just like yours. > Insurance company are going to make changes to try and make revenue during > this change into "OBAMA CARE". Remeber we are not the enemy they are. Who > are they to dictate how my company runs. Insurance companies have to much > power and the decisions they force us to make do not always provide the > best patient care. And that is the ultimate goal for any provider, to give > best patient care right? This is just another hurdle we all must jump > through in these comming changes. I vote we stick together and try our > best to protect all our jobs. Wasnt that long ago that each of us we > trying to get pay increases and bring the importance of our jobs to the > fore front of pathology. The financial squeeze of the helath care system > is going to be felt by all. Histology, pathology, radiology, cytology, we > all must do our best to role with the punches and ensure quality care and > our incomes, as well as our field, reguardless of location. > > Nicole Tatum, HT ASCP > > > > > > Thank you for that. How are things at Hartford Hospital? One of my >> favorite >> places, rotated there many years ago. Very impressive facility! Is Dr. >> Ricci still there? >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Richard Cartun <rcar...@harthosp.org> >> wrote: >> >>> This was released today. >>> >>> Richard >>> >>> Statline Special Alert: >>> New Evidence Links Self-Referral Labs to Increased Utilization, Lower >>> Cancer Detection Rates >>> Study co-funded by CAP Appears in April 2012 Issue of Health Affairs >>> April 9Self-referring urologists billed Medicare for nearly 75% more >>> anatomic pathology (AP) specimens compared to non self-referring >>> physicians, according to a study published today in a leading health >>> care policy journal. Furthermore, the study found no increase in cancer >>> detection for the patients of self-referring physicians-in fact, the >>> detection rate was 14% lower than that of non self-referring >>> physicians. >>> >>> These findings, from an independent study co-funded by the CAP, provide >>> the first clear evidence that self-referral of anatomic pathology >>> services leads to increased utilization, higher Medicare spending, and >>> lower rates of cancer detection. The study, led by renowned Georgetown >>> University health care economist Jean Mitchell, PhD, will appear in the >>> April 2012 issue of Health Affairs and is now available on the >>> journals website. >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> >>> Daniel Schneider <dlschnei...@gmail.com> 4/9/2012 4:47 PM >>> >>> This is all about the money. The rest is rationalization. >>> >>> The reason a group of non-pathologist physicians opens an in-house >>> pathology lab and hires an employee pathologist is first and foremost >>> to harvest profit from pathology reimbursement. Be a fly on the wall in >>> the >>> partners' meetings and you would know that's what they are talking >>> about. >>> >>> To suggest otherwise is disingenuous. >>> >>> And the implication that the generalist anatomic pathologist is >>> unqualified >>> to be signing out skins, prostates, GI's and whatever is >>> reprehensible. >>> This is not cardiac bypass surgery, and AP pathologists *are* trained >>> to do >>> all of the above. I eagerly defer to subspecialty expert consultants >>> as >>> needed, but most of the time they're not needed. >>> >>> Hospital labs that see few, if any skins, prostates, GI's, are only in >>> that >>> pickle because of the cherrypicking they've already been subjected to. >>> >>> *"in-office AP labs are an emerging frontier of employment for >>> histologists >>> and pathologists. In an era of high unemployment, another source of >>> employment for our professions is "a good thing.""* >>> >>> Really? The jobs follow the specimens. Given the same number of >>> specimens, >>> there's the same number of jobs, more or less, just under different >>> circumstances and in different locations Unless you're suggesting >>> that >>> in-office labs will generate increased specimens, and thus increased >>> jobs >>> though overutilization, i.e. excessive numbers of unnecessary biopsies >>> and >>> abuse of the patient and the taxpayer. In which case I have to say >>> there's >>> a grain of truth. And the truth hurts. And it's not " a good thing." >>> >>> None of this should be taken as criticism of histotechs and >>> pathologists >>> who find themselves working in an in-office lab. I know there's bills >>> to >>> pay, families to take care of, and god knows it's hard for a >>> pathologist to >>> find a job these days with the numbers our residency programs keep >>> churning >>> out (but that's another rant...). >>> >>> Dan Schneider, MD >>> Amarillo, TX >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:52 PM, <jdcoch...@aol.com> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > Histonetters: >>> > >>> > In-office AP labs provide a valuable service to the practices they >>> serve >>> > by facilitating 1) better communication between pathologists and >>> ordering >>> > clinicians, 2) quality metrics that are practice-specific, and 3) >>> high >>> > volume, sub-specialization for both histotechnologists and >>> pathologists. >>> > In other words, the more of one type of histopathology a lab does >>> (e.g., >>> > skin, prostate, GI), the better it gets. Most people would not think >>> of >>> > having their cardiac bypass surgery done at a community hospital >>> doing >>> > 50/year; you want to go where more than 500/year are done. In >>> > histopathology, the kinds of volume you want are in the thousands for >>> each >>> > tissue type. Many hospital labs do little skin or prostate >>> histology >>> > anymore. Many sub-specialty in-office AP labs may do thousands of >>> cases of >>> > one tissue type every year. >>> > >>> > Aside from that, in-office AP labs are an emerging frontier of >>> employment >>> > for histologists and pathologists. In an era of high unemployment, >>> another >>> > source of employment for our professions is "a good thing." >>> > >>> > This requirement by an insurer for accreditation will help to >>> validate >>> > these in-office AP labs' commitment to quality and put them on the >>> level >>> > with their hospital counterparts. >>> > >>> > John D. Cochran, MD, FCAP >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Histonet mailing list >>> > Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu >>> > http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Histonet mailing list >>> Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu >>> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Histonet mailing list >>> Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu >>> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> *David Costanzo, MHS, PA (ASCP)* >> Project Manager >> *Blufrog Path Lab Solutions* >> 9401 Wilshire Blvd. Ste 650 >> Beverly Hills, CA 90212 >> _______________________________________________ >> Histonet mailing list >> Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu >> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet >> > _______________________________________________ Histonet mailing list Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet