A majority of hospital chief executive officers say they don't have enough physicians, nurses or allied health professionals to handle increased demand if health reform improves access, according to a survey released Monday by AMN Healthcare, a large provider of clinical staffing services.
The survey, completed by 285 hospital executives, found that although there are more applicants for jobs today because of the recession, significant gaps remain. And what's worse, many of the executives believe the situation will not improve.
"While the short-term economic environment may have temporarily eased the ability to recruit and retain clinical staff, the long-term dynamics of an aging population will drive the need for thousands of additional healthcare professionals," said Susan Nowakowski, president of AMN Healthcare.
"Any plan to expand access to care would intensify an already anticipated critical shortage of physicians. Healthcare reform should include robust efforts to train more doctors, nurses, and other clinicians," she said.
Among the survey's highlights:
Ninety-five percent of CEOs believe there is a shortage of physicians, 91% say there's a shortage of nurses, 79% say there is a shortage of allied health professionals, and 86% point to a shortage of pharmacists.
Ninety-five percent of CEOs said the physician shortage has worsened in the last six months or has not improved. Meanwhile, 27% perceived the supply of nurses has improved in the last six months.
Hospital CEOs continue to report clinical staff vacancies, reporting an 11% gap for physicians, 6% for nurses, 5% for allied professionals, and 5% for pharmacists.
Forty-six percent of CEOs said access to care in their service areas has been compromised by a physician shortage, 8% said access has been compromised by a nursing shortage, and 10% said it's been hurt by a lack of allied health professionals. Three percent said access has suffered because of a shortage of pharmacists.
Of the CEOs who responded to the survey, 81% rated reimbursement as an important strategy priority, 65% rated quality of care as important, and 50% said margin compression as the top priority.
Asked if their service areas had enough clinicians to handle increased demand if more patients have a source of healthcare payment, 21% said their regions had enough physicians, 33% said they had enough nurses, and 31% said they had enough pharmacists.
The AMN survey concluded that shortages persist though some hospital CEOs said the economic downturn has alleviated some of the difficulty of recruiting clinicians.
When it comes to paying for health overhaul, Americans see just one way to go: Tax the rich. That finding from a new Associated Press poll will be welcome news for House Democrats, who proposed doing just that in their sweeping remake of the medical system, which passed earlier this month and would extend coverage to millions of uninsured Americans. The poll found participants sour on other ways of paying for the health overhaul that is being considered in Congress, including taxing insurers on high-value coverage packages derided by President Barack Obama and Democrats as "Cadillac plans."
Uninsured patients with traumatic injuries, such as car crashes, falls, and gunshot wounds, were almost twice as likely to die in the hospital as similarly injured patients with health insurance, according to a new study. The findings by Harvard University researchers surprised doctors and health experts who have believed emergency room care was equitable. The researchers couldn't pin down the reasons behind the differences they found. The uninsured might experience more delays being transferred from hospital to hospital. Or they might get different care. Or they could have more trouble communicating with doctors. The hospitals that treat them also could have fewer resources.
Pressing to begin the Senate's landmark floor debate on healthcare legislation this week—and to finish by the end of the year—Majority Leader Harry Reid is considering new ways to fund the bill by raising the payroll taxes that upper-income workers pay for Medicare. Reid is studying the idea, senior Democratic aides say, because of criticism of a plan approved by the Senate Finance Committee that would impose new taxes on insurance companies that offer expensive healthcare plans. But Reid is meeting resistance from centrist Democrats who believe the tax on expensive insurance plans could rein in the growth of health costs overall, while a payroll tax hike would not.
Congressional Democrats' intensifying efforts to pay for their healthcare overhaul and provide more relief for consumers are threatening to unravel a White House deal with the pharmaceutical industry and turn one of Washington's most powerful lobbies against the legislation. Drug makers, which have already spent $110 million lobbying Congress this year, are preparing to make a stand in the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid is working to unveil a healthcare bill this week. And senior administration officials, including White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, are warning members of Congress not to antagonize the deep-pocketed industry at a time when a major victory appears to be within reach, according to Democratic aides.
As Illinois' insurance director, Michael McRaith has a conflicting job: His office is charged with protecting Illinois consumers in their insurance transactions, while making sure their premiums are set high enough to keep the reserves of health plans well-funded. The Illinois Department of Insurance helps to oversee a healthcare system that has allowed insurance companies to essentially dictate how much consumers are charged and what kind of benefits they get. But that would change under healthcare bills making their way through Congress. McRaith, along with other state insurance directors, would be given unprecedented powers in helping to decide the benefits and cost of health plans for the proposed government-regulated insurance exchange. Under the bill passed by the House this month, insurance policies largely geared to those without coverage would be offered on an exchange, or insurance marketplace, to help consumers purchase health plans, many using newly created federal subsidies.
A federal appeals court says a former HealthSouth executive should go to prison for his role in an accounting fraud at the rehabilitation chain. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that probation isn't enough punishment for Ken Livesay, who pleaded guilty to inflating earnings at HealthSouth. Federal judges have sentenced Livesay to probation three times for his role in the HealthSouth fraud. Prosecutors appealed each time, claiming the sentences were too lenient.
As the Senate prepares to take up legislation aimed at overhauling the nation's healthcare system, President Obama and the Democrats are still struggling to win the battle for public opinion. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows Americans deeply divided over the proposals under consideration and majorities predicting higher costs ahead. But Republican opponents have done little better in rallying the public opposition to kill the reform effort. Americans continue to support key elements of the legislation, including a mandate that employers provide health insurance to their workers and access to a government-sponsored insurance plan for those people without insurance. The new poll provides ammunition for both advocates and opponents of reform.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is pressing to advance his version of healthcare legislation past a key juncture this week in a bid to avoid a timing crunch that could otherwise kick the proposed revamp into next year. Republicans will likely filibuster the "motion to proceed," which simply allows the Senate to begin debate. Delaying consideration of the bill until 2010, an election year, could jeopardize its chances and turn the intricacies of the Senate timetable into a political tool for the bill's opponents. This week could offer a test of Reid's ability to hold together Democrats and independents in the 60-vote majority needed to shut off any filibuster.
Restrictions on abortion coverage approved in the House version of the healthcare bill likely will affect the affordability of the procedure for only a small minority of women. Although the bill has stirred passions on both sides of the abortion-rights debate—which are likely to be echoed when the Senate takes up its version—the practical effect of the restrictions will be limited, statistics suggest and some experts in family-planning issues say. The restrictions aim to ensure that no taxpayer dollars fund abortion. To that end, the government-run public insurance plan set up by the House bill wouldn't cover abortion, except in the rare cases of rape or incest, or when the pregnancy endangers the woman's life. Individuals getting federal subsidies to buy insurance on a new healthcare exchange also would be barred from buying policies that cover abortion, unless they do so with their own money.
