When “Doctor” Doesn’t Mean Physician
Megan Marcinko, MPS AAO-HNS Senior Manager, Congressional & Political Affairs Although we are more than a year beyond passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), efforts remain under way to advance various health-related pieces of legislation that focus on areas of the health system not adequately addressed in the health reform law. Specifically, advocates for “transparency” in patient communications, including the AAO-HNS, argue that clear and accurate information empowers patients with an improved understanding of the healthcare delivery system. Currently, there is little transparency associated with the most fundamental and important component of healthcare delivery—the many health professionals who interface with patients every day. The continuing evolution of the healthcare delivery system has included the emergence of a variety of new non-physician medical provider degrees and/or accreditations. Although non-physician healthcare providers are an important component of the U.S. healthcare delivery system, it is critical that patients understand the level of training associated with various providers. Today, being a “doctor” does not necessarily mean that an individual has completed the training associated with the Medical Doctor (MD) or Doctor of Osteopathy (DO) degrees. Little has been done to ensure patients are able to identify and/or recognize the differences between providers. Recent studies confirm American patients prefer a physician-led approach to healthcare and are often confused about the level of training and education of their healthcare providers, including physicians, technicians, nurses, physician assistants, and other allied providers. Patients lack information about the wide variety of professionals who work in healthcare settings, and they are confused by the increasing ambiguity of healthcare provider-related advertisements and marketing. To address this serious health policy void, the AAO-HNS and others in the healthcare community continue to advocate for state and federal legislation that would require all healthcare providers to fully disclose their credentials and/or level of training in all patient communications. Across the nation, there have been numerous state legislative proposals introduced in the past several years, with additional states adopting and implementing transparency legislation each year. Prior to this year’s state legislative sessions, truth-in-advertising legislation has been enacted in Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania. In 2011, there were truth-in-advertising bills introduced in Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Indiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming. Most recently, Connecticut joined Oregon, Tennessee, and Utah in successfully passing healthcare truth and transparency legislation this year. On June 6, 2011, Governor Dannel P. Malloy (D-CT) signed into law Public CT House Bill 5045 (CT Public Act 11-32), which requires healthcare providers to wear a photographic identification badge during work hours that display the facility name, the provider name, the type of license held, and the individual’s title/position with the facility. In addition to the positive truth-in-advertising measures that many states have taken, there are also some proposals being considered that are cause for concern. The Massachusetts legislature is currently considering a bill, MA House Bill 1490, that would add the term “oral physician” for dentists’ scope of practice and for compliance with the state’s current truth-in-advertising language. Support for federal healthcare truth-in-advertising legislation also continues to grow. In January 2011, U.S. Representatives John Sullivan (R-OK) and David Scott (D-GA) introduced H.R. 451, the Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act of 2011. As written, H.R. 451 is designed to empower patients by improving transparency in healthcare provider-related advertisements and marketing. The legislation provides modest, yet meaningful, increases in resources to marketplace regulators so they can effectively enforce federal consumer protection laws pertaining to the healthcare setting. Although similar legislation has been introduced in past years, H.R. 451 has garnered more co-sponsors in 2011 than in any other Congress. As of August 24, the bill has broad bipartisan support and a total of 45 cosponsors. The AAO-HNS is a strong supporter of H.R. 451 and will continue to work with Represenatives Sullivan and Scott to advance this important legislation. Information is power, and the AAO-HNS strongly believes that increased efforts to educate patients about the qualifications and training of their healthcare providers will benefit the delivery of quality care as a whole. The AAO-HNS encourages its members to contact their state and federal elected officials to urge support of efforts to better inform our patients. To learn more about the Academy’s state and federal advocacy efforts, visit AAO-HNS Legislative and Political Affairs at www.entnet.org/advocacy or contact the Government Affairs team at legstate@entnet.org or legfederal@entnet.org.
Although we are more than a year beyond passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), efforts remain under way to advance various health-related pieces of legislation that focus on areas of the health system not adequately addressed in the health reform law. Specifically, advocates for “transparency” in patient communications, including the AAO-HNS, argue that clear and accurate information empowers patients with an improved understanding of the healthcare delivery system. Currently, there is little transparency associated with the most fundamental and important component of healthcare delivery—the many health professionals who interface with patients every day.
The continuing evolution of the healthcare delivery system has included the emergence of a variety of new non-physician medical provider degrees and/or accreditations. Although non-physician healthcare providers are an important component of the U.S. healthcare delivery system, it is critical that patients understand the level of training associated with various providers. Today, being a “doctor” does not necessarily mean that an individual has completed the training associated with the Medical Doctor (MD) or Doctor of Osteopathy (DO) degrees. Little has been done to ensure patients are able to identify and/or recognize the differences between providers.
Recent studies confirm American patients prefer a physician-led approach to healthcare and are often confused about the level of training and education of their healthcare providers, including physicians, technicians, nurses, physician assistants, and other allied providers. Patients lack information about the wide variety of professionals who work in healthcare settings, and they are confused by the increasing ambiguity of healthcare provider-related advertisements and marketing.
To address this serious health policy void, the AAO-HNS and others in the healthcare community continue to advocate for state and federal legislation that would require all healthcare providers to fully disclose their credentials and/or level of training in all patient communications.
Across the nation, there have been numerous state legislative proposals introduced in the past several years, with additional states adopting and implementing transparency legislation each year. Prior to this year’s state legislative sessions, truth-in-advertising legislation has been enacted in Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania. In 2011, there were truth-in-advertising bills introduced in Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Indiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming. Most recently, Connecticut joined Oregon, Tennessee, and Utah in successfully passing healthcare truth and transparency legislation this year. On June 6, 2011, Governor Dannel P. Malloy (D-CT) signed into law Public CT House Bill 5045 (CT Public Act 11-32), which requires healthcare providers to wear a photographic identification badge during work hours that display the facility name, the provider name, the type of license held, and the individual’s title/position with the facility.
In addition to the positive truth-in-advertising measures that many states have taken, there are also some proposals being considered that are cause for concern. The Massachusetts legislature is currently considering a bill, MA House Bill 1490, that would add the term “oral physician” for dentists’ scope of practice and for compliance with the state’s current truth-in-advertising language.
Support for federal healthcare truth-in-advertising legislation also continues to grow. In January 2011, U.S. Representatives John Sullivan (R-OK) and David Scott (D-GA) introduced H.R. 451, the Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act of 2011. As written, H.R. 451 is designed to empower patients by improving transparency in healthcare provider-related advertisements and marketing. The legislation provides modest, yet meaningful, increases in resources to marketplace regulators so they can effectively enforce federal consumer protection laws pertaining to the healthcare setting. Although similar legislation has been introduced in past years, H.R. 451 has garnered more co-sponsors in 2011 than in any other Congress. As of August 24, the bill has broad bipartisan support and a total of 45 cosponsors. The AAO-HNS is a strong supporter of H.R. 451 and will continue to work with Represenatives Sullivan and Scott to advance this important legislation.
Information is power, and the AAO-HNS strongly believes that increased efforts to educate patients about the qualifications and training of their healthcare providers will benefit the delivery of quality care as a whole. The AAO-HNS encourages its members to contact their state and federal elected officials to urge support of efforts to better inform our patients. To learn more about the Academy’s state and federal advocacy efforts, visit AAO-HNS Legislative and Political Affairs at www.entnet.org/advocacy or contact the Government Affairs team at legstate@entnet.org or legfederal@entnet.org.