Original Research

Perception of Executive Order on Medicare Pay for Advanced Practice Providers: A Study of Comments From Medical Professionals

Author and Disclosure Information

On October 3, 2019, President Donald Trump issued the Executive Order on Protecting and Improving Medicare for Our Nation’s Seniors, in which he proposed eliminating supervision requirements for advanced practice providers (APPs) and equalizing Medicare reimbursements among APPs and physicians. The objective of this study was to understand public opinion of this proposal by analyzing online comments. We reviewed 352 comments on a Medscape article as well as the corresponding Reddit discussion, and we characterized the comments by demographic information provided and theme. There were 155 commenters. Our study highlights physician concerns about the executive order, specifically the importance of appropriate supervision and improved dermatologic training of APPs so that patients are provided with the best possible medical care.

Practice Points

  • On October 3, 2019, President Donald Trump issued the Executive Order on Protecting and Improving Medicare for Our Nation’s Seniors, in which he proposed eliminating supervision requirements for advanced practice providers (APPs) and equalizing Medicare reimbursements among APPs and physicians.
  • In a review of comments posted on online forums for medical professionals, a majority of medical professionals disapproved of the executive order.
  • Advanced practice providers were more likely to support the plan, citing the breadth of their experience, whereas physicians were more likely to disapprove based on their extensive training within their specialty.


 

References

The ability of advanced practice providers (APPs) to practice independently has been a recent topic of discussion among both the medical community and legislatures. Advanced practice provider is an umbrella term that includes physician assistants (PAs) and advanced practice registered nurses, including nurse practitioners (NPs), clinical nurse specialists, certified nurse-midwives, and certified registered nurse anesthetists. Since Congress passed the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, APPs can bill and be paid independently if they are not practicing incident to a physician or in a facility.1 Currently, NPs can practice independently in 27 states and Washington, DC. Physician assistants are required to practice under the supervision of a physician; however, the extent of supervision varies by state.2 Advocates for broadening the scope of practice for APPs argue that NPs and PAs will help to fill the physician deficit, particularly in primary care and rural regions. It has been projected that by 2025, the United States will require an additional 46,000 primary care providers to meet growing medical needs.3

On October 3, 2019, President Donald Trump issued the Executive Order on Protecting and Improving Medicare for Our Nation’s Seniors, in which he proposed an alternative to “Medicare for all.”4 This order instructed the Secretary of Health and Human Services to prepare a regulation that would “eliminate burdensome regulatory billing requirements, conditions of participation, supervision requirements, benefit definitions and all other licensure requirements . . . that are more stringent than applicable Federal or State laws require and that limit professionals from practicing at the top of their field.” Furthermore, President Trump proposed that “services provided by clinicians, including physicians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners, are appropriately reimbursed in accordance with the work performed rather than the clinician’s occupation.”4

In response to the executive order, members of the medical community utilized Reddit, an online public forum, and Medscape, a medical news website, to vocalize opinions on the executive order.5,6 Our goal was to analyze the characteristics of those who participated in the discussion and their points of view on the plan to broaden the scope of practice and change the Medicare reimbursement plans for APPs.

Methods

All comments on the October 3, 2019, Medscape article, “Trump Executive Order Seeks Proposals on Medicare Pay for NPs, PAs,”5 and the corresponding Reddit discussion on this article6 were reviewed and characterized by the type of commenter—doctor of medicine (MD)/doctor of osteopathic medicine (DO), NP/RN/certified registered nurse anesthetist, PA, medical student, PA student, NP student, pharmacist, dietician, emergency medical technician, scribe, or unknown—as identified in their username, title, or in the text of the comment. Gender of the commenter was recorded when provided. Commenters were further grouped by their support or lack of support for the executive order based on their comments. Patients’ comments underwent further qualitative analysis to identify general themes.

All analyses were conducted with RStudio statistical software. Analyses were reported as proportions. Variables were compared by χ2 and Fisher exact tests. Odds ratios with 95% CIs were calculated. P<.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

A total of 352 comments (130 on Medscape and 222 on Reddit) posted by 155 unique users (57 on Medscape and 98 on Reddit) were included in the analysis (Table 1). Of the 51 Medscape commenters who identified a gender, 60.7% were male and 39.2% were female. Reddit commenters did not identify a gender. Commenters included MD and DO physicians (43.2%), NPs/RNs/certified registered nurse anesthetists (13.5%), medical students (11.0%), PAs (9.7%), pharmacists (3.2%), NP students (1.9%), PA students (1.3%), emergency medical technicians (1.3%), dieticians (0.6%), and scribes (0.6%). Physicians (54.5% vs 36.73%; P=.032) and NPs (22.8% vs 8.2%; P=.009) made up a larger percentage of all comments on Medscape compared to Reddit, where medical students were more prevalent (16.3% vs 1.8%; P=.005). Nursing students and PA students more commonly posted on Reddit (4.08% of Reddit commenters vs 1.75% of Medscape commenters), though this difference did not achieve statistical significance.

table of Comment Characteristics

A majority of commenters did not support the executive order, with only 20.6% approving of the plan, 54.8% disapproving, and 24.5% remaining neutral (Figure). Advanced practice providers—NPs, PAs, NP/PA students, and APPs not otherwise specified—were more likely to support the executive order, with 52.3% voicing their support compared to only 4.8% of physicians and medical students expressing support (P<.0001). Similarly, physicians and medical students were more likely to disapprove of the order, with 75.0% voicing concerns compared to only 27.3% of APPs dissenting (P<.0001). A similar percentage of both physicians/medical students and APPs remained neutral (20.2% vs 18.2%). Commenters on Medscape were more likely to voice support for the executive order than those on Reddit (36.8% vs 11.2%; P=.0002), likely due to the higher percentage of NP and PA comments on the former.

graph of PUBLIC OPINION OF EXECUTIVE ORDER ON MEDICARE PAY

Support for executive order by provider type (n=155). APP indicates advanced practice provider.


Pages

Recommended Reading

FDA grants emergency use authorization to Lilly’s antibody COVID-19 therapy
MDedge Dermatology
Trump could clean house at health agencies
MDedge Dermatology
AMA takes on vaccine misinformation, physician vaccines, racism
MDedge Dermatology
CDC panel delves into priorities for COVID vaccine distribution
MDedge Dermatology
Biden chooses California Attorney General Xavier Becerra to head HHS
MDedge Dermatology
Moderna COVID-19 vaccine wins decisive recommendation from FDA panel
MDedge Dermatology
FDA grants emergency use for Moderna COVID-19 vaccine
MDedge Dermatology
Second COVID-19 vaccine ready for use, CDC panel says
MDedge Dermatology
CDC issues COVID-19 vaccine guidance for underlying conditions
MDedge Dermatology
Rural Residency Curricula: Potential Target for Improved Access to Care?
MDedge Dermatology