Topics:

How Midlevel Providers Can Enhance Your Practice

How Midlevel Providers Can Enhance Your Practice

Linked Articles

For those of us who have very busy practices, how we deal with same day call-ins and open access can make or break the practice we have worked so hard to create. When I opened my solo private practice in late 2003, I was able to quickly build a very solid base of patients. Of course starting a practice in my hometown was the key to my quick success, however a little over one year into my practice, I found that it was very difficult to see my regular patients in follow up, add new patients to the panel, and provide open access for same day call-in service simultaneously.

I added a nurse practitioner to my practice 17 months after I opened my doors. The nurse practitioner I chose already had a solid patient panel in her previous practice and a large percentage of her patients chose to follow her to my practice. Even though it was a difficult decision to make, I never did regret adding a midlevel provider to my practice. I was able to continue seeing my routine patients and provide timely follow up for their problems and the nurse practitioner was able to provide service to her prior patients and see the same day call-in patients for acute care. The patients coming to see the midlevel provider enjoy the ability to have a consult with me if the need arises during their visit.

This routine worked well for about three years. Not only was I able to comfortably continue to provide non-pressured care for my existing patient panel, but was also able to see new patients at a rate of about one to two additions per day. Surveys for patient satisfaction were at an all time high and the word of mouth advertising quickly spread throughout our community. It was not long before I found my practice bursting at the seams again and also found that the availability of same day call-in slots was starting to become something of a premium.

Just a little after four years following the addition of my first midlevel provider brought with it a very difficult decision. Should I close my practice to new patients or continue to strive to provide access for new additions? It was a very difficult decision to make, but after a great deal of prayer and planning, I chose to add a second nurse practitioner. The addition of my second midlevel provider not only allowed me to continue providing access for routine primary care follow up, but it also allowed me to continue to provide access for new additions to our practice at the rate of one to two new patient visits per day.

It is now almost two years since the addition of my second midlevel provider and surveys in our office still show that patient satisfaction is higher than ever. Although I am able to continue to add new patients to my existing panel, the rate has now peaked and I am able to add about one new patient every one or two days. My patients have no problem with seeing midlevel providers because the service they receive is perceived by them to be higher than what they would normally expect to see in our hospital's emergency department or any of the local acute care facilities. A review of my schedule during any routine day finds that my appointment slots are filled at a rate of 95 to 98 percent and both midlevels I have are seeing about 90 to 92 percent of their capacities. Even though my practice continues to thrive, I will add a second physician before bringing in another midlevel provider. I am presently on track to add a second physician later this year.

Although it can be a difficult decision to make for most physicians in primary care, the choice to use midlevel providers to provide open access for same day call-in visits can bring a high level of patient satisfaction to the practice. It is important to remember that when adding a midlevel provider to your practice that you have a very rigid protocol in place for the midlevel to follow so that the care that is provided can be easily supervised and monitored by the physician(s).
I have never looked back after adding my two midlevel providers and would recommend this to any of my physician colleagues finding themselves under the constant pressure of searching for the ultimate balance between providing timely follow up and at the same time allowing for open access for acute care visits.
 

Since 'incident to' is a Medicare term, how are these midlevels reporting their services? - under their own NPI or the physician's? The CMS manual states incident to is integral to the physician's service and the NPP can only see established patient with a plan of treatment.
Who else besides Medicare and Aetna credential midlevels?
Thank you
Peg
Peggy Eiden @
Dr. Litton~

I applaud you for adding Nurse Practitioners to your staff, as we certainly add to patient satisfaction and can see a variety of chronic and acute illnesses in practice. My collaborating physician and I have developed a team effort in our patient care after 2 1/2 years in our Internal Medicine practice.

May I respectfully ask that you not refer to us as "mid-level"providers? If Nurse Practitioners are "mid-level," who is "low-level?" Would that be nurses, physical therapists, etc.? I dare-say that your two NPs do not provide services that are "mid-" anything, and I'm sure that you would agree. Indeed, numerous studies will attest otherwise.

It is, perhaps, a small and minor point...but one that does make patients and providers alike give pause to the term. Perhaps "Advanced Practice Clinician" would be a preferable term?

Thank you for your wonderful insights on what we NPs can add to a practice.

Respectully,

Kim Spering, MSN, CRNP, FNP-B.C.
Kimberly Spering @
Your practice growth and quality and patient satisfaction are to be applauded. I have a comment regarding your statement about the NPs requiring a "very rigid protocol"for supervision. In my 30 years of practice as an FNP in many settings and many states, NPs have never required rigid protocols. We are well educated with graduate degrees, have an exceptionaly low incidence of malpratice actions, and function independently in over 20 states. Even in Texas, a conservative state, physicians do not have to be present for care to be provided and rigid protocols have never been required. NP are experts at providing prevention care and managing chronic illnesses. I know your patients who see NPs wuld be very happy to learn that NP outcomes are equivalent to those of physicians and often superior!

Please celebrate the wonderful contribution that NPs have provided to your practice and do not denigrate them by using the term mid-level providers. Gain even more time for yourself because you do NOT need to monitor "rigid protocols."
Maureen Courtney @
to question by "by" re: billing NP/PA services.

Just as with Medicare, you should be able to bill NP services using their NPI number. I understand that many commercial insurances have said they would reimburse only 80% (perhaps that is not true, but that is what many say) as medicare does for independent billing (not incident to). While I do not agree with reimbursing only 80%, it would be more than turning patients away as you said you are currently doing. Test it.
Maureen Courtney @
Please forgive the term midlevel providers as I certainly consider both of my nurse practitioners to be advanced practice clinicians. Both do a very good job, require very little input from me on a daily basis and their presence has opened access for many patients to receive same day service without any barriers to care.
J. Litton @
Establishing a meaningful practice team that includes Nurse Practitioners will be key in empowering primary care to demonstrate both its capability and value in collaborating with the ultimate payor of healthcare services; employers, both public and private. Employers who have recognized the true value of primary care practices that are Patient Centered Medical Home (PCMH) capable welcome the opportunity to redirect both the role and the associated revenue of "wellness"programming to such practices. These practices have developed a clinical care team that often has a 3:1 ration of Nurse Practitioners to Primary Care Physicians. These practices have perfected the art of "incident to" care planning, developed by the Nurse Practitioner and signed off by the Physician. Finally, through this type of more effective and efficient deployment of talent, PCMH capable practices are both demonstrating and documenting meaningful improvement in patient engagement and overall health status. These types of results help employers lower the cost of employing people.

Jed Constantz/CNYMSS
Jed Constantz @
We've struggled with the "incident to"billing for 8 years and have found many insurances do not recognize NPPs billing on their own. This results in out-of-network benefits for our patients when their visit does not qualify as "incident to" - i.e. new patient or new illness visit. We are not comfortable billing all NPP visits under their supervising physician as several insurance provider representatives have advised without written documentation that they allow this practice. None have been willing to provide anything in writing. I, too, would be interested in learning how other practices have dealt with this issue. We're turning new, non-medicare patients away when we have two PAs qualified to see them. ~ jky
@
Click here to close