Patient cap being lifted?

[tstinson]

I'm surprised that no one has commented on the Final Rule that will allow certain physician's to treat 275 patients. Of course, the time line for this to be implemented is uncertain. The Rule doesn't become effective for over 3 weeks. The the OMB must review and give final approval to the form to be used to request the new limit. Once the form is authorized, made available to doctors and submitted, HHS has 6 weeks to decide whether to approve the new limit for a particular physician. Maybe some doctors will be able to treat new patients sometime in 2016. Quite a desultory response to a major public health crisis.

[drpasser]

Latest news including proposal to increase cap to 500:

http://www.drugfree.org/join-together/senators-allow-doctors-treat-500-patients-time-buprenorphine/?utm_source=Stay+Informed+-+latest+tips%2C+resources+and+news&utm_campaign=36bcb41c43-JT_Daily_News_Senators_Allow_Doctors_to_6_2_2016&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_34168a2307-36bcb41c43-223226245

[kcairns]

Enlightenment at 4 AM...there will NOT be success in reducing opioid deaths ...the epidemic WILL continue to worsen because treatment of same has become main area in which "THEY" can regulate docs which for them has greater salience than does saving lives...disagree who will that in as much as it is ruled that prevention of bup diversion must have equal valence to saving of lives the choice is thereby made of failure rather than the otherwise possible success

[NoDrugs4u]

NO Mid-Levels! That is a sure recipe for Pill Mills!

[tstinson]

How many people would support the TREAT Act, which allows physicians (after a year of practice) to prescribe buprenorphine to 500 patients and allows mid-level practitioners (PAs and NPs) to prescribe to 100? Apparently this bill has a decent chance of passing the Senate but almost no chance of passing in the House; therefore, it is probably not going to become law. Would you prefer this to the recent HHS NPRM which raises the limit to 200 for some physicians, subject to significant restrictions and conditions?

[rickbennettmd]

I wrote in favor of increasing the limit for well qualified prescribers

We always have the problem with the "mills," damn it

Richard Bennett

[kcairns]

The request for pt limit increase form is quite decent, maybe best try cooperate in good faith and get additional people helped as soon as they allow

[Dave]

More regulations eliminating those physicians who do not take third party payments is just one of the problems with more regulations. The government should NOT be in the business of practicing medicine -- period.

[Bruni]

quote:

---

Originally posted by tstinson

...Simply requiring compliance with "good medical practice" according to several, and possibly shifting privately-written documents does not constitute legitimate rule-making.

---

I believe the Feds always have to be cognizant of the fact that states control the practice of medicine, and that the Fed gov't cannot take that over by stipulating exactly what constitutes 'good medical practice'. But I agree with your observation that this preliminary 'rule' is vague and imprecise.

Bruni

[BrianPierce]

As a direct primary care physician, it's frustrating to see third party payment listed as a requirement of a qualified practice setting.

Given the harm that third party payment has done to primary care and psychiatry, the burden should be on insurance oriented practices to show that they are qualified.

Rockport, Maine