Insights learned from Canada’s experience may benefit clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups in the US as well
Canada continues to face a severe shortage of skilled healthcare professionals, especially among medical laboratory technologists (MLTs) and radiology technicians (RTs). According to the Canadian Society for Medical Laboratory Science (CSMLS), “In 2010, the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) identified that approximately half of all MLTs would be eligible to retire in 10 years, with the greatest impact felt in Canada’s rural and remote communities.” Today, “This staffing concern is currently affecting the professional community across all provinces and territories resulting in the decrease of workers, dramatically impacting organizations and their employees.”
One thing true of government-run healthcare programs is that they consistently underinvest in building new facilities, upgrading older facilities, and training/retaining enough physicians, nurses, and clinical laboratory/radiology workers. This is seen in the UK, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia, where varies combinations of facility, physician, and other healthcare professional shortages generate regular headlines about patient wait times—particularly for elective procedures—that may be six months to a year or more.
For example, officials at Pasqua Hospital in Regina, which serves patients in southern Saskatchewan, Canada, say diagnostics services may need to be shut down by the end of January as a result of “extended, chronic staffing shortages.”
“We’re barely struggling to keep up with urgent cases,” Christy Labreche, a nuclear medicine technologist told the Regina-Leader Post, which noted that people requesting non-urgent treatment may need to make appointments six to 12 weeks out.
Pasqua Hospital leaders have asked province officials to take “immediate action,” but they feel their concerns are “falling on deaf ears,” the Leader Post reported.
“For over a decade, we have been sounding the alarm on behalf of our members that provide a vital service in the continuum of care,” said nuclear medicine technologist Bashir Jalloh (above) in a CUPE statement. Jalloh is President of CUPE 5430, Saskatchewan’s largest healthcare union which represents medical technologists in a variety of specialties. “Now, as waitlists grow, we are at risk of more disruptions of services and communities on bypass for critical care at a time when wait lists are as long as ever.” Clinical laboratory leaders in the US can gain valuable insights from the struggle with shortages taking place in Canada. (Photo copyright: Regina-Leader Post.)
Chrobak noted the following reasons for the deficit of MLTs in Canada:
An aging workforce: Many current lab scientists are over age 50, signaling a “potential shortage of medical laboratory technologists when seasoned professionals retire.”
Lack of awareness and representation: Other healthcare fields may benefit by being in the public spotlight, while “opportunities and rewards” of a medical lab technology career may not be apparent to job seekers.
Insufficient funding for educational programs: The need for laboratory professionals may supersede “scarce healthcare dollars that fund education programs.”
Barriers to registration: International applicants may be challenged in “recognition of existing field-of-practice competencies.”
Solutions: Improve Recruitment, Retention
To address the MLT shortages across Canada, CAMLPR aims to step up the registration of people interested in the medical laboratory profession through a project in partnership with the Canadian government called the Flexible Pathways to Registration for Medical Laboratory Technologists. The goal is to develop competency standards for entering the profession, ease the registration process, and increase the supply of qualified health professionals in Canada, according to a news release.
This is not the first time Dark Daily has covered Canada’s lab worker shortages.
In “Clinical Laboratories Suffer During the ‘Great Resignation’,” we reported how the so-called “Great Resignation” caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has had a severe impact on clinical laboratory staffs, creating shortages of pathologists as well as of medical technologists, medical laboratory technicians, and other lab scientists who are vital to clinical laboratories in both Canada and the US.
And in “Lab Staffing Shortages Reaching Dire Levels,” Dark Daily’s sister publication, The Dark Report, noted that CAP Today characterized the current lab staffing shortage as going “from simmer to rolling boil” and that demand for medical technologists and other certified laboratory scientists far exceeds the available supply. Consequently, many labs use overtime and temp workers to handle daily testing, a strategy that has led to staff burnout and a high turnover rate.
Shortages in other areas of Canadian healthcare are on the rise as well, which we covered in “Number of Unfilled Medical Residencies Increases in Alberta and Other Areas of Canada.” We reported that, according to the Angus Reid Institute, approximately half of all Canadians cannot find a doctor or get a timely appointment with their current doctor. And that, just like in many parts of America, certain provinces are experiencing severe medical staffing shortages that includes clinical laboratories and pathology groups.
Global Insights May Offer Ideas
Dark Daily’s coverage of healthcare industry challenges in Canada, the US, and other countries is aimed at helping clinical laboratory managers and pathologists understand challenges faced by government-run healthcare systems, where there is constant pressure on the government to provide adequate funding. Capital is needed to modernize and expand hospitals and clinics. At the same time, there is need to expand training opportunities to solve the shortage of clinical laboratory scientists, medical laboratory and imaging technologists, doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals.
The insights gained by studying these healthcare systems may be of value to US-based hospitals and medical laboratories that face their own worker recruitment and retention issues.
When it comes to point-of-care (POC) testing for infectious diseases, a meticulously crafted quality system is not just an option—it’s a necessity. Ensuring safety and satisfaction hinges on having the right practices in place. This comprehensive white paper is designed to be your go-to guide, providing invaluable insights into critical success factors and essential functions crucial for maintaining compliance and delivering reliable results. Tailored for POC teams outside the clinical laboratory, this resource delves into the tangible aspects of good laboratory practice and regulatory compliance, offering practical knowledge applicable to both routine and urgent patient care settings.
This is good news for clinical laboratories that already perform medical testing for telehealth providers and an opportunity for medical labs that do not, it is an opportunity to do so
Telemedicine visits have become commonplace since the arrival of COVID-19. Before the pandemic, telehealth was primarily used to give remote patients access to quality healthcare providers. But three years later both patients and physicians are becoming increasingly comfortable with virtual office visits, especially among Millennial and Gen Z patients and doctors.
Now, a recent study by the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania (Penn Medicine) suggests that there could be a significant financial advantage for hospitals that conduct telemedicine. This would be a boon to clinical laboratories that perform medical testing for telemedicine providers.
According to Digital Health News, in July 2017 Penn Medicine launched a 24/7/365 copayment-free telemedicine program for its employees called Penn Medicine OnDemand. To engage with a telemedicine provider, patients must have a smartphone or tablet with a front-facing camera and updated operating system.
Telemedicine Visits Cost Less than In-Office Doctor Appointments
An analysis of the OnDemand program’s data collected from its inception through the end of 2019 found that the telemedicine appointment per-visit cost averaged around $380, whereas the cost of an in-person visit at an emergency department, primary care office, or urgent care clinic averaged around $493.
Typically, Penn Medicine’s employees used the telemedicine program for common, low risk health complaints. Healthcare conditions that many patients might otherwise not seek treatment for if an in-office visit was inconvenient.
“The data we analyzed pre-date the pandemic. It was a time when people were just putting a toe in the water and wondering, ‘Let me see if telemedicine could treat my needs,’” Krisda Chaiyachati MD, an internal medicine physician and Adjunct Assistant Professor at Penn Medicine, told Digital Health News. Chaiyachati lead the research team that conducted the telemedicine study.
“These days, people seem willing to jump in for an appropriate set of conditions,” he added. “The good news is that we made care easier while saving money, and we think the savings could be higher in the future.”
Chaiyachati and his colleagues found that telemedicine can save employers healthcare costs without sacrificing quality of care.
“The conditions most often handled by OnDemand are low acuity—non-urgent or semi-urgent issues like respiratory infections, sinus infections, and allergies—but incredibly common, so any kind of cost reduction can make a huge difference for controlling employee benefit costs,” Krisda Chaiyachati MD (above), a Penn Medicine physician and the study’s lead researcher, told Digital Health News. Clinical laboratories that already perform testing for telemedicine providers may see an increase in test orders once hospitals learn of the costs savings highlighted in the Penn Medicine study. (Photo copyright: Penn Medicine.)
Telemedicine on the Rise
The idea is not new. In late 2018, Planned Parenthood launched the Planned Parenthood Direct mobile app in New York State. The app provides New York patients with access to birth control, emergency contraception, and UTI treatment with no in-person visit required.
The program has since expanded across the country. Users of the app can connect with a physician to go over symptoms/needs, and the be sent a prescription within a business day to the pharmacy of their choice.
The concept is similar to Penn Medicine OnDemand, which gives patients 24/7 year around access to treatment for common and low-acuity medical issues in a convenient, virtual process.
Telemedicine was on the rise in other parts of the healthcare industry before the pandemic. According to “The State of Telehealth Before and After the COVID-19 Pandemic” published by Julia Shaver, MD, Kaiser Permanente, in the journal Primary Care: Clinics in Office Practice, 76% of US hospital systems had utilized some form of telemedicine by 2018. This rate grew exponentially while the healthcare system had to navigate a world with COVID-19 on the rise.
And, apparently, quality of care does not suffer when moved from in-person to virtual settings. Two studies conducted by The University of Rochester Medical Center (URMC) found telemedicine to be effective and that “common concerns about telemedicine don’t hold up to scrutiny,” according a news release.
In her New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) paper on the studies, Kathleen Fear, PhD, URMC’s Director of Data Analytics, Health Lab, and her co-authors, wrote: “Three beliefs—that telemedicine will reduce access for the most vulnerable patients; that reimbursement parity will encourage overuse of telemedicine; and that telemedicine is an ineffective way to care for patients—have for years formed the backbone of opposition to the widespread adoption of telemedicine.”
However, URMC’s study found the opposite to be true. The NEJM authors wrote, “there is no support for these three common notions about telemedicine. At URMC, the most vulnerable patients had the highest uptake of telemedicine; not only did they complete a disproportionate share of telemedicine visits, but they also did so with lower no-show and cancellation rates. It is clear that … telemedicine makes medical care more accessible to patients who previously have experienced substantial barriers to care.
“Importantly, this access does not come at the expense of effectiveness. Providers do not order excessive amounts of additional testing to make up for the limitations of virtual visits. Patients do not end up in the ER or the hospital because their needs are not met during a telemedicine visit, and they also do not end up requiring additional in-person follow-up visits to supplement their telemedicine visit,” the NEJM authors concluded.
“Not only did our most vulnerable patients not get left behind—they were among those engaging the most with, and benefiting the most from, telemedicine services. We did not see worse outcomes or increased costs, or patients needing an increased amount of in-person follow up. Nor did we find evidence of overuse. This is good care, and it is equitable care for vulnerable populations,” Fear said in the news release.
“For patients, the message is clear and reassuring: Telemedicine is an effective and efficient way of receiving many kinds of healthcare,” she added.
Opportunities for Clinical Laboratories
Dark Daily has covered the fast growing world of telemedicine in many ebriefs over the years.
As telemedicine broadens its reach across the healthcare world, clinical laboratories and pathology groups would be wise to seek collaboration with health plans and providers of telemedicine to figure out where sample collection and testing fits into this new virtual healthcare space.
Federal regulators continue to recognize value of clinical laboratory testing in near-patient settings
To help in the diagnosis and management of two sexually-transmitted diseases, another point-of-care diagnostic test will soon be available for use in physician’s offices, urgent care clinics, and other healthcare settings. The federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced it granted a CLIA waiver for the binx health io CT/NG assay, a molecular platform used to detect sexually transmitted diseases—chlamydia and gonorrhea—at the point of care (POC).
This will be welcome news to many medical professionals, as it indicates federal regulators recognize the value of diagnostic testing in near-patient settings.
Allows Non-Laboratorian Processing at Point of Care
In 2019, binx health received FDA 510k clearance to market its binx io rapid point-of-care (POC) platform for women’s health. “The binx io platform is a rapid, qualitative, fully-automated test, designed to be easy to use, and intended for use in POC or clinical laboratory settings … In the company’s recently completed 1,523-person, multi-center clinical study, 96% of patient samples were processed on the binx io by non-laboratorians in a POC setting,” a binx press release noted.
“With ever-increasing sexually transmitted infection rates, point-of-care and CLIA-waived platforms like the binx io are essential additions to our sexually-transmitted-infection-control toolbox, which will increase accessibility and decrease the burden on traditional healthcare settings,” Barbara Van Der Pol, PhD, Professor of Medicine and Public Health at University of Alabama at Birmingham, said in a binx press release.
According to binx, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that one in five people in the US has a sexually-transmitted disease (STD), with an estimated 108 million Americans potentially in need of routine STD testing. Additionally, chlamydia and gonorrhea are the two most treated STDs globally.
Study Finds Binx Health POC Assay Comparable to Traditional Clinical Laboratory NAATs
Van Der Pol led a team of researchers who compared the binx io chlamydia/gonorrhea POC assay to three commercially-available nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs). The binx-funded study, published in JAMA Network Open, analyzed swab samples from 1,523 women (53.6% with symptoms) and urine samples from 922 men (33.4% symptomatic) who presented to 11 clinics in nine cities across the US.
The molecular point-of-care assay proved on par with laboratory-based molecular diagnostics for vaginal swab samples, while male urine samples were associated with “good performance.”
For chlamydia:
Sensitivity of the new POC assay was 96.1% (95% CI, 91.2%-98.3%) for women and 92.5% (95% CI, 86.4%-96.0%) for men.
Specificity of the new POC assay was 99.1% (95% CI, 98.4%-99.5%) for women and 99.3% (95% CI, 98.4%-99.7%) for men.
For gonorrhea:
Sensitivity estimates were 100.0% (95% CI, 92.1%-100.0%) for women and 97.3% (95% CI, 90.7%-99.3%) for men.
Specificity estimates were 99.9% (95% CI, 99.5%-100%) for women and 100% (95% CI, 95.5%-100%) for men.
Van Der Pol told Reuters News, “The bottom line is that chlamydia and gonorrhea are still the most frequently reported notifiable diseases in the US, and it costs us in the $5 billion to $6 billion range to manage the consequences of untreated infections. Unfortunately, about 70% of women who are infected don’t have any symptoms, so they don’t know they need to be tested.”
The CLIA waiver allows binx to distribute the chlamydia/gonorrhea test to 220,000 CLIA-waived locations across the US through the company’s national commercial distribution partnership with McKesson. Obstetrician/gynecologist and primary care offices, urgent care facilities, community health clinics, STD clinics, and retail settings are all potential testing sites.
Binx says its testing platform can improve health outcomes by:
Increasing treatment compliance,
Limiting onward transmission,
Minimizing the risk of untreated conditions, and
Ensuring the right treatment is provided.
In the binx health press release, binx CEO Jeffrey Luber, JD, said, “The io instrument’s demonstrated clinical effectiveness, ease of operation, and patient convenience make it a much-needed tool with transformative implications for public health, especially now during the COVID-19 pandemic, where STI [sexually-transmitted infection] prevention services nationwide have been dramatically reduced or cut altogether as resources have been allocated to focus on the COVID response.”
Should Clinical Laboratories Be Concerned about POCT?
It happens often: after consulting with his or her doctor, a patient visits a clinical laboratory and leaves a specimen. The test results arrive at the doctor’s office in a few days, but the patient never returns for treatment. That is why point-of-care tests (POCTs) came to be developed in the first place. With the patient in the clinic, a positive test result means treatment can begin immediately.
As the US healthcare system continues toward more integration of care and reimbursement based on value, rather than fee-for-service, point-of-care testing enables physicians and other healthcare providers to diagnose, test, and prescribe treatment all in one visit.
Thus, it is a positive step for healthcare providers. However, clinical laboratories may view the FDA’s increasing endorsement of waived point-of-care testing as a trend that is unfavorable because it diverts specimens away from central laboratories.
There also are critics within the medical laboratory profession who point out that waived tests—often performed by individuals with little or no training in laboratory medicine—have much greater potential for an inaccurate or unreliable result, when compared to the same assay run in a complex, CLIA-certified clinical laboratory.
COVID-19 pandemic has elevated virtual care into the mainstream, creating opportunities to increase access to care, including clinical laboratory testing, and drive down healthcare costs
As the COVID-19 pandemic fuels demand for virtual healthcare, Cigna is acquiring telehealth provider MDLIVE in a move that may indicate the insurance giant anticipates virtual visits playing a major role in healthcare delivery going forward. And, with each acquisition within the telehealth space, the need for clinical laboratories and pathology groups to have a strategy to respond to this trend increases.
The acquisition of MDLIVE by Cigna’s health services subsidiary Evernorth is expected to be completed in the second quarter of 2021, pending regulatory approval, according to an Evernorth press release.
Evernorth, noted Becker’s Hospital Review, is a division of Cigna that “includes pharmacy benefit manager Express Scripts, specialty pharmacy Accredo, and the rest of Cigna’s health service product lines.” And that Evernorth focuses on, “… benefit management, behavioral and clinical care, pharmacy, and intelligence.”
Tim Wentworth, Evernorth’s CEO, anticipates consumers’ desire for telehealth options will not disappear as SARS-CoV-2 infections decrease and the country returns to a new normal.
“Customers expect more convenient care interactions and COVID-19 has rapidly accelerated this need. We see an immediate opportunity to build a new model of care delivery, one that delivers a connected experience with greater affordability, predictability, and simplicity,” Wentworth said in the press release.
The MDLIVE website states the telehealth company’s provider network includes physicians who are board certified in:
Internal medicine,
Family practice,
Emergency medicine, and
Pediatrics.
The company also provides counseling and behavioral health services by licensed mental health professionals.
Virtual Care Expanded Rapidly Due to COVID-19 Pandemic
Cigna was an early investor in MDLIVE. According to the company’s investors page, other investors include:
Health Care Service Corporation (HCSC), a Chicago-based mutual legal reserve company and independent licensee of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association.
Sentara Healthcare, a not-for-profit that operates more than 100 sites of care across Virginia and North Carolina.
Sutter Health, a not-for-profit integrated health delivery system headquartered in Sacramento, Calif., that operates 24 acute care hospitals and more than 200 clinics in Northern California.
And various venture capital and private equity firms.
Cigna began investing in virtual care years before the COVID-19 pandemic arrived in America. In 2018, members of Cigna’s employee-sponsored health plans were given access to virtual urgent care services. In 2019, the partnership was expanded to include online appointments with psychiatrists and behavior health counselors, while some primary care services were added last year.
Then, according to Cigna’s Virtual Investment Day Excerpt Video, virtual care expanded rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the use of telehealth jumping 46% in 2020 compared to an 11% increase in 2019.
That trend was highlighted last month in a report published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine (AJPM), titled, “Who Is (and Is Not) Receiving Telemedicine Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic.” The study’s authors found a twentyfold increase in telehealth visits starting in March 2020 among six million people with employer-based health insurance, while office-based encounters fell by almost 50%.
Telehealth Drives New Model of Virtual Healthcare
In the Cigna video, Cigna President and CEO David Cordani says telehealth will be an important driver behind a new model of healthcare delivery.
“The emergence of virtual care is an important example of this,” he states. “We have seen consistent growth in virtual care over the past decade and it has rapidly accelerated further during the COVID pandemic. At Cigna, we see this trend continuing and accelerating further, moving well beyond urgent care to primary, coordinated chronic and behavioral care.”
Cordani added that the MDLIVE acquisition will not only increase patient access to care, but also help Cigna drive down healthcare costs to “below CPI (Consumer Price Index) and ultimately to zero or less.”
Evernorth, however, does not appear to be signaling that its expanded network of virtual providers will serve as gatekeepers for patients scheduling in-office visits with their providers. The Evernorth press release states MDLIVE’s 24/7 virtual care platform will “complement—not replace—the way customers and patients interact with their existing providers.” The goal, Evernorth says, is to achieve:
Earlier identification and diagnosis of critical care needs;
Faster and more seamless referrals to high-performing providers, including specialists and behavioral health; and
More convenient access to appropriate, affordable sites of service, and pharmaceutical fulfillment.
“From cost to complexity to quality, there is tremendous potential for progress in healthcare,” Evernorth President and Chief Operating Officer Eric Palmer said in the company press release. “As one, Evernorth and MDLIVE can accelerate meaningful change. MDLIVE will be part of the new, differentiated, and future-state care solutions that improve the patient experience, close the patient-provider accessibility gap, and bring providers opportunities to augment the services they currently offer. We’ll also have the opportunity to expand the reach of MDLIVE’s capabilities to Evernorth’s clients, as well as Cigna’s US Medical customers and clients.”
Opportunities for Clinical Laboratories That Can Support Virtual Care
Evernorth’s acquisition of MDLIVE expands Cigna’s health services portfolio of healthcare services and may provide opportunities for clinical laboratories that are prepared to support telehealth providers.
As virtual healthcare networks become a signature part of employee-sponsored health plans, clinical laboratories and pathology groups will need to keep pace with a changing healthcare landscape that puts a premium on remote and virtual visits. Outreach to health plans may be necessary to ensure clinical laboratories are included in an ever-growing virtual network.