2017 Fall Chairs Courses
(In conjunction with ANA)
October 15-17, 2017
Sheraton San Diego Hotel & Marina
1380 Harbor Island Drive, San Diego, CA, 92101
Rooms: Nautilus 3 (all threes sessions)
There is no registration fee to attend, but we ask that you RSVP your attendance
Please click here to read a summary of each chair session with evaluation results.
Sunday, October 15, 2017 – 7:30 am – 9:00 am
SESSION I: “Challenges in Faculty Compensation”
Robert G. Holloway, MD, MPH, University of Rochester Medical Center
Sara Uschold, Chief Finance and Research Officer, Department of Neurology, University of Rochester Medical Center
Jose Biller, MD, FAAN, FACP, FAHA, Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine
Michael Budzynski, Executive Director, Neurosciences Service Line, Loyola University Medical Center
Holloway & Uschold Presentation Slides
Biller & Budzynski Presentation Slides
Salary disparities are increasing between procedural and cognitive subspecialties and between research- or education-oriented faculty and predominantly clinical faculty, while traditional salary differences between junior and senior faculty are shrinking. At the same time, funding for faculty salaries is challenged by declining reimbursement for clinical activity, the NIH cap on research salary support which prevents adequate reimbursement for research effort, the need to compete with salaries offered by the private sector, and the lack of support for educational activity. In this environment, how can chairs effectively cross-subsidize the salaries of research- or education–focused faculty? Are salary disparities disruptive to morale, or simply the new normal? How can chairs argue effectively for institutional subsidies and support when other departments face the same challenges? Are there novel revenue sources (philanthropy, concierge medicine, legal consulting, device and Pharma industry relationships) that can fill the gaps?
- Understand the various funding resources available to a faculty member within a university setting and identify the internal/external pressures associated with each resource.
- Examine alternative funding for clinical compensation that may not be directly related RVU (Relative Value Unit) production, but is necessary for the university Neurologist to remain competitive with private practices (directorships, committees, call pay, etc.).
- Develop systems to understand what each Neurology patient is worth to the institution in terms of direct patient care and downstream revenue. Understand the total financial picture of a patient presenting to the institution with a Neurological condition and track the total financial contribution.
- Related to morale/burn-out, offer non-monetary means for compensation to the university Neurologist – protected research/educational days, funding for educational activities/conferences, provide an environment conducive to fostering research activities (bench and clinical trials), etc.
Monday, October 16, 2017 – 7:30 am – 9:00 am
SESSION II: “Politics for Neurology Chairs"
Richard Kronick, PhD, University of California, San Diego School of Medicine
Kronick Presentation Slides
With the seismic shift in political alignment brought about by the 2016 federal election, the fates of the Affordable Care Act, Medicare and other major systems supporting healthcare are in question. When is it appropriate (and when inappropriate) for Chairs to be politically active and lobby for what academic neurology needs to meet its missions and goals? How do the goals for academic neurology differ from those for private practice neurologists? What are the most effective means to inform our legislators, executive branch, and the public of our perspective and needs? How do we prioritize those needs (more GME slots, better reimbursement for cognitive specialties, more funding for research)? What can/should we as chairs do to promote a new plan for healthcare that accounts for the challenges faced by academic medical centers in general and neurology in particular?
- To understand the major health policy issues confronted by Congress
- To understand the major factors that influence Congressional decisions on these issues
- To understand how neurology chairs could develop priorities for advocacy
Tuesday, October 17, 2017 – 7:00 am – 8:30 am
SESSION III: “Winter is coming, but MACRA is here: Reimbursement for quality and the shift to population-based care"
Marc Nuwer, MD, PhD, University of California, Los Angeles, Reed Neurological Research Center
Lyell Jones MD, Mayo Clinic Rochester
Nuwer & Jones Presentation Slides
The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) ended the Sustainable Growth Rate formula, which threatened massive reductions in Medicare payments, and replaced it with a program that bases reimbursements on quality and innovation. How will this change affect academic Neurology departments? What are the implications of MACRA for academic neurology? How can we address the new MACRA requirements using either Advanced Alternative Payment Models (APMs) or the Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS)? More broadly, how will population health measures including disease prediction, prevention, and early intervention, be incorporated into academic neurology practice? Can such practices improve outcomes and reduce costs, and will they be adequately reimbursed
By the end of this session, you should be able to return to your institutions and:
- Explain MACRA’s two major pathways: the Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) and Advanced Alternative Payment Models (AAPMs)
- Implement a plan to report under MIPS or participate in AAPMs
- Develop strategies to manage the impact of value based care on academic neurology practices