Clinical laboratories will need new methods for accommodating the increase in senior patients seeking rapid access to medical laboratory testing and pathology services
Experts within the healthcare industry are predicting existing care delivery models will need to be revised within the next few years to accommodate a rapidly aging population dubbed a “silver tsunami.” Many hospital systems are actively taking steps to prepare for this coming sharp increase in the number of senior citizens needing healthcare services, including clinical laboratory testing.
Multi-hospital health systems will have to accommodate demand for healthcare delivered in ways that meet the changing expectations of seniors. These include rapid access to clinical laboratory testing and anatomic pathology services, electronic health records, and telehealth visits with their doctors.
These trends will also require clinical laboratories to evolve in ways consistent with meeting both the volume of services/testing and improved levels of personal, speedy access to test results that seniors expect.
All of this is problematic given the current state of hospital staff shortages across the nation.
Investopedia defines the term “silver tsunami” as “the demographic shift caused by the increasing number of older adults in society, led by the baby boom generation.”
Baby boomers are individuals who were born between 1946 and 1964. The US Census Bureau estimates there are 76.4 million baby boomers living in the country today, and that by 2030 all boomers will be 65 years of age or older.
“In the next five years, the most significant disruptor to healthcare will be the capacity challenges associated with the ‘silver tsunami’ of baby boomers hitting the age of healthcare consumption,” said Jonathan Washko, MBA, FACPE, NRP, AEMD (above), director at large, National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians (NAEMT) and assistant vice president, CEMS Operations, in an interview with Becker’s Hospital Review. Clinical laboratories will have to engage with these senior patients in new ways that fit their lifestyles. (Photo copyright: EMS1.)
Silver Tsunami Could Transform Healthcare
Approximately 10,000 people turn 65 in the US every day, making them eligible for Medicare. This increase in recipients is likely to strain the government system. Healthcare organizations are seeking new ways to prepare for the anticipated boost in seniors requiring health services.
Washko believes the population shift will cause healthcare leaders to develop novel care models based on “intelligent and intentional design for better outcomes, lower costs, and faster results,” Becker’s Hospital Review reported.
“Solutions will require shifts to care in the home, new operational care models, and technology integration,” Washko noted. “These will allow the medicine being delivered to be effectively and efficiently optimized, vastly improving the productivity of existing and net new capacity.”
A recent HealthStream blog post outlined some of the methods hospitals can use to adapt to an aging population. They include:
Facility Design: Modifying lighting, using large-print signage, providing reading glasses and hearing amplifiers, purchasing taller chairs with arms and lower examination tables.
Technology: Offering assistive devices, creating more telehealth options, developing more user-friendly websites and electronic medical records.
Healthcare Delivery: Training staff on geriatric care, offering services intended for an older population, such as geriatric psychology, fall prevention programs, and establishing a more patient-centered environment.
“Anticipated regulatory challenges post-election will influence healthcare operations. The looming recession may alter how individuals access healthcare and treatment based on affordability,” Shelly Schorer, CFO CommonSpirit Health, told Becker’s Hospital Review. “Despite these headwinds and challenges, at CommonSpirit we are prepared to pivot and meet the changing needs of our communities by accurately predicting and addressing their healthcare needs efficiently.”
“This represents the greatest market disruption on the near-horizon,” said Ryan Nicholas, MD, Chief Quality Officer at Mercy Medical Group. “This has prompted Mercy Medical Group to move rapidly into value-based care with focus on total cost of care and network integrity.”
Nichols told Becker’s Hospital Review that Mercy’s Medicare population has increased by 24% over the last year, and that Mercy is anticipating a growth of 28% over the next year. These increases have convinced the organization to shift its view of service functions and to invest in additional resources that meet the growing demands for senior healthcare.
“Expanding ambulatory services and improving access for primary care services to reduce unnecessary [emergency department] utilization and shorten length of stay is our top priority,” Nichols said.
Shifting Demand for Clinical Laboratory Testing
This is not the first time Dark Daily has covered how shifting demographics are changing the landscape of healthcare services in nations where populations are aging faster than babies are being born.
Thus, many healthcare organizations are taking a proactive approach to the expected increase in seniors needing care for age-related and chronic illnesses.
“This along with other risk and value-based models will continue to drive integration of healthcare services and the value proposition through improving quality while reducing costs,” Alon Weizer, MD, chief medical officer and senior vice president, Mount Sinai Medical Center, Miami Beach, Fla., told Becker’s Hospital Review. “While we are investing heavily to be successful in these models through primary care expansion and technology that will help reduce the need for acute care services, we continue to focus our culture on providing safe and high quality care to our patients.”
Clinical laboratories will need to adapt to the changing needs of older patients to ensure all people receive high quality care. The coming “silver tsunami” will require labs to evolve in ways consistent with meeting the growing needs of seniors and providing better levels of personal services and access to cost-effective, fast, and accurate lab testing.
Clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups should consider these cyberattacks on major healthcare entities as reminders that they should tighten their cybersecurity protections
Hackers continue to gain access to public health records—including clinical laboratory testing data—putting thousands of patients’ protected health information (PHI) at risk of being exposed. The latest important healthcare entity to become the victim of a ransomware attack is American Associated Pharmacies (AAP). According to The Register, AAP announced a ransomware operation called Embargo had stolen over 1.4 terabytes (TB) of data, encrypted those files, and demanded $1.3 million to decrypt the data.
Embargo claims that Scottsboro, Ala.-based AAP paid $1.3 million to have its systems restored. They are now demanding an additional $1.3 million to keep the stolen data private, the HIPAA Journal reported, adding, “The attack follows ransomware attacks on Memorial Hospital and Manor, an 80-bed community hospital and 107 long-term care facility in Georgia, and Weiser Memorial Hospital, a critical access hospital in Idaho.”
AAP has not publicly confirmed the ransomware attack, nor has it made an official statement regarding the breach. But it did post an “Important Notice” on its website reporting, “limited ordering capabilities for API Warehouse have been restored at APIRx.com.”
API Warehouse is a subsidiary of AAP that helps subscribers save on brand name and generic prescriptions via wholesale purchasing plans. It oversees more than 2,000 independent pharmacies across the US and has over 2,500 stock keeping units (SKUs) in its inventory.
The message further states “All user passwords associated with both APIRx.com and RxAAP.com have been reset, so existing credentials will no longer be valid to access the sites. Please click ‘forgot password’ on the log in screen and follow the prompts accordingly to reset your password.”
“Embargo seems to have international and multi-sector victims and is not focusing on a specific victim profile. They seem opportunistic,” Mike Hamilton (above), founder and chief information security officer (CISO) of cybersecurity firm Critical Insight, told HealthcareInfoSecurity. “However, as they do have multiple victims in healthcare, and their tooling to disable detection is sophisticated, they should not be discounted. If indeed they operate through affiliates, we can expect others to use their infrastructure and tools, and Embargo may emerge as a top threat to healthcare.” Since 80% of all medical records are made up of clinical laboratory testing data, laboratory patients are particularly vulnerable. (Photo copyright: Critical Insight.)
Embargo on the Hunt for PHI
Due to the large amount of data Embargo stole from the AAP servers, it’s likely the hackers were able to procure medical records and account details from all customers of the pharmacies involved in the attack.
Researchers at ESET, an internet security company, first noticed the ransomware organization known as Embargo in June of this year. In a news release, ESET stated that Embargo used an endpoint detection and response (EDR) killer toolkit to steal AAP’s data.
“Based on its modus operandi, Embargo seems to be a well-resourced group. It sets up its own infrastructure to communicate with victims. Moreover, the group pressures victims into paying by using double extortion: the operators exfiltrate victims’ sensitive data and threaten to publish it on a leak site, in addition to encrypting it,” ESET wrote in a news release.
Embargo recently attacked other organizations within the healthcare industry as well. In November, it claimed responsibility for breaching the security of Memorial Hospital and Manor in Bainbridge, Ga. The cyberattack affected Memorial’s email and electronic medical record (EHR) systems, which caused the facility to pivot to a paper-based system, The Cyber Express reported.
Embargo’s attack on Weiser Memorial Hospital in Weiser, Idaho, involved the theft of approximately 200 gigabytes (GB) of sensitive data and caused a four-week-long outage of its computer systems.
Other Cyberattacks on Healthcare Organizations
Dark Daily has covered many cyberattacks on hospital health systems in multiple ebriefs over the past few years.
Safeguarding patient data is critical, and more healthcare organizations are discovering the hard way that they are vulnerable to hackers. This situation serves as another reminder to clinical laboratory and pathology group managers that they need to be proactive and serious about protecting their information systems, and in upgrading their digital security at regular intervals.
Hackers are working hard to obtain access to protected health information, which puts patients at continuous risk of having their private records stolen.
Underfunding of clinical laboratories has led to similar worker walkouts in multiple Australasian nations
Once again, cuts in government spending on pathology services has forced healthcare workers to walk off the job in Australia. This is in line with other pathology doctor and clinical laboratory workers strikes in New Zealand and other Australasian nations over the past few years.
Announcement of a planned closure of the pathology laboratory at 30-bed Cootamundra Hospital in Australia to make room for expanding the emergency department spurred the health worker walkouts.
“Health staff from Cootamundra Hospital, alongside pathology workers from Deniliquin, Tumut, Griffith, Wagga Wagga, and Young will rally in front of their respective facilities” to draw attention to the effect closing the lab would have on critical healthcare services across those areas, Region Riverina reported.
The strikes are drawing attention to unfair pay and poor working conditions that underfunding has brought to the state-run healthcare systems in those nations. They also highlight how clinical laboratories worldwide are similarly struggling with facility closings, unfair pay, and unachievable workloads.
“The proposed closure of Cootamundra’s pathology lab is a short-sighted decision that will have far-reaching consequences for patient care in the region,” NSW Health Services Union (HSU) Secretary Gerard Hayes (above) told Region Riverina. Similar arguments have been made for years concerning the underfunding, pay disparities, and poor working conditions in New Zealand’s government-run clinical laboratories and pathology practices that has led to worker strikes there as well. (Photo copyright: HSU.)
Australia Pathology Lab Closure Stokes Fears
Cootamundra Hospital’s strike was spurred by a planned closure of its pathology laboratory. In May, employees learned of the plans to close the lab as well as surgery and birthing centers to accommodate expansion of the emergency department, Region Riverina reported.
“Pathology workers are already in short supply and this move could see us lose highly skilled professionals from the NSW Health system altogether,” New South Wales (NSW) Health Services Union (HSU) Secretary Gerard Hayes told Region Riverina.
The cuts would not only be detrimental to the area, it would significantly affect patient care, he added.
“This lab is not just profitable; it’s a vital lifeline for Cootamundra Hospital’s [surgical] theater lists and maternity unit,” he said. “Without this lab, patients will face significantly longer wait times for life-saving diagnostic information. This delay could severely impact our ability to provide timely care, especially in emergencies.”
Echoing those sentiments, HSU Union Official Sam Oram told Region Riverina that closing the Cootamundra Hospital lab would put pressure on labs in Wagga and Young and would continue a trend of closing smaller pathology labs. Oram, who organizes for members in Canberra and Murrumbidgee Local Health District, noted that smaller labs in Tumut and Deniliquin could be in danger as well.
“Why should people living in rural and regional areas have fewer and inferior services to Australians living in metropolitan areas?” Michael McCormack, MP, Federal Member for Riverina and former deputy prime minister of Australia, asked Parliament in June, Region Riverinareported. “There’s no right or proper answer to that question. They simply should not,” he added.
Tasmania’s Troubles
Medical scientists recently walked off the job at Launceston General Hospital in Tasmania, Australia, to protest “the government’s ‘inaction’ on recruiting more staff,” according to Pulse Tasmania. The hospital’s lab has a staff shortage of 17 employees, requiring the remaining staff members to handle a much increased workload, Ryan Taylor, a medical laboratory scientist with the Tasmanian Department of Health, told Pulse Tasmania.
“This shortfall is leading to significant and unacceptable challenges … which are causing the Tasmanian community from receiving vital test results that are essential for their health,” Lucas Digney, Industrial Champion, Health and Community Services Union (HACSU) leader, told Pulse Tasmania.
New Zealand Struggles with Its Healthcare Workers
Aotearoa, as New Zealand is known by its indigenous Polynesian population, also struggles with health worker walkouts.
“Medical labs are an essential organ of the health system. Many were stupidly privatized years ago, others still operate within Te Whatu Ora [aka Health New Zealand, the publicly funded healthcare system] with all the resource shortages and stress that go with that,” Newsroom said of the country’s plight in 2023. “There was a view that competition in medical labs would produce greater efficiency, but it has actually produced a mess.”
Dark Daily has covered the ongoing strife in New Zealand’s clinical laboratories over many years. Previous ebriefs highlighted how the strikes were causing delays in critical clinical laboratory blood testing and surgical procedures.
Underfunding in clinical laboratories continues to cause work stoppages in the Australasian countries. But as Dark Daily readers know, it is a growing problem among European nations and in the United States as well.
Though the cost of clinical laboratory testing is not highlighted in KFF’s annual survey, it is a component in how much employers pay for healthcare plans for their employees
Employers now pay higher health insurance premiums than ever for family coverage. However, because of the current tight labor market, they are generally absorbing much of that increase rather than passing the higher costs on to their workers. That’s one key takeaway from KFF’s 26th annual Employer Health Benefits Survey, which the non-profit published on Oct. 9, 2024. While the report does not comment specifically about the cost of clinical laboratory testing or genetic testing and how they may contribute to rising insurance costs, it stands to reason they are part of growing healthcare costs for corporate health benefits.
The KFF survey found that premiums for family coverage increased 7% in 2024, reaching an average of $25,572. That follows a 7% increase in 2023. “Over the past five years—a period of high inflation (23%) and wage growth (28%)—the cumulative increase in premiums has been similar (24%),” KFF stated in a press release.
However, the amount paid by workers has gone up by less than $300 since 2019. It now stands at an average of $6,296, a total increase of 5% over five years. On average, workers covered 25% of family premium costs in 2024, down from 29% in 2023. Workers with single coverage paid an average of $1,368—16% of the annual premium cost—compared with 17% in 2023.
“Employers are shelling out the equivalent of buying an economy car for every worker every year to pay for family coverage,” KFF President and CEO Drew Altman, PhD (above), said in a press release. “In the tight labor market in recent years, they have not been able to continue offloading costs onto workers who are already struggling with healthcare bills.” Rising costs of clinical laboratory testing is always part of the mix contributing to increased worker insurance premiums for employers. (Photo copyright: KFF.)
HDHP/SO plans, as defined by KFF, “have a deductible of at least $1,000 for single coverage and $2,000 for family coverage and are offered with an HRA [Health Reimbursement Arrangement] or are HSA [health savings account]-qualified.” Point-of-service plans “have lower cost sharing for in-network provider services and do not require a primary care gatekeeper to screen for specialist and hospital visits,” the report states.
Cost Sharing via Deductibles
Average deductible amounts—which KFF identified as another form of cost-sharing—varied depending on the type of plan, employer size, and whether the worker had family or single coverage.
For workers with single coverage, average deductibles across all plan types rose from $1,655 in 2019 to $1,787 in 2024, a total five-year increase of about 8%. The average in 2023 was $1,735. These numbers were for in-network providers.
The report noted that some family plans calculate deductibles using an aggregate structure, “in which all family members’ out-of-pocket expenses count toward the deductible,” whereas others use a separate per-person structure. The report includes breakdowns of average deductibles across all types.
Who Offers the Best Benefits?
In general, the KFF report found that large companies—defined as those with 200 or more workers—tend to offer more generous health benefits than smaller ones. Virtually all large companies (98%) offered health benefits, while slightly more than half of small companies (53%) do so.
Among companies that do offer health benefits, the average deductible at a small firm was $2,575 compared to $1,538 at large firms. Among workers with family coverage, the average contribution toward overall premium costs was $7,947 (33%) at small firms compared to $5,697 (23%) at large firms. Among workers with single coverage, the numbers were $1,429 (16%) at small firms compared to $1,204 (14%) at large firms.
The report also found variations in overall premiums and health benefits across nine different industries. For example, healthcare firms paid the highest premiums for family coverage—an average of $26,864—followed by transportation/communications/utilities at $26,601. Companies in agriculture, mining, and construction paid the lowest premiums, an average of $22,654.
There were wide variations by industry in terms of how many firms offer any health benefits. Among state and local government entities, 83% offered health benefits, followed by transportation/communications/utilities (69%), manufacturing (65%), wholesale (62%), healthcare (58%), and finance (56%). Just 40% of retail businesses and 49% of agriculture/mining/construction businesses offered health benefits.
Health Screening Coverage
The KFF report did not include data about insurance coverage for clinical laboratory services. However, one section did address employer willingness to provide opportunities for health screening.
Among large businesses, 56% offered health risk assessments, in which individuals answer questions about their medical history, lifestyle, and other areas relevant to their health risks. A smaller number (44%) offer biometric screening, which “could include meeting a target body mass index (BMI) or cholesterol level, but not goals related to smoking,” the report said. Only 9% of small businesses offered biometric screening, the report found.
KFF conducted its survey between January and July 2024 among a random selection of public and private employers with at least three workers. The survey excluded federal government entities but included state and local government. A total of 2,142 employers responded.
Inflation during this current administration definitely hit consumers in the health insurance premium pocketbook. At the same time providers raised their own prices making it more expensive for people with HDHPs to come up with the cash required by their annual deductible. While clinical laboratory and genetic testing are not highlighted in KFF’s survey, they certainly play a role in increasing costs to healthcare consumers and are worth considering.
“Previously … CDC developed tests for emerging pathogens and then shared those tests with others, and then after that, commercial labs would develop their own tests,” Shah told CNN. “That process took time. Now with these new arrangements, commercial labs will be developing new tests for public health responses alongside CDC, not after CDC.”
In a news release announcing the contract, ARUP Laboratories also characterized the move as a shift for the agency.
“The new contract formalizes ARUP’s relationship with the CDC,” said Benjamin Bradley, MD, PhD, medical director of the ARUP Institute for Research and Innovation in Infectious Disease Genomic Technologies, High Consequence Pathogen Response, Virology, and Molecular Infectious Diseases. “We continue to expand our capabilities to address public health crises and are prepared to scale up testing for H5N1, or develop other tests quickly, should the need arise.”
“To be clear, we have no evidence so far that this [bird flu] virus can easily infect human beings or that it can spread between human beings easily in a sustained fashion,” Jennifer Nuzzo, DrPH (above), Director of the Pandemic Center and Professor of Epidemiology at Brown University School of Public Health, told CNN. “If it did have those abilities, we would be in a pandemic.” Clinical laboratory leaders will recall the challenges at the CDC as it developed its SARS-CoV-2 test early in the COVID-19 pandemic. (Photo copyright: Brown University.)
Missouri Case Raises Concerns
The first human infection of HPAI was reported in late March following a farmer’s “exposure to dairy cows presumably infected with bird flu,” the CDC stated in its June 3, 2024, bird flu Situation Summary. That followed confirmation by the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of an HPAI outbreak in commercial poultry flocks in February 2022, and the CDC’s confirmation of the first known infections in dairy herds reported on March 25, 2024.
Concerns about the outbreak were heightened in September following news that a person in Missouri had been infected with the virus despite having no known contact with infected animals. CNN reported that it was the 14th human case in the US this year, but all previous cases were in farm workers known to be exposed to infected dairy cattle or poultry.
In a news release, the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) revealed that the patient, who was not identified, was hospitalized on Aug. 22. This person had “underlying medical conditions,” DHSS reported, and has since recovered and was sent home. Both DHSS and the CDC conducted tests to determine that the virus was the H5 subtype, the news release states.
At present, the CDC states that the public health risk from the virus is low. However, public health experts are concerned that risks could rise as the weather gets cooler, creating opportunities for the virus to mutate “since both cows and other flu viruses will be on the move,” CNN reported.
Concerns over CDC Testing and FDA Oversight
In the months immediately following the first human case of the bird flu virus, Nuzzo was among several public health experts sounding an alarm about the country’s ability to ramp up testing in the face of new pathogens.
“We’re flying blind,” she told KFF Health News in June, due to an inability to track infections in farmworkers. At that time, tests had been distributed to approximately 100 public health labs, but Nuzzo and other experts noted that doctors typically order tests from commercial laboratories and universities.
KFF reported that one diagnostics company, Neelyx Labs, ran into obstacles as it tried to license the CDC’s bird flu test. Founder, CEO, and lead scientist Shyam Saladi, PhD, told KFF that the federal agency had promised to cooperate by facilitating a license and a “right to reference” CDC data when applying for FDA authorization but was slow to come through.
While acknowledging the need for testing accuracy, Greninger contended that the CDC was prioritizing caution over speed, as it did in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. “The CDC should be trying to open this up to labs with national reach and a good reputation,” he told KFF.
Another problem, KFF reported, related to the FDA’s new oversight of laboratory developed tests (LDTs), which is causing labs to move cautiously in developing their own tests.
Jennifer Nuzzo, DrPH (above), Director of the Pandemic Center and Professor of Epidemiology at the Brown University School of Public Health co-authored a June 2024 analysis in Health Affairs that called on the CDC to develop “a better testing playbook for biological emergencies.” The authors’ analysis cited earlier problems with the responses to the COVID-19 and mpox (formerly known as monkeypox) outbreaks.
If global surveillance networks have detected a novel pathogen, the authors advise, the US should gather information and “begin examining the existing testing landscape” within the first 48 hours.
Once the pathogen is detected in the US, they continued, FDA-authorized tests should be distributed to public health laboratories and the CDC’s Laboratory Response Network (LRN) laboratories within 48 hours.
Advocates of this approach suggest that within the first week diagnostics manufacturers should begin developing their own tests and the federal government should begin working with commercial labs. Then, within the first month, commercial laboratories should be using FDA-authorized tests to provide “high throughput capacity.”
This may be good advice. Experts in the clinical laboratory and healthcare professions believe there needs to be improvement in how novel tests are developed and made available as novel infectious agents are identified.
Patients outside the US wait even longer to see healthcare specialists with some appointments scheduled a year out in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia
Data recently released by healthcare consulting firm ECG Management Consultants (ECG) reveals that patients in the United States wait an average of 38 days for healthcare appointments. That figure is a significant stretch from the desired industry standard of 14-day or less wait times, according to Becker’s Hospital Review.
Clinical laboratories serve the needs of physicians who see patients and refer testing needed by patients to labs. Thus, average wait times should be of interest to lab professionals who strive to meet reporting turnaround times for lab test results, particularly given the unique way that ECG conducted its survey of patient wait times.
In “The Waiting Game: New-Patient Appointment Access for US Physicians,” ECG wrote, “Adopting a ‘secret shopper’ approach, we put ourselves in the shoes of the average patient trying to book an appointment. We contacted nearly 4,000 physician practices in 23 major cities across the US, posing as a new, commercially insured patient seeking care for general, nonemergent conditions that typically don’t require a physician referral.”
ECG’s study provides “a realistic view of where and in what specialties patients face the most significant challenges to accessing routine care,” the authors wrote in their published report. The report also includes patients’ appointment-keeping behavior based on length of wait times.
“Consumer expectations have evolved significantly in all industries. From buying a plane ticket to making a restaurant reservation, the consumer experience has been highly optimized and customers in turn have become accustomed to information and services being available at their fingertips. They bring the same expectations about speed and convenience to healthcare,” the researchers explained.
ECG pointed out that when patients are required to wait 14 days or more to see their physicians, no shows and cancellations increase dramatically.
“Numerous studies have shown that patients are significantly less likely to show up for appointments that are scheduled further out,” the study authors noted.
“One of the takeaways was how difficult the patient experience is. Not only did our secret shoppers have to go out and find physicians, they had to sit on the phone sometimes on very long holds and go through multiple barriers and jump through hoops,” Jennifer Moody (above), partner with ECG Management Consultants and one of the authors of the study, told Becker’s Hospital Review. “Even in that case, they weren’t successful in scheduling appointments with all the practices they called. I think of the average consumer who might be having a similar experience,” she added. Lengthy wait times are not believed to be an issue when patients need clinical laboratory tests. (Photo copyright: ECG Management Consultants.)
Getting Authentic Results
To gather the study data, ECG distributed its secret shoppers throughout 23 major US cities, reaching almost 4,000 physician practices (between 145-168 per city) to schedule appointments for non-emergency conditions not needing a physical referral.
The researchers gathered wait times for TNAAs (third next available appointments), a common metric. They chose TNAAs because first and second appointments often produce unclear results due to extenuating circumstances or late cancellations, Becker’s Hospital Review reported.
The researchers recorded TNAAs for the following specialties:
Cardiology (39 days),
Dermatology (40 days),
Family medicine (29 days),
Gastroenterology (48 days),
General surgery (22 days),
Neurology (63 days),
Obstetrics/gynecology (37 days),
Ophthalmology (37 days),
Orthopedic surgery (20 days),
Pediatrics (24 days), and,
Rheumatology (68 days).
They found the average wait time to be 38 days. And “of the 253 metropolitan market and specialty combinations included in this research, only 6% had an average wait time of 14 days or less,” Becker’s reported.
The researchers omitted the physician practices that were unable to either take or return calls, take messages, or provide a hold time under five minutes to give the secret shopper an answer, Becker’s added.
Jennifer Moody, Partner, ECG Management Consultants, one of the authors of the study, “was particularly surprised by the portion of callers who never even made it to the stage of learning about wait times. Out of 3,712 physician practices, callers were able to secure responses from only 3,079, meaning nearly one in five physician practices could not provide appointment availability information,” Becker’s reported.
The lowest average wait time in all specialties was 27 days in Houston, and the longest was 70 days in Boston. “A key takeaway from the report is that physician concentration does not guarantee timely access, as a major healthcare hub like Boston helps illustrate,” Becker’s noted, adding that physicians in such areas may “devote time to teaching or research over appointments.”
The graphic above, taken from ECG’s published report, shows the average TNAA times recorded by their secret shoppers at medical specialty practices in major cities across the US. (Graphic copyright: ECG Management Consultants.)
Other Country’s Wait Times
Healthcare systems outside the US struggle with patient wait times as well. Forbes reported that patients of Canada’s public health system “faced a median wait of 27.7 weeks for medically necessary treatment from a specialist after being referred by a general practitioner. That’s over six months—the longest ever recorded.”
Patients in Nova Scotia wait even longer. There they “face a median wait of 56.7 weeks—more than a year—for specialist treatment following referral by a general practitioner. Those on Prince Edward Island are also in the year-long waiting club—a median of just over 55 weeks,” Forbes noted.
And in the UK, a recent survey found that “more than 150,000 patients had to wait a day in A&E [accident and emergency] before getting a hospital bed last year, according to new data,” with the majority of those patients over the age of 65, according to The Guardian.
ECG suggestions that may reduce wait times include:
Adopt automation and self-service tools in an “easily navigable platform” that enables patients to schedule appointments 24/7.
Ensure healthcare providers are “utilized appropriately and at the top of their license.”
Address inequities in access to healthcare regardless of patients’ location or socioeconomic status.
There is more in the ECG report that hospitals—as well as clinical laboratories—can use to reduce patient wait times to see care providers. As the authors wrote, “For patients, the first step of the care journey shouldn’t be the hardest.”
