COMPLEMENTARY ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE

1
COMPLEMENTARY ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE

• Building Acuity Measures

2
Issues Facing Complementary Alternative Services

• Emphasis on Core Services
• Not considered a Core Service
• Reauthorization may further limit available
  resources
• Mistrust between allopathic and naturopathic
  physicians
• Reluctance to utilize alternative services
• Break down in communications
• Assumption of liability with no feedback
• Policy 2.4 Primary health care provider referral
• Determining need
• Who (clients) can benefit most from alternative
  services
• How can needs be measured

3
Determining Acuity

• Goals
• PCP driven
• Based on measurable outcomes
• Who can benefit the most

4
Steps in the Process

• Work Group
• Chosen representation
• Primary Care Physicians
• Naturopathic Physicians
• Service Providers
• Consumers
• Set Ground Rules
• Not a discussion of the value of alternative
  services
• Set goals for each work group and acuity system
  within the EMA
• Split work group in sub groups for phases of
  completion
• Each phase has a specific function to the whole
  process
• Sub groups can overlap from one to another for
  continuity

5
Phase I

• Allopathic / Primary Care Physicians,
  naturopathic physicians, expert consultants
• Primary Care Physician (PCP) driven
• Referrals must be made by a HRSA recognized
  Primary Care Physician (Policy 2.4)
• Determine the needs of allopathic practitioners
  to coordinate and oversee client care
• Determine conditions and acuity that can benefit
  most from alternative services
• Naturopathic physicians provide input on common
  and/or chronic conditions that are most treatable
  with alternative services and what alternative
  services are best used

6
Phase II

• Naturopathic physicians, Providers, and consumers
• Use input from Phase I to develop
  recommendations of scoring need based on health
  status and conditions of client
• Develop a procedure for naturopaths to follow
• Communications and treatment plans with Primary
  Care Physicians

7
Phase III

• Providers, consumers, other stake holders
• Develop procedures for clients and compliance
  within Federal regulations
• Notification to clients, responsibilities of
  clients, allopathic and naturopathic follow up,
  etc.
• Develop scoring scale and limitations based on
  actual available funding
• Funding may fluctuate, raise or lower minimum
  score for qualification of service

8
Phase IV

• Entire work group
• Review of all input and forms from phases I III
• Fine tune forms, layout, and procedures
• Final recommendations and forms
• Determine review process for the system

9
Conclusion

• Increased communication between allopathic and
  Naturopathic providers
• Referral and approval
• Treatment plans involving PCP, NMD, and client
• Follow up between allopathic and naturopathic
  providers
• Periodic review of system to ensure appropriate
  standards
• Flexible scoring based on total available funding
• Recommended standards of care for the Title I
  Planning Council
• Standard procedure for linking clients into care
• All clients scored based on predetermined
  conditions and scale of acuity
• Less risk of real or perceived arbitrary decisions