Brian Hudson

Many health system leaders wrestle with the question: should HTM be handled in-house or with a partner? There are valid concerns like retaining staff knowledge, maintaining control, staying compliant and managing costs. The right partnership doesn’t replace your team; it augments expertise, provides coverage when needed and helps leaders focus on what matters most: patient care. By combining deep local knowledge with scalable processes and analytics, health systems can optimize equipment, extend lifecycle value and reduce administrative burdens. At Advantus Health Partners, we’ve seen first-hand how thoughtful HTM programs help health system leaders make informed decisions and balance risk, without losing the human touch. HTM is more than maintenance. It’s strategy, foresight, and care for both your staff and your patients. Learn more about how a thoughtful HTM approach can support your health system: https://lnkd.in/gup_95nV

19

Budgeting for 2026 without modeling CMS RVU changes? That’s a risk. The latest Physician Fee Schedule reshapes work and practice expense RVUs in ways that won’t impact every specialty equally. This discussion helps finance and analytics leaders see what’s coming before it hits the bottom line. https://bit.ly/3NagDuf

1

Building an Audit-Ready Organization Before the Audit Notice Arrives Audits rarely provide comfortable timelines. Agencies that operate in constant readiness experience less disruption and lower stress when reviews occur. This means documentation is organized, caregiver files are current, and clinical records are complete at all times. Creating a culture of continuous oversight prevents the scramble that many agencies face. Structured compliance dashboards, proactive tracking, and documented workflows allow organizations to move confidently, knowing their foundation is solid. March is a strategic month to reinforce that culture. #AuditPreparedness #HealthcareAudits #ComplianceCulture #HomeCareAgencies #NYBestStandard #OperationalStructure #QualityAssurance  

7

New features only from VerifyTreatment ! We're thrilled to announce the launch of our powerful revenue management features this month. Find em- Failed eligibility? Use our industry best Coverage Discovery feature. Find where a patient's policy or coverage has changed before you find out too late. Track em- One of the biggest challenges in the pay and chase that healthcare burdens provides with. With VerifyTreatment's Claim Status feature, we're lifting the curtain on your claim journey. Did your billing solution fall off their filing cadence? It matters becuase your bills didn't. This soup to nuts feature updates you in real-time.   Book em- Doing your billing in-house? ERA (Electronic Remittance Advice): Receive and process detailed payment explanations digitally, drastically speeding up payment posting and reconciliation. This isn't just an update; it's a complete revolution in how you manage your revenue. Stop waiting, start knowing! Don't trust. Verify. #revenuecycle #healthcare #vob #benefits #financials #transparency

11

I asked perplexity about attribution and the CMS LEAD model. 1 year or 10 they are not dealing with the real problem. In fact by focusing on provider participation vs patient relationships they make the measurement and performance accountability problem worse🙄 Attending this march to nowhere are selection bias and a lack of a causal linkage. What do you think? What am I missing? AI response No. Under the LEAD model, beneficiaries are not required to change how they seek care or to “comply” with CMS’ attribution; attribution is a financial/accountability mechanism for CMS and ACOs, not a restriction on patient choice.[1][2] ## Nature of the LEAD model - LEAD is a **voluntary** accountable care organization (ACO) model for participating provider entities, scheduled to begin in 2027 and run for 10 years.[2][1] - Voluntary in this context applies to organizations (ACOs, provider groups) choosing to participate; beneficiaries are aligned to those participants through CMS’ attribution and alignment rules.[3][1] ## Beneficiary attribution vs. patient choice - In CMS ACO and primary care models, attribution assigns a beneficiary to a participant for purposes of benchmarking, payment, and quality measurement, often using voluntary alignment first and then claims-based methods.[4][5] - Even when attributed to a specific ACO or practice, beneficiaries retain freedom to see any Medicare-enrolled providers, both inside and outside the model; attribution does not lock them into a network or require them to accept care management services.[6][7] ## What beneficiaries are expected to do - Beneficiaries may be informed about the model, potential benefits (e.g., care coordination, possible cost-sharing support), and may be asked to voluntarily align or consent in some models, but traditional Medicare rights and provider choice remain intact.[8][1] - Refusing to engage with an ACO’s care management, or choosing to see other practitioners, does not affect their Medicare coverage; it primarily affects which entity CMS holds accountable for costs and quality and how payments are calculated.[7][6]

6

Exciting partnership with Saisystems and a strong signal of where value-based care is headed. Bringing Healthmonix’s quality intelligence together with Saisystems Health’s deep LTPAC workflow expertise has the potential to make quality reporting far more actionable and embedded directly into day-to-day provider operations. For post-acute providers already focused on delivering complex, high-acuity care, reducing the friction between clinical workflows, documentation, and performance visibility is a major step forward. Partnerships like this can help turn quality data from a retrospective reporting exercise into a real-time operational advantage. Looking forward to seeing how this collaboration helps LTPAC organizations improve outcomes, streamline reporting, and succeed in value-based care.

6

Telemedicine works best when it is simple. Many hospitals are managing multiple specialty vendors, multiple contracts, and multiple workflows. That complexity adds cost and friction over time. This article explains why more health systems are moving toward a single specialty telemedicine partner and what that means for care continuity, operations, and long-term value. Worth a quick read.

4

Prior #authorization is one of the biggest sources of friction in healthcare, impacting patients, providers, and administrative team. What’s compelling in Baptist Health Care’s story is how thoughtful #automation turned a long‑standing pain point into a measurable experience win. Completing the majority of authorizations within one business day, cutting reschedules tied to missing authorizations, and improving patient satisfaction all show how reducing administrative burden directly improves access to care. Just as important, it strengthened relationships with referring providers by making scheduling simpler and more predictable. A great example of how getting administrative work out of the way allows teams to focus on what matters most: patients. #RCM #healthcareautomation #AIinhealthcare

1