|
Geriatric
Workforce Crisis in the United States
I am pleased to have this opportunity to
briefly summarize the key issues involving
the geriatric psychiatry workforce crisis in
the United States (U.S.). To begin with, a
statement of the problem: Only ~55-60
physicians are entering geriatric psychiatry
fellowships annually in recent years,
compared to a peak of over 90 per year
almost a decade ago. Such numbers are
insufficient even to replace existing
geriatric psychiatrists leaving the field
(due to retirement, other career changes,
and death), let alone to increase the
numbers sufficient to make subspecialty care
accessible to the rapidly aging U.S.
population.
There are of course many reasons for this
pipeline problem. Longstanding ageist
attitudes among the general public, policy
makers, and health care providers including
physicians, have long conspired to make
careers in geriatrics (psychiatry, medicine,
and other specialties and disciplines) seem
to many less important and less appealing
than other fields. That geriatric care
involves chronic disease management, and has
few ‘procedures’ or otherwise
dramatic-seeming interventions, further
lowers its superficial appeal. Somehow the
rather clear data on high job satisfaction
for those who do choose the field fail to
oppose these other perceptions!
As well, those who do consider pursuing
fellowship training face an immediate
financial disadvantage. While training
stipends do provide a living wage, the
educational debt burden faced by most
U.S.-educated physicians (averaging over
$175,000 nationally) makes the prospect of a
full year stipend that is typically only
one-third to one-half of what would be
earned by going directly into practice
difficult or simply unviable for many. Child
and adolescent fellowships face the same
issue, but unlike geriatric psychiatrists,
psychiatrists (a) must do such a fellowship
if they want to treat children and younger
adolescents, and (b) will be able to earn
higher salaries than adult psychiatrists as
a benefit of their subspecialty training.
Neither holds true for geriatric
psychiatrists: salaries are comparable or at
most only slightly higher than general
psychiatrists, and non-geriatric-trained
general psychiatrists can and do treat older
patients and work in the geriatric care
settings. Therefore, for many it is
difficult to justify the financial burden of
the fellowship year, despite evidence that
subspecialists do provide higher quality
care for older adults.
To these longstanding problems, recent years
have added the general financial and labor
uncertainties facing the nation (and of
course much of the world). It remains
unclear what the effects will be of U.S.
health insurance reform or any further
attempts to modify how health care is
structured and financed. And yet another
cause for uncertainty is the upcoming change
in the residency pool. Recognizing the need
for more physicians to serve the population,
several new medical schools have been
created and many existing schools have
increased their class size, such that within
the next few years the U.S. will graduate
about 25% more physicians annually. But the
number of residency positions, largely
funded through GME (graduate medical
education) funds via Medicare, has not been
increased. Indeed, recent federal budget
proposals threaten to decrease, not
increase, GME funding. Unless alternative
sources are used to support residency
positions, the net result will not be an
increase in the number of trained physicians
in the U.S., but rather merely the filling
of existing residency slots entirely by
graduates of U.S. medical schools, i.e.,
squeezing out the vast majority of IMGs
(international medical graduates). This may
further devastate the supply of trainees for
geriatric psychiatry fellowships, since a
substantial proportion of current fellows
are IMGs.
Are there any signs of hope amidst these
bleak circumstances? I do believe that there
are substantial opportunities in the coming
years. Growing experiments to change the
delivery of health care, including medical
homes (i.e., a full range of
patient-centered services built around
primary care) and accountable care
organizations (ACOs, i.e., capitated
payments putting the health care
organization responsible, and financially at
risk, for maintaining the health of its
covered population) might prove to be ideal
settings for collaborative care models in
which the limited supply of geriatric
psychiatrists and other mental health
professionals might be deployed more
efficiently and effectively to the benefit
of patients. Unfortunately, thus far few
medical homes or ACOs have included mental
health (let alone geriatric mental health)
in central and substantive ways. But other
policy decisions may help the workforce
situation. Last year, Medicare for the first
time included billing subcodes for select
clinical services denoting whether they are
provided by geriatric psychiatrists. At
present there is no reimbursement
differential, but the hope is that
ultimately these subcodes will reflect
higher payment rates when the care is
provided by a subspecialist.
Perhaps the biggest impetus to driving such
policy changes is the upcoming Institute of
Medicine (IOM) report on the geriatric
mental health workforce. This report,
championed in part by the American
Association for Geriatric Psychiatry (AAGP),
is a follow-up to the IOM’s 2008 report on
the geriatric health workforce more broadly.
IOM reports often have strong influence on
policy makers.
Lastly, I believe that the postwar ‘baby
boom’ generation now reaching their senior
years, by dint of its size and its
longstanding sense of entitlement, will
demand better access to quality mental
health services. I expect that we (as I am
part of this generation) will pressure our
governmental representatives to design and
implement the required policy changes. It
remains to be seen what such changes will
look like, how they will be funded, and
whether they will occur in time to prevent
the erosive decimation of our current
workforce and collective expertise.
Jeffrey M. Lyness, MD, is Associate Dean for
Academic Affairs and Professor of Psychiatry
at the University of Rochester Medical
Center in Rochester, NY, USA. He is
Immediate Past President of AAGP.
|