Perhaps the single most common question asked of me in my over 25 years of coaching experience is “What are your most successful client practices doing?” I know that those who ask this question are expecting me to give them an answer that involves buying a particular piece of equipment, implementing the latest new service, or even an item to sell in their practices. Most are shocked when I give them the “real” answer. Today’s most successful practices are establishing a public relations department for their practice. 

Take notice that I did not say “marketing department”, but rather a public relations department. This is because marketing tends to conjure up images of spending money on advertising and the like. While this could indeed be part of public relations, a PR department can do so much more for your practice.

The Federal Trade Commission released a new Proposed Rule to prohibit employers from imposing noncompete clauses on workers and, in fact, requiring employers to retract existing noncompete agreements with their employees, including independent contractors. Should this Proposed Rule become Final, it would have a monumental impact for employers across the country. However, getting to the finish line in the wake of having to change decades of history supporting noncompete agreements, will be no easy task for the FTC.

What Is the Proposed Rule
• The Proposed Rule would make it illegal for employers to enter into noncompete clauses with their workers, including independent contractors.
• The Proposed Rule would require employers to rescind existing noncompete clauses with workers and actively inform their employees that the contracts are no longer in effect.
• The Proposed Rule purports to supersede state laws. The reasonableness standard used in Florida would be supplanted by a more bright-line FTC rule.

What Employers Would the Proposed Rule Impact
• The Proposed Rule’s definition of “worker” means that the FTC intends the noncompete ban to apply as broadly as possible – from small physician owners to large corporations.
• The Proposed Rule is broad and applies to all industries and all categories of workers.

When Might this Take Effect?
• There is first a 60-day comment period the FTC will use to review the thousands of comments submitted. The FTC can then make changes in a Final Rule. This could take months. Once the Final Rule is issued, it may force lawsuits on the jurisdiction of the FTC’s involvement in noncompete agreements, among other issues.

What Can a Provider Do?
• Submit a comment to the FTC here.

The FCA will continue to keep you apprised of the progress of the Rulemaking process on the proposed ban on noncompete agreements.

The FCA is thrilled to report its newest Member Benefit – the FCA's HIPAA Privacy and Security Manual. The Manual shares information, policies, procedures, law, forms and resources to assist you with making sure you are compliant when it comes to the HIPAA privacy and security laws. A few of the topics covered include the HIPAA general operating policies and procedures; patient consent; patient confidentiality; HIPAA privacy training; Business Associate policy; security awareness training; contingency plan / disaster recovery practice, to name a few. The Manual also contains Sample Forms such as, a request to access and/or copy health information form; confidential communication request form; notice of privacy practices template; business associate agreement; security incident form, to name just a few.

As of January 1, 2022, providers and facilities must comply with a number of requirements established by the federal No Surprises Act (NSA) . The NSA prohibits out-of-network health care providers and facilities from balance billing commercially insured patients, in certain circumstances. Part II of the NSA, the “Requirements Related to Surprise Billing; Part II” is most applicable to chiropractic physician offices and was created to provide additional protections against surprise medical bills, including:

• Requiring good-faith estimates of medical items or services for uninsured (or self-paying) individuals.
• Requiring notice posted in your office and on your website of the uninsured/self-insured’s right to receive a good faith estimate.
• Establishing a patient-provider dispute resolution process for uninsured (or self-paying) individuals to determine payment amounts due to a provider or facility under certain circumstances.

Dry needling is quickly becoming a very popular modality in medical, physical therapy and chiropractic offices nationally, as musculoskeletal complaints are one of the most reported conditions for which people seek professional care.  Nationally, dry needling is included in the scope of practice for PTs in approximately 75% of states in the US in comparison to chiropractic which is included, whether by statute or Rule, in approximately 50% of states.  With the passage of FCA-supported House Bill 467 during the 2020 legislative session, amending “An Act Relating to Physical Therapy Practice,” many like us at the FCA believe dry needling falls within a chiropractic physician’s scope of practice.  The new law includes dry needling in the scope of physical therapy, defining it as a procedure in Western medicine that uses filiform needles to stimulate a myofascial trigger point for neuromusculoskeletal conditions, pain, movement impairments, and disabilities.  While the FCA believes dry needling is included in the chiropractor’s scope of practice, the same cannot be said for Florida’s prior chiropractic regulatory Board.

On September 9, 2021, President Biden announced his, “Path Out of the Pandemic COVID-19 Action Plan” (the Path Out Plan or Plan).  The Plan does not appear to mandate vaccines to individual physician offices. The Plan is a six-pronged, national strategy to, “ensure that we are using every available tool to combat COVID-19 and save even more lives in the months ahead, while also keeping schools open and safe, and protecting our economy from lockdowns and damage.”  See Path Out Plan at p. 1.  

During the 2020 Florida legislative session, a bill was introduced to require written consent before the performance of a pelvic examination.  Numerous physicians and physician groups immediately voiced their concerns about the ambiguities within the bill as to the definition of “pelvic examination” and requested clarification from the Florida legislature, the FCA being one of them.  As of July 1, 2021, Senate Bill 716, Consent for Pelvic Examinations, clarified the intent of the prior Senate Bill 698, and better defined the terms of the requirements for written and verbal consent prior to performing a pelvic examination.  

Currently, there is a conflict relating to the Governor’s May 3, 2021, Executive Order invalidating all local Executive Orders mandating mask wearing and numerous local school boards now imposing mask mandates.  Gov. DeSantis cited the new law passed in the 2021 Legislative Session, the Parents’ Bill of Rights, allowing parents to make this decision.  However, days ago, Judge John Cooper, Leon County Circuit Judge, struck down the Governor’s order restricting School Boards from imposing mask mandates.  

Prior to the 2021 Legislative Session, Florida law did not make it a crime to provide medical treatment to a minor child without parental consent.  House Bill 241, effective July 1, 2021, changed the law and now makes it a misdemeanor of the first degree for physicians and other health care providers to provide medical services to a minor without first obtaining written parental consent.