Posts Tagged hospitals
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Posted by Editor in For Consumers, Healthcare Financing, Healthcare Policy, Healthcare Reform on November 19th, 2009
The Government We Deserve: Healthcare Edition
Posted by Hal Andrews in Data Advantage, For Consumers, Healthcare Financing, Healthcare News, Healthcare Policy, Healthcare Reform on October 17th, 2009
So, the battle is joined – the passage of the Senate Finance Bill has forced every healthcare participant whose oxen might be gored into the open, and the fighting is fierce.
I don’t have a dog in the fight from an economic standpoint, unless Washington, D.C. decides to give everyone a full indemnity policy like the New Hampshire state union employees. As a result, I have had a freedom to think and speak in a way that few of my colleagues can.
It took me a while to realize that I would be so alone in this regard. I have been very fortunate to participate for the past five years in two different groups of nationally recognized healthcare executives with very diverse experiences. Several of them are very publicly prominent in the debate, and others are quietly influential. I have hoped that these groups might coalesce, create a blueprint for reform, and lead the way forward. While I am disappointed that has not happened, I am really surprised at how resolutely the group members have retreated to their economic realities or their philosophical ideals. In short, there has been no sustained dialogue with the goal of determining how hospitals, physicians, insurance companies, device manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies and others can create a reformed system. At the same time, I have observed all of us bemoan that “healthcare reform” is really “insurance coverage reform”, and not so impressive at that.
The result is that We, the People, have turned it over to Washington, D.C. In the coming weeks, 535 people who know a lot about politics, a little about the art of compromise, and almost nothing about how approximately 20% of the economy works will decide our future. The 20% of us employed in healthcare have failed to reform ourselves through real and shared sacrifice. The 80% is angry enough not to care that they don’t know the difference between a scalpel and a saw.
In the words of Dandy Don Meredith, some people in healthcare will need to “turn out the lights, the party’s over”. The tricky part is that we won’t know until the very end who that is.
On Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal ran an opinion piece called “Paying the Health Tax in Massachusetts” by an author named Wendy Williams. In it, Ms. Williams lamented that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts changed the definition of acceptable coverage. Her family’s policy no longer meets the requirement, so she must either (a) buy a more expensive policy, which she does not think she needs, or (b) enroll in the government option.
What caught my eye was the following:
“Mr. Romney and Sen. Ted Kennedy publicly promised that the middle class – that is, people like us – would not be taxed and that our health-care costs would actually decrease if the plan became law.
My husband and I weren’t convinced. It all seemed inane, but we are neither politically or socially conservative and figured the plan wouldn’t affect us much. Besides, who could be against a plan that covers more people for less money?”
Here in the South, we might respond to that statement by saying, “I’m not sure I would have told that”, but I am afraid the subject is too serious to be that dismissive.
Ms. Williams, in four sentences, has summarized the debate.
First, in order to get elected, politicians have to tell people (us) what we want to hear. Politicians rarely make the call for sacrifice, and today’s America is not interested in that much anyway. Elections for 473 of the 535 positions will be held in 2010. For each of those 473, the calculus over the next 60 days is about how a vote on healthcare reform will play at home between now and November 4, 2010 (Note: “what will get me reelected” is sometimes phrased as “what my constituents want” but rarely as “what does my country need” or “what does courage require”).
Second, We, the People, know better. What is wrong with us? We aren’t that stupid, and we don’t even like Congress. On the other hand, we do seem to like something for nothing. The members of the Greatest Generation have given way to individuals who are more interested in their personal good than the common good. Most of us just listen for what we want to believe and ignore the rest; some of us listen to talk radio and shout at the rest. The Greatest Generation gave way to the Baby Boomers, who seem to be the majority of those in power. The generation of Timothy Leary and “Turn on, tune in, drop out” seems to have taken the “drop out” part to heart, except that Leary’s hope for self-reliance has morphed into singular self-interest.
*********
It is time for We, the People, to wake up:
- As we proved spectacularly in Tennessee, you cannot cover more people for less money. No one in Washington, D.C. should know that better than Nancy-Ann Deparle.
- The results of the Massachusetts experiment are that costs have increased, while quality and access have decreased. These results should be terrifying since Massachusetts had one of the lowest uninsured rates in the nation at the start of the Massachusetts Connector program. Up next, “global payments”, aka capitation – good luck with that at Partners.
- In The Washington Post, Alec MacGillis reports that maybe the Mayo Clinic is not a model for reform since they restrict access to Medicare and Medicaid patients. As we continue to report, the Mayo Clinic does not deliver high healthcare value.
- The Senate Finance Bill pretends that physicians will take a 25% cut in pay in 2011 to achieve the $900B cost; it appears that AMA has convinced Senator Reid otherwise.
Sir Winston Churchill famously stated that:
“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” He also said, “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” Let’s hope that we do not allow Washington, D.C. to test the former, and let’s see if America can prove Sir Winston wrong on the latter.
An Open Letter to the President
Posted by John Morrow in Data Advantage, For Consumers, Healthcare Reform, Value-Based Purchasing on August 14th, 2009
Dear Mr. President,
As all good statisticians and pollsters know, the best stories are found in the outliers of an analysis, but often have an N of 1. In other words, the best stories are usually the exception and not the rule.
Not surprisingly, healthcare is no exception. Neither McAllen, Texas nor the “Clinic” model (Mayo, Cleveland, Scott & White, Geisinger, Sayre, etc.) are the rules. None of them, as even they acknowledge, are replicable models for healthcare reform. It appears that your advisors have selected models of reform based upon a mixture of historical reputation and old (non-severity adjusted) data as examples about what looks to be wrong or right about healthcare. It doesn’t make any sense, and besides, my pick-up truck won’t get there from here!
Mr. President, I offer you an alternative model. I would like to draw your attention to a formidable group of 747 unrelated hospitals that serve communities in nearly every state, in all CMS regions and across all hospital types. These hospitals are urban and rural, religious and secular, for-profit and not-for-profit, teaching and non-teaching community organizations that spend their days and nights doing the right thing, time after time. These hospitals are the leaders who persevere irrespective of patients’ ability to pay and who provide billions in community benefit beyond their primary functions. These hospitals employ 3.33 million professionals, and spend over $130 Billion on delivering services to make safer, happier, healthier lives for their taxpaying communities. These hospitals are typically the largest employer in their town, providing essential emergency services and serving as the first responders and last line of defense. And they do this without any official mandate to do so.
These hospitals are the Hospital Value Index™: Best in Value™ Award winners, and they will succeed under Value-Based Purchasing better than the other hospitals in America. They are the unsung heroes because they deliver quality, access, affordability, safety and outcomes better than the rest, while doing so in an efficient and affordable way that makes patients and taxpayers highly satisfied. Furthermore, they have been selected based upon an objective and comprehensive set of criteria.
Who are these hospitals?
What drives their leadership?
How do they do it?
How do you inspire an industry to seek their counsel?
Mr. President, it seems to me that holding up 747 hospitals as examples of models of success would be a far more effective way of understanding the culture of healthcare than embracing the anecdotes of a magazine most famous for its cartoons. The folks in Hidalgo County, Texas are burdened with immigrant and indigent populations with chronic conditions. To suggest that the “Clinic” model would “fix” what is wrong in Hidalgo County is, at best, naïve. Sure, the “Clinic” model is a worthy contributor to the U.S. healthcare system, and their lobbyists in Washington are effective at keeping their names in the media and in front of your advisors. But these microcosms of care won’t get replicated because they are outliers. Each of the aforementioned clinics provides a level of healthcare value that is above the national median. They are, however, isolated by either geography or access or both, putting them out of the reach of the typical American. The “Clinic” models have unique cultures especially with respect to physician leadership (which apparently is OK if “Clinic” is in the name but not if the physicians are the owners). I applaud them for their innovation, but I worry about the bigger picture. Medicare covers over 10 million people and there are 5,000 hospitals…I see a little bit of a bottleneck in your message.
Healthcare, like politics, is local, with the populations and health status that is endemic to each market. Hospitals have no choice but to care for their taxpaying, health care utilizing citizens regardless of their work permit status, educational levels, or ignorance about wellness and healthy living.
If these exemplary 747 hospitals have already accepted the challenge with Value-Based Purchasing, make them your poster child. Use the social media to endorse one in every major town, and create incentives for them to lead and others to follow.
Use the carrot and not the stick to recognize and reward those hospitals that meet the value definition. Help these hospitals with what they are good at and support where they want to improve.
Some hospitals may not make the change needed to survive in a value-oriented environment, That will be unfortunate, but it happens in every industry, and it might even be healthy for the industry.
If Stanford, Harvard, Princeton and Yale were your models for education where would that take us? Heck! My pick-up truck doesn’t even know where Princeton is!
If you want leadership, invite the 747 hospitals that are doing the right thing to a summit, introduce them to the country, and let them tell the world their success stories. There are some common threads among this special group of 747 – analyze those things that work in most markets and reward those hospitals that implement those practices.
These 747 hospitals are the bread and butter of our healthcare system. Please, please don’t disenfranchise them with talk of a new and better model…they are your models, statistically relevant and a force to collaborate with.
I still have “hope” that “change” will be good. So, Mr. President, let’s dispense with the sound bites and move on to the serious business ahead of us.
Respectfully,
John Morrow
$155B Down, $845B To Go
Posted by Hal Andrews in Healthcare Financing, Healthcare Reform on July 7th, 2009
Ceci Connolly reports that Hospitals Reach Deal With Administration in the July 7 edition of The Washington Post. Unnamed sources report that the American Hospital Association, Federation of American Hospitals and the Catholic Health Association agreed to “contribute $155B over 10 years toward the cost of insuring the 47 million Americans without health coverage.” Approximately $100B will come through reduced Medicare and Medicaid payments, while $40B will come through “slowly reducing what hospitals get to care for the uninsured”, which presumably means lower payments to disproportionate share hospitals.
The White House has previously discussed plans to find $600B of “savings” from providers. In that context, the “contribution” by the hospitals of $155B appears to be a significant win, and the stock market seems to agree this afternoon. However, it is difficult to understand how the balance of providers make up the $445B difference.
Even so, hospitals have not fared as well as the pharmaceutical industry, whose “contribution” of $80B will not accrue to the government. In addition, it is likely that their “sacrifice” will be offset substantially or entirely by an increase in the number of new customers because of lower drug prices or the acquisition of health insurance. Along those lines, The New York Times published Sheryl Gay Stolberg and David Herszenhorn’s article Health Deals Could Harbor Hidden Costs on the front page of the July 8 edition.

