CodeBlueNow!
CodeBlueNow! Dispatch
March 25, 2009
The ABCs of Health Care Reform:  Part II
Greetings!
 
Last week we published the first in a series on what elements of a new health care system would look like and could work.  This is Part II of that series.
In This Issue
The ABCs of Reform: Part II
Through California to the Nation
The ABCs of Reform:  Part II
 
We are pleased to report two things.  First, we have updated selected past Dispatches on our website.  Go  to:  http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs021/1101840126336/archive/1101868317363.html
It also includes the first article in this series.
 
Second, I found my old O'Connor Health Analyst website, and it is now up again.   http://www.oconnorhealthanalyst.com 

It was fascinating looking at the articles on the website from my Seattle Times columns: http://www.oconnorhealthanalyst.com/sections/articles/articles.html

Most of them could run today and all we would need to do is change the date.  Which is another excellent case for reform.

Now:  Part II: of The ABC's of Reform followed by an intriguing article by Leo van der Reis, MD on an IT implementation strategy for California and the nation.

Watch next week for Part III of the ABCs of Reform.

The ABC's of Reform:  Part II

D
 

Decision trees:  Software applications now exist to help patients and doctors make better decisions by raising questions that need to be asked depending on the patient's age, stage of illness, and family health history.

Deductibles:  Deductibles will continue to be used and will be one of the decision factors for employers and individuals to use when choosing a health care plan.
Delivery System:  The organization of medical and health care services and providers, including financial incentives for providers will be re-structured to reward prevention and decrease the incentive for over treatment in the fee for service payment approach. 
 The current fee for service, pay for procedure delivery system model does not reward doctors for preventive care or early diagnosis. The current financial incentive is to fix a problem after it arises and to conduct procedures on patients rather than preventing the problem in the first place. Without changing the financial incentives in the current system, the "fix it" procedures approach rather than preventive/wellness focus will continue to be rewarded. 
Diversity:  Research on clinical outcomes will also examine outcomes by ethnic origins, because disease patterns often differ in different ethnic groups, such as earlier and more aggressive breast cancer in women of color. 
 
E
 

Ease of Administration:  A standard benefit package and electronic medical records will make health care options easier for employers and individuals to understand, select and manage.

Efficacy:  Research on clinical outcomes will increase the body of knowledge on the best and most appropriate treatments given the patient's age, gender, illness and health history.
Efficiency: A basic benefit for everyone and an electronic medical record will increase efficiency, thus freeing up money for patient care.                                                                                                                                    
 Current estimates are that only 50 cents of every health care dollar actually goes to patient care.
 

Electronic Medical Records: Standard electronic medical records will improve the quality of care, reduce errors and improve medical decisions when coupled with clinical outcomes research. (See Leo van der Reis article below).

Employers:   Will continue to play a major role in offering health care benefits. Having a standard benefit and research on clinical outcomes will make it easier for employers to offer benefits that have known effectiveness and will enable the large employers who operate under
ERISA (see ERISA) to add more benefits and services for their employees, thus allowing businesses to continue their practice of using  health care benefits to attract and retain employees.

Entitlement programs:  These programs cover the costs for those who cannot provide for themselves, such as Medicaid for low income women and children; the blind and disabled; some families below the federal poverty level and for long-term care. Medicare is for people over 65 and the severely disabled. If these programs are not continued in their current structure and financing, the entitlement services will be continued in another form. 

Equity:  Greater equity will exist because everyone will be playing by the same rules.                     Currently, individuals and employers have different benefits and different   regulations, not only    for private insurance, even in public programs such as Medicaid which has different services and eligibility in every state (See Taxes).

ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act): Will be continued so large employers retain the flexibility they need to operate across state lines and to attract and retain employees. 
F
 

Financing:  Three major approaches are proposed to pay for health care:
Single payer: tax based, government managed health care. It eliminates employers and insurance companies as participants.

Health Savings Accounts/Vouchers: insurance payments migrate from the employer to the individual who purchases benefits from insurance companies. Keeps private insurance companies, but eliminates employers over time.  Health savings accounts and voucher proposals differ. Health Savings Accounts work like a 401(k) plan.  The employee keeps the funds in the account and the contributions accumulate over time.  Those savings may be inherited by family members when the beneficiary dies. Vouchers, as currently proposed, are used to purchase benefits, but do not work like a 401(k) plan.

Shared Responsibility:  Continues to use employers, individuals and the government (federal, state and local) to finance the health care system. 

Flexibility:  Having a basic benefit plan enables employers to have greater flexibility in managing their health care benefits, choosing plans that fit their needs and adding benefits tailored to their employees.
 
To be continued week of March 30th. 
 
Kathleen O'Connor, Founder and CEO
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Through California to the Nation
 
  
It is generally true that economics of scale do exist and do occur.  Yet it is also true that conditions may make it not possible to introduce a large entity when a smaller, but similar, facility or program can be established.  Given the current state of affairs, domestic and foreign, that require serious and constant attention by the federal government, it is unlikely that comprehensive health care reform will be enacted in the near future.  And even though measures will be passed by the next congress that support the application of informatics in medicine, these measures will also come up short in terms of broad implementation that is necessary for the nation to derive the many benefits that a national informatics in medicine program will produce.
 
The performance and experience of California with its 36 million citizens, the world's eighth largest economy, and its geographic and demographic characteristics can be viewed as a major subset of the nation as a whole.  It is the thesis of this essay that conditions exist in California that make a state-wide medical informatics system not only possible but desirable. 
 
At this time medical information systems are in use in many physicians' offices, clinics, hospitals, pharmacies and fiscal intermediaries.  A statewide informatics communication system does not exist.  Some organizations such as Kaiser-Permanente and the US Veterans Administration have introduced informatics throughout their systems.  Most fiscal intermediaries have taken full advantage of the dividends that informatics can bring, in their case improving the bottom line.
 
And even though the insurers by and large are doing well, the State as well as the medical industry, professionals and facilities, are under great financial stress.  Since informatics constitutes an essential tool in improving the finances of medicine, it makes sense to find ways and means to implement informatics in medical practice to the extent made possible by prevailing conditions of society as a whole.
 
The State of California by virtue of its statewide University of California system already has in its hand the foundation of a statewide medical informatics program.  All UC medical facilities as well as the VA, community-based and county facilities that are in operation today make use, at least internally, of informatics systems, some extensive, some not so extensive, some successfully, some not so successfully.
 
At this time an exciting development for the future use of informatics in medicine in California is the establishment of the California Center for Connected Health.  This facility can be viewed as the potential leadership that to this date has been lacking.  Its official status lends credence and support to its proposals.
 
Given the presence of this new administrative and policy leadership, the absorption of an existing statewide medical operation in its master plan makes eminent sense.  With its medical school tertiary full-service hospitals in Davis, Irvine, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, and Riverside, where an additional medical school has been authorized, and its affiliation with more than 100 VA, county and community based hospitals throughout the state, the UC medical system already constitutes the framework of a state- wide medical informatics system.
 
It is apparent that the melding of the current informatics systems is in essence a minimal cost administrative step.  Yet, the dividends will be impressive: in lowering providers' overhead, marked reduction in the cost of emergency room transactions as well as marked reduction in errors and the lowered mortality and morbidity that result.  If a statewide accessible medical database were available in every emergency room, then a patient could be treated anywhere in California with the same level of background knowledge, even and especially when there is no time to obtain the patient's medical history files from their usual health care provider.  
 
The systems currently in use have been purchased under the assumption that the essence of informatics "communicability" was included, the baseline tool. That this assumption has not proven to be correct in practice is regrettably all too real. However the adjustments necessary to make the existing systems communications compatible should require nothing more than a protocol that sets forth the basic criteria that medical informatics tools need to comply with.  Thus in actuality in order to establish a statewide medical informatics system the first step should be the communications integration of the UC medical system and its affiliated hospitals, even if limited to the emergency room services that together form the spine of the state-wide medical communication network.  And it deserves repeating, in and by itself that measure will bring major dividends in access to records, access to care, cost reduction and error reduction.  And importantly, it will also aid in medical education.
 
Experience in other nations that have addressed the issue of informatics in medicine seriously has been mixed.  Based on these experiences some conclusions can be reached that have merit for consideration in a California statewide program.  It can be concluded that:

1)      Clear managerial authority should be vested in the program's CEO;
2)      Operational, privacy and safety guidelines need to be clearly defined in a protocol;
3)      Equipment compatibility criteria, set forth in a protocol, need to be adhered to;
4)       It is possible to start a program without all the t's crossed and the i's dotted (for example, less than 100% of physicians on line);

5)       Institutions and other providers not initially part of the network will join as the network become operationally established thus leading to virtual "universal" participation and access;
6)      A statewide medical informatics system will provide easier access to improved quality of care while reducing operating costs;
7)       Connecting the pre-existing databases of the University of California's hospital system to form the backbone of the statewide medical informatics system will be the fastest and most cost-effective path forward.

Leo van der Reis, M.D.
Adjunct Professor, Health Management and Informatics Department
School of Medicine, University of Missouri
Email: vanderreisl@health.missouri.edu
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Thank you for taking time to read these articles.  If you have a positive approach for reform, we would like to hear from you. 
 
Please forward to friends and colleagues if you find this of interest. See the link below.
 
Sincerely,
 

Kathleen O'Connor, Founder & CEO
CodeBlueNow!
 
O'Connor  Website Returns
I have not used my old website in years, and some of the dates show little to no activity for 4 to 5 years, but it does include the op-eds I wrote for The Seattle Times.
 
Ironically, you could take these same op-eds, change the dates, and they would be just as timely today, for the most part.
 
Which is another compelling case for reform.
www.oconnorhealthanalyst
com  
 
 
Join Our Mailing List