Cross-posted with the Philadelphia Inquirer
Imagine a woman in labor who goes to the hospital with a delivery plan she made in consultation with her obstetrician: yes to antibiotics in labor; no to an epidural for pain control; yes to neonatal circumcision; and yes to having an intrauterine device (IUD) placed immediately after childbirth.
Cross-posted with US News
Cross-posted with the Field Clinic blog
Over the past two years, one of the top health care priorities in Philadelphia has been getting people signed up for health insurance. That is still a huge, unfinished task, but alongside it we need to make sure we have enough doctors in the right places to deliver care. For health care reform to deliver on its promise, people need good access to primary care.
As a recipient of the Alice Hersh Scholarship, I had the privilege of attending AcademyHealth’s 2015 National Health Policy Conference in Washington D.C. In addition to many interesting sessions, I had the opportunity to meet many leaders in the health care space, from health services researchers and policy makers to providers and business leaders.
The story of the Medicaid fee bump is, first and foremost, a story of a policy to improve access to primary care for Medicaid recipients, by paying physicians more to see them. But it is also a story of how research can answer an important policy question, and how it can affect policy as it is being made. That's the story we tell here:
In a Perspective in today’s New England Journal of Medicine, David Grande, LDI's Co-Director of Health Policy, and colleagues write about new digital forms of pharmaceutical and medical device marketing to physicians. The same technologies that can be used to support clinical practice—such as electronic health records, social media, and mobile applications—can also be used to conduct market research and to market directly to physicians. Grande and colleagues write:
The Affordable Care Act has generated carrots and sticks for hospitals to reduce readmissions. With the goal of achieving the Triple Aim (improving quality of patient care, improving population health, and reducing overall cost of care), innovative care delivery models are being tested locally and nationally, including the roll-out of Accountable Care Organizations and bundled payment programs. These programs create incentives in terms of shared savings for health care systems that provide high quality, coordinated care.
It’s not easy to make the case that health care innovation can come from within…from the physicians and nurses on the front lines of patient care. Clinically-trained, path-driven, and time-starved, these clinicians may not appear to be the best source of disruptive change in health care.
What do Edward Snowden and Daniel Ellsberg tell us about the appropriate use of personal health information?
Since Edward Snowden revealed that US agencies have been following social media, telephone data, and other seemingly private communications of US citizens, public reaction to his actions has been mixed. Roughly as many call him a traitor as call him a hero, and some simultaneously criticize his approaches and praise him for what he revealed.
The ugly truth is that health care is often inefficient, costly, and does not meet the needs of its principal constituent -- the patient. This realization has led many physicians and health systems to enthusiastically turn to a new model for delivering primary care, the patient-centered medical home. The patient-centered medical home is a simple idea. It reorganizes care around the needs of the patient, emphasizing coordinated, accessible, and efficient care. In short, it reimagines the health care delivery system in the best image of itself.
A few months ago, I spoke with LDI Senior Fellow Lawton R.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has released its most recent list of hospitals that will receive bonuses, or in some cases penalties, under the Value-Based Purchasing Program.
The Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula – a source of unpredictability in Medicare payments to physicians – may finally be repealed. While this might seem unrelated to medical education, what happens next could have a significant impact on academic medicine and the training of students, residents and fellows.
Cross-posted on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Human Capital Blog
All too often, the debate about expanding the role of nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) takes place in a vacuum, as though these practitioners do not already deliver significant amounts of primary care. But they do, and existing evidence indicates that quality of care and patient satisfaction are good as a result.
Last week’s article by Jon Skinner in the MIT Technology Review, The Costly Paradox of Health-Care Technology was an excellent synopsis of the unique and bizarre relationship between technology and the marketplace that exists in American medicine. Unlike almost any other sector of the economy, in health care new technology drives up costs while often providing little or no benefit.