OP-ED

Op-Ed: Health care reform is within reach

-1In recent weeks, President Obama has gotten flack for insisting that, despite the nation’s urgent economic  problems, “health care reform
cannot wait.”

On this point, though, he’s absolutely right. But that doesn’t mean we
need more government programs. What we need is a focus on chronic
disease.

Chronic diseases are among the most serious public health threats
facing the American people today. These conditions, which include
diabetes, chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular disease and cancer,
often last for years, requiring frequent treatment throughout a
person’s life. The toll they exact on American patients is appalling,
accounting for 70 percent of all deaths in the United States.

America’s exorbitant health care spending is also linked to these
destructive illnesses. In fact, 75 percent of the more than $2 trillion
spent on health care in the United States goes toward caring for those
with chronic conditions. Heart disease and strokes alone cost the
American people $448 billion in 2008.

It’s for these reasons that combating chronic conditions must be a
central goal of health care reform. Fortunately, unlike some public
health crises of the past, the challenges posed by chronic conditions
are hardly insurmountable. That’s because a large majority of them can
be prevented simply through healthier lifestyle choices.

As a practicing primary care physician specializing in treating the
elderly, I understand better than most how unhealthy habits can, over
time, lead to debilitating chronic conditions.

But before any effort to reduce the incidence of these diseases can be
effective, we need to rethink the way medicine is practiced in the
United States. In short, health care in this country needs to be more
patient-focused.

For doctors, this means practicing a more personalized kind of care
that aims at keeping patients healthy, and not simply on treating
illnesses when they arise.

Toward this end, experimenting with new health care delivery models may
prove effective. In the “medical home” model, for instance, a single
personal physician coordinates all of an individual’s medical care over
the course of that person’s life. This allows for a more comprehensive
approach to medicine that stresses healthy living and disease
prevention over stopgap treatment solutions.

In other words, the government doesn’t have to step in and incentivize
us to take better care of ourselves. The truth is that the government
isn’t equipped to do such a thing. And that’s not a proper role for
government, either.

Lawmakers can, though, create a system where both patients and
physicians are incentivized to prevent chronic illnesses before they
develop. Moving closer to a health care model where patients are
rewarded for living healthier lives and physicians are compensated
based on outcomes rather than volume of service would go a long way
toward reducing health care costs.

Just look at breast cancer, an illness that killed more than 40,000
women in 2004. According to Researchers at the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, regular mammograms could reduce that number by
up to one-third.

The same goes for hypertension, a leading cause of stroke and heart
attack. If caught early, high blood pressure can be effectively treated
with prescription medication before it evolves into something worse.

In fact, a recent study published in the journal Health Affairs found
that blood pressure medication reduced the number of heart attacks and
strokes in 2002, saving Americans more than $16 billion. That same
study found that properly using antihypertensive therapies could reduce
the number of premature deaths from heart disease in America by 89,000
and the number of hospital admissions for strokes by 287,000.

Recognizing the urgency of this issue, leaders of key health care
institutions – from AARP to pharmaceutical companies – have united
behind the goal of making chronic illnesses far less common.

Our health care system is ripe for reform. Not because it is
irreparably broken, but rather because the reforms we need are well
within our grasp. It’s crucial that we all work to reduce the
prevalence of chronic illness.

Gary Applebaum is a senior fellow at the Center for Medicine in the Public
Interest, which is known best for the usually pro-big pharma leanings of Peter Pitts. He is the former executive vice president and chief medical officer of Erickson Retirement Communities. This opinion piece first appeared in the San Diego Union Tribune.

Livongo’s Post Ad Banner 728*90

Categories: OP-ED

Tagged as: ,

19
Leave a Reply

19 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
18 Comment authors
AndyElite HealthrockyChristina VieringMD as HELL Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Andy
Guest

Naturally, prevention is the ideal solution to ballooning costs. Unfortunately, such a methodology is hard to convey to people when they are healthy and stable. Treating problems only after they arise is our nature. It is the speed, level of efficiency and efficacy with which we treat them that is most important.
http://www.hometelemed.com – Stroke Rehabilitation At Home

Elite Health
Guest

Exercise has been really a very important factor for the people of today’s generation. And especially exercise really helps heart patient more than anything. I have got an enlarged heart because of inability of pumping. I was also having a defective valve, which led me to be a sinus tachycardia patient. I got to know at my medical checkup at my campus. And being very young to face all this, I was really frightened regarding all these health issues. I need someone to monitor my health and keep an eye on my health as well as daily health issues. Getting… Read more »

rocky
Guest
rocky

this is a very nice post

Christina Viering
Guest
Christina Viering

I won’t hold my breath.

MD as HELL
Guest
MD as HELL

The government screwed up the system. We had great primary care until 1983. Now no one in their right mind will go into it except midlevel providers and FMG’s.

Collodial Silver
Guest

I would agree the reforms are closer than people think, and I think it will happen soon. Still can’t decide if this is a good idea though.

botetourt
Guest
botetourt

There is absolutely nothing new being discussed here-must be a slow blog day. Amen to Tim, who shares my view that nothing meaningful in healthcare reform will occur until and unless the payment system is used to shape whatever the “reform” prescription. I think medical home as a concept has legs, but in most states and locations would require significantly more consolidation among hospitals and physicians–but could be accomplished via either govt or private insurance, or a mixture. The trick is reallocating professional payments from producers of medical widgets to primary care, and increasing the primary care physician numbers.

Chris
Guest
Chris

You are assuming everyone has access to a private, long term doctor. What about those with mobile lives or that live in urban centers? How about the uninsured? How about some unethical for-profit practices that make money from unnecessary prescription and testing sales? What about the good private practices that have become overburdened by the inefficiency of the insurance companies? How about nurse understaffing and lack of access to quality Heath IT data? The government must have a role in the system. It, after all, is paying for it.

Tim
Guest
Tim

In other words, you get what you pay for. American doctors are paid by CPT code, so CPT codes are what they produce. As the government becomes a larger and larger payer through the years, the likelihood that the system will change decreases, unless the payment system is utterly remodeled. A reform in payment methodology would solve the coordination of care problem, which would do much to reduce costs — and this reform could be done by CMS today, using their present clout, with no new legislation. Simply put more money in the coordination of care codes. Expenditures will bump… Read more »

phillip white
Guest

hi i like your blog and i see alot people would like to be healthy the rest of there life who doesn’t if you guys like info and advice on health and fitness check out my blog

TexBryant
Guest

It seems that many of the changes in access to health care and the provision of services have indeed been driven by government programs. What Medicare does is often followed by private insurers, so it seems to me. Medicare part D has driven much competition among insurers in the area of prescription drugs, for instance. From these historical facts I believe that the adoption of the Wagner Chronic Care Model in the Patient-Centered Medical Home by Medicare will drive a great deal of change in chronic care practices at primary care sites. Patient–Centered Medical Home pilots have demonstrated the improved… Read more »

Stephen C Schimpff, MD
Guest

Dr Applebaum’s comments are well taken. We cannot afford to give everyone everything in the way we now deliver medical care in America. That said, America is the only country that has not figured out a way to assure all of its citizens have access to required medical care. After I wrote “The Future of Medicine – Megatrends in Healthcare” I was repeatedly asked about healthcare delivery as well. This led to interviewing over 150 thought leaders across the country. What comes through loud and clear is this. We have a medical care not a health care system. We do… Read more »

Peter
Guest
Peter

Oh yes Deron I read all of it, but it’s nothing there but rambling blather with no connecting practical way of instituting the things we all know already – or have been told by our mothers – “eat your vegetables”. And he does not address how we’re going to pay for his “solutions”, except to say government can’t solve this. He’s a Republican who ran in the primary for the GOP. He starts with this; “It’s for these reasons that combating chronic conditions must be a central goal of health care reform. Fortunately, unlike some public health crises of the… Read more »

Ken Coburn
Guest

Agree with the importance of chronic diseases and the need for a better approach to preventing and managing them. A systems approach that supports primary care with a team of health care professionals having expertise in care coordination, medication adherence and safety checks, self-management coaching, lifestyle behavior change, gait and balance training, ongoing assessments in the home and community, and other elements of a full-featured care management service is more likely to be effective.

Nate
Guest
Nate

“Heart disease and strokes alone cost the American people $448 billion in 2008.” Does Healthcare and high spending on it really “cost” us? What would happen if Wal Mart sold a magic pill for $4 a month that prevented all heart disease and stroke? Would we have $448 billion to play with? Could we buy more oil and Chinese imports? Healthcare expenditures are almost 100% domestic. Very little HC spending leaves the country. Elasticity of money would imply our $448 billion in spending on heart disease increases our GDP by trillions. Buying foreign oil or chinese toys draws money out… Read more »