BY SAURABH JHA, MD

Once, a farmer from a village in Bihar was diagnosed with colon cancer. He came to Patna, the capital city, to have the tumor removed. Because he was poor, my father recommended a young surgeon who trained in the UK. The surgeon was competent and idealistic. He was a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons. His charges were the lowest. He did not charge the extremely poor.

The farmer declined, saying “if this babu is treating patients for free, he can’t be a good surgeon.” The farmer chose the most famous surgeon in the city, whose charges were not astronomical in comparison, but certainly higher. The farmer paid full fare – there were no discounts for poverty. The practice accepted credit cards. He paid cash. Once the surgeon received half the payment, he made the incision. The surgery was uneventful. The farmer was cured.

This was a voluntary contract between surgeon and farmer. No middle man. No forms to submit. Cash for scalpel and the skill of its bearer. There is a resurgence of this model in the US, known as Direct Pay Medicine. Despite India’s socialist roots, paradoxically, much of medicine has always been direct pay, or private.Continue reading…

By MICHEL ACCAD, MD

On the surface, the proposition that medical care in India is a free market seems plausible.

Setting aside the perennially underfunded public healthcare system, there is a large second tier system where patients get care without any apparent oversight. Sure, laws and rules abound, but these are easily overcome with bribes paid to bureaucrats. A “cost of doing business,” you might say.

In that private system, the care rendered is up to the doctor and patient, and the terms of the transaction are simply decided on the basis of cash exchanging hands. What could be more free market than that? A libertarian paradise!

But Voltaire wisely advised debaters to define their terms, or else engage in fruitless conversations. So perhaps we should make it clear that a free market is not solely defined on the basis of voluntary exchanges, although I recognize the prevalence of that unfortunate misconception.

Continue reading…

By SEAN CAVANAUGH

Today, the U.S. health care system moves to the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision – ICD-10. We’ve tested and retested our systems in anticipation of this day, and we’re ready to accept properly coded ICD-10 claims.

The change to ICD-10 allows you to capture more details about the health status of  your patients and sets the stage for improved patient care and public health surveillance across our country. ICD-10 will help move the nation’s health care system to better, smarter care.

You may wonder when we’ll know how the transition is going. It will take a couple of weeks before we have the full picture of ICD-10 implementation because very few health care providers file claims on the same day a medical service is given. Most providers batch their claims and submit them every few days.

Even after submission, Medicare claims take several days to be processed, and Medicare – by law – must wait two weeks before issuing payment. Medicaid claims can take up to 30 days to be submitted and processed by states. Because of these timeframes, we expect to know more about the transition to ICD-10 after completion of a full billing cycle.

Continue reading…

By ABRAAR KARAN, MD

The cost of medical service provision in the United States is one of the most palpable strains on the healthcare system, but we must not forget that cost is the sibling of quality and access—without considering the three as such, we will undoubtedly fail to navigate our country’s healthcare quandary. Low quality care inevitably results in the need for more care in the form of readmissions, while lack of access to primary care leads to increases in the utilization of expensive, emergency services. Of particular concern in our country, a growing contributor to cost, and driven by low quality care and even less access to that care, is the systematic exclusion of undocumented patients. This was made very clear to me through the example of a single suffering patient, Mr. Gomez.Continue reading…

Should the government be in the business of funding infrastructure for healthcare communication?

Comparable infrastructures

The governments on local, state and federal level have deployed comparable infrastructures and licensing in the interest of public health and safety:

1. Licensing of car tags while providing infrastructure for roads

2. Licensing of planes and pilots while providing infrastructure for air traffic control

3. Licensing post office locations while providing infrastructure for moving mail

How about: Licensing providers (NPI) while providing infrastructure for health data exchange “highway”?

The communicating health professional

What if providers could communicate in a secure “healthcare highway” or cloud system?

Dr. Specialist: “Hey @npi.1234567890 attached a consult note.”

Dr. Primary: “Thanks @npi.0987654321, sending 3 more pts your way with similar symptoms. (attached)”

Continue reading…