Categories

Category: Uncategorized

TECH/QUALITY/PHYSICIANS: Healthcare and The Long Tail – Searching for help when you’re on the wrong-end of the curve by Jim Walker

Two things have got my attention recently. The first is the concept of the long tail in medicine, which I’ve thought about alot since my fiancee got an odd condition (shortness of breath) that didn’t match any of the symptoms the text books said were the symptoms of the usual shortness of breath. She endured several doctors diagnoses of diseases that went from the wrong to the ridiculous (panic attacks that lasted for weeks?). After much, much digging around on the web she found a patient testimonial from someone who had long term shortness of breath and related it to caffeine. Yup, drinking coffee was causing the problem. But because it was a rare symptom of what’s not normally a medical problem she had to go through the annoyance (and worry) of being wrongly diagnosed and put on drugs she didn’t need, and now she can’t drink coffee or eat chocolate—her life  must barely be worth living!

The second is a plethora of people writing to me telling me about XYZ product that is the greatest since sliced bread and would I please praise it on THCB. One such person is Jim Walker from new physician social networking site MyMedwork. Usually when I request that said person writes a piece putting their service in context I get self-serving marketing jargon, and when I request that they instead really write a general interest piece I never hear from them again. In contrast Jim wrote an excellent explanation of the Long Tail in health care. Here it is:

Healthcare and The Long Tail

By JIM WALKER

My neighbor brought her son to the doctor this summer for a rash that
wouldn’t go away. “The doctor had never seen anything like it,” she
explained.  “In fact, he brought in the other doctors to take a look at
it, and none of them had ever seen it either.”  Now I don’t know about
you, but listening to her reminded me of my worst medical nightmare of
things I don’t ever want to hear from my doctor:  “Excuse me, do you
mind if I bring in some of the residents? We’ve never seen a case like
yours before.”

In a recent THCB post,
author Maggie Mahar writes that “Ambiguity haunts medical care”. She
goes on to quote Dr. Atul Gawand – “Uncertainty is the core predicament
of medicine . . . the thing that makes being a patient so wrenching,
being a doctor so difficult and being part of a society that pays the
bills so wrenching."

 

It’s important to note that for a great
many cases, ambiguity is not really an issue.  This is because the
distribution of medical ailments follows a curve very similar to Chris
Anderson’s “Long Tail”,
with a great many common “blockbuster” ailments stacked up high on the
left-hand side of the curve. For those not familiar with the Long Tail,
Anderson describes how Amazon, Netflix, and other online retailers sell
lots of the usual blockbusters, but actually derive more total volume
from 100s of thousands of niche products.  In healthcare, it is the
left side of this distribution curve which inspires (for better or
worse) Wal-Mart, Target, and others to offer “Doc In A Box” services –
Allergies, Bladder Infections, Bronchitis, Ear Infections, Pink Eye,
Sinus Infections, and a full battery of vaccines – all served up for a
fixed price while you wait.

 

On the right hand end of the
curve though, the NIH Office of Rare Disease classifies over 6,000
conditions, each afflicting fewer than 200,000 Americans.  Along this
part of the curve, things do indeed get very ambiguous in a hurry –
both for patients and physicians. Specialization is a response to this
range of ailments (“nichefication” in Anderson’s terms), and brings
physicians repeated cases of a particular nature – giving them the
confidence that they can routinely diagnose and treat a high percentage
of these patients. However, even within a particular specialty area,
cases will naturally follow a distribution curve from typical to
atypical. Unto themselves – atypical cases are just that – one of a
kind aberrations that force physicians to go outside their typical
“comfort zone” of diagnosis and treatment.  For each individual
physician, these atypical cases feel like the exception rather than the
rule. What the Long Tail suggests though, is that taken in their
entirety, these rare cases actually compromise a large percentage of
all medical cases. In fact, over 25 million Americans suffer from a
“rare” condition.

 

This is problematic, because in general,
physicians – and the healthcare system as a whole – are not well
prepared for dealing with the many and inevitable rare cases. In fact, statistics show
that the median time to diagnosis of a rare condition is six months,
and the average is almost three years! When faced with an atypical
case, most physicians will begin to consult the literature, and/or
confer with their colleagues. Ironically, it is at this moment that the
Long Tail shows up again in a quite surprising and often detrimental
fashion. This is because recent studies in social and information
analysis reveal that our network of professional contacts and
information sources follows the same type of distribution curve. In
other words – we all generally tend to connect with the same 15 or 20
trusted colleagues on a regular basis, and we all gather our
information from a limited stream of trusted sources. Beyond this
trusted core lies an entire world of other people and sources we rarely
connect with, if at all – our own social and information “long tail”.
Generally, using a network of trusted sources (while tuning out most
everything else) is actually very efficient at handling a majority of
our day to day needs. For the atypical situation though, just when we
really need to break out of our habitual way of doing things – our
trusted sources generally don’t deliver. They’ve all been drinking from
the same information punch bowl.

 

So, we have to head out to
the right-hand side of the curve – and begin finding and evaluating
people and sources we don’t really know. For a student or researcher,
this type of research can become a time consuming, challenging, but
often rewarding journey. But, for a patient and physician confronted
with a puzzling and life threatening illness, the stakes are much
higher and time is at a premium. In today’s system, the physician often
must address this dilemma by referring the patient to some other
specialist – with the hope that maybe they will have the knowledge or
connections to form a proper diagnosis and treatment protocol in a
timely manner. The patient of course, must continue to move from
specialist to specialist, their rare case still in hand.

 

Not
surprisingly, the Internet has proved both boon and bane in this
situation. Patients and their families are using the Web to dig into
the latest medical research. However, matching a worried patient or
family member against 1,706,532 Google results is usually a
prescription for both confusion and high blood pressure.

 

On
a more encouraging note, patients stuck along the right-side of the
curve with a “niche disease” are using the extraordinary reach of the
Web to discover that they are not so atypical after all. It’s probably
no surprise to THCB readers that patients are banding together around
wikis, chat rooms, blogs and social networks to offer each other
information, empathy, and inspiration. (This is not so different in
network theory terms from when fans of a niche band find each other on
MySpace). Some of these disease state patient networks are sponsored by  pharma marketing, while others are grass-roots efforts, usually led by  a parent or family member related to one of the patients.

 

Physicians
are also turning online in large numbers. Manhattan Research reports
that more than 600,000 physicians are using search engines to find
medical information. Are they searching about how to treat their
day-to-day typical cases? Very unlikely. Chances are, they are
researching an atypical case. However, if two physicians search – for
example, on “phylloides tumors” at Google they each receive the same
list – but have no easy context by which to evaluate the 13,600 +
search results! 

 

Social network software may be one way to
help physicians overcome this “search result overload”, allowing them
to move faster and more confidently outside their circle of trusted
sources and down the long tail, especially when faced with a “rare”
condition (which as we’ve noted – is not such a rare occurrence in the
aggregate). For example, within MyMedwork
, search priorities start with the individual physician’s network of
trusted colleagues and work outward from there. In other words – each
physician gets a totally unique list of search results based on who in
their own extended network is likely to possess useful information.
Because the medical community is so small, it turns out that physicians
are usually quite closely linked to any given article or study, they
are just not aware of the connection. By viewing the social network
connection within their search results – they are then in a position to
more accurately judge the quality of the information – either by
checking with the in-between link (i.e. “Hi Dr. Jones, I notice you’re
connected to Dr. Watson – what do you think of his study on phylloides
tumors?”) – or by contacting the physician directly (i.e. “Hi Dr.
Watson, I see you went to medical school with my colleague Dr. Jones,
do you mind if I ask you a few questions about your study?).

 

The
implications of The Long Tail and social network analysis for
healthcare are just beginning to be explored and understood. It is
already clear though, that as the entire healthcare field continues to
undergo dramatic change, and “atypical” rare disease states become ever
more typical, ambiguity and uncertainty will continue to impact medical
decision making. In this environment, the need to develop richer and
more varied sources of information, and the value of far-reaching,
online social trust networks will become increasingly apparent for
patients and healthcare practitioners alike.

YOU’VE GOT MAIL

Or we’ve got mail. Or we’ve all got mail. Or something … 

After much late night heroism by THCB’s trusty (and highly
sensitive) tech staff, the THCB email list is up and running. If you’d
like to get a quick email in your inbox with a rundown of new posts –
with news flashes for important stories – you can sign up here.

If you subscribed to the list in its earlier incarnation, there’s no need to do so again.

PBMs: Rebates are nearly dead; can the PBMs keep their generic margins?

Vanessa Furhman continues her swath through the PBM industry in the WSJ. The article is called Managers of Drug Benefits Agree To More Transparency in Pricing. Apparently bullied into this by fear of losing some big clients, both Medco and Caremark are going to disclose their prescription pricing.

Responding to pressure from some of their biggest corporate clients, two big pharmacy benefit managers agreed to provide more information to employers about the way they price and administer employee drug purchases. The two PBMs, Medco Health Solutions Inc. and Caremark Rx Inc., each handles the drug benefits for tens of millions of Americans. They have agreed to participate with eight smaller PBMs in a purchasing model that would require them to pass on to clients their own costs for acquiring retail and mail-order prescriptions. They also have agreed to pass along the price rebates, rarely disclosed in the past, that they receive from drug manufacturers.

Well actually Medco was making its total rebates clear and has begun passing back to its clients a significant chunk of its rebates last year, but its profits increased anyway because it made it up on the spread on mail-order generics. So will they start disclosing what they pay for those versus what they charge? Unclear:

Medco and Caremark both started the coalition’s process to become certified when it launched last year, but dropped out along the way. A big sticking point for them, according to some people working with the coalition, was the demand for full transparency and acquisition-cost pricing on generics ordered through the mail. PBMs enjoy some of their steepest markups and profits on mail-order generic drugs.

It’s not evident that they will be doing this, although smarter employers can find out market generic prices, see what they’re paying and figure out the difference. Something not many have bothered to do–to their great cost.

But if they succeed in beating the PBMs up on rebates and on generic spreads, the enormous profitability of the PBMs (Yup, it is enormous—around 50%  net margins if you don’t look at the cost of the drugs which are mostly a pass thru) can’t continue. So does Wall Street believe the end is nigh?

Judging by the change in their stock price, not exactly.

Big.chart

 

THCB CLASSIFIEDS

INFORMATION THERAPY (Ix) is transforming health care. Join us in Park City UT for the Fifth Annual Ix Conference, "Catalysts for Innovation"Sept 25-27, 2006.  To register or for agenda details go to:http://www.ixcenter.org/2006conference/index.cfm
DISEASE MANAGEMENT BOSTON At a three day conference in Boston MA, scheduled between July 31 and Aug 2, industry leaders from managed care companies, employer groups purchasing healthcare services, providers, third party administrators, physicians, healthcare technology players, nursing and pharmacy practitioners, disease management experts will meet at the 4th Annual Disease Management Conference. The event is posted online at www.srinstitute.com/ch142.  Learn about advertising on THCB

HOSPITALS: Dr. Anna Pou Defense Fund

From THCB’s New York Desk … A defense fund has been set up to help cover legal expenses
for Dr. Anna Pou and the two nurses charged with murder by Louisiana attorney
general Charles Foti in the Memorial Medical Center case last week. Contributions should be
mailed to:

Dr. Daniel Nuss, MD
Professor and Chairman
LSU Dept. Of Otolaryngology
533 Bolivar St, 5th Floor ENT Suite New Orleans, LA 70112

HOSPITALS: The secret to Sutter’s high margins?

Appears to be defamation suits! Yup Sutter just got awarded $17.3m because

Unite Here, one of the nation’s largest unions that represents hotel, restaurant and laundry workers, defamed Sutter Health early last year by sending postcards to women of child-bearing age in Northern California claiming the organization’s hospitals used unclean linens. The union was in a labor dispute with the laundry service that cleaned the linens at the time.

Of course the cynics amongst us might just wonder if Sutter’s continued combination of being the region’s highest cost provider and its most unpopular employer are in any way connected—and whether that really does indicate that Sutter’s only concern is to “enhance the health and wellbeing of people in the communities in which we serve through a not-for-profit commitment to compassion and excellence in health care services”. (Yes, that is their mission statement), especially when Sutter is happy to go to the mattresses to protect its way of doing business, despite in some cases the significant opposition of those communities to its unwillingness to get to a compromise. Still as they say that’s showbusiness, or whatever passes for it in the hardball world of American health care.

POLICY/INTERNATIONAL: Canadians somewhat grumpy about waiting, but not waiting that long

How bad are those terrible waiting lists in Canada? Well if you hang with the loonies at Fraser and PRI they average 10 months for a typical pregnancy and care for everyone else is delivered only by morticians. On the other hand, StatCanada (the official government body, and this one I believe is an independent bunch of civil servants rather than the US variety who’s reports are re-written by 23 yr old Republican staffers) is out with some real data.

What’s the conclusion? Canadians have to wait a little bit, and they’re pissed off, but only a little bit

Results for 2005 indicate that waiting for care remains the number one barrier for those having difficulties accessing care. Median waiting times for all specialized services have remained relatively stable between 2003 and 2005 at 3 to 4 weeks, depending on the type of care. There were some differences noted in selected provinces. Most individuals continue to report that they received care within 3 months.

Similarly, patients’ views about waiting for care have remained  fairly stable between 2003 and 2005. While 70 to 80 percent indicated that their waiting time was acceptable – there continues to be a proportion of Canadians who feel they are waiting an unacceptably long time for care.

And how bad did that wait make them feel? Well most didn’t seem to worry at all but some were pissed off.

The proportion of patients who felt that their waiting time was unacceptable was highest among those who waited for specialist visits (29%) and diagnostic tests (21%) and lowest among those who waited for non-emergency surgery (16%) (Chart 2 ; Table 9) even though individuals are more likely to wait longer (i.e. > 3 months) for non-emergency surgical care compared with other specialized services (Table 7).

And for some the wait involved real inconvenience and pain. But that was less than 20%.

Approximately 18% of individuals who visited a specialist indicated that waiting for the visit affected their life compared with 11% and 12% for non-emergency surgery and diagnostic tests respectively. (Table 10)

And most of that was stress related rather than actual pain, although there was some of that too with about half experiencing pain. (These are proportions of those who experienced adverse effects from waiting)

Most of those who were affected reported that they experienced worry, stress and anxiety during the waiting period: ranging from 49% among those whose lives were affected by waiting for non-emergency surgery to 71% among those affected by waiting for a diagnostic test. (Table 11) Between 38% and 51% of individuals waiting for specialist services experienced pain and close to 36% of those who were affected by waiting for non-emergency surgery indicated that they experienced difficulties with activities of daily living. Approximately 28% of those who were affected by waiting for a diagnostic test indicated that it resulted in worry, stress and anxiety for their friends and family.

But of course what this doesn’t tell you and what the myopic Canada bashers like Gratzer, the PRI crowd and the AMA guy all fail to point out is the other half of the equation.

Even if every single American never had to wait for any care, there is considerable the impact because of our system on the financial health of poorer Americans, and there is also consequent impact on those poorer Americans’ access to care services. Below is a chart from the 2004 Health Affairs report which shows that on a raft of issues, like not getting care from a doctor, skipping recommended care, and not filing prescriptions, the direct cost of care here impacts people just as much, if not more so. And of course some substantial number of Americans (whichever side of that argument you believe) are going bankrupt because of it.

Schoen_primarycarehltsystemperf_itlchart

Yes there are problems with the Canadian system. Yes there’s room for honest debate about it.

But take the veil of ignorance test John Tierney uses in his columns in the NY Times. If you didn’t know you were going to be born or become rich, which system would you rather be in given the realistic chance that you might end up poor? The one that will get to you if you’re prepared to wait a few months, or the one that you won’t ever get to because you can’t afford to, and that might bankrupt you if you really need it? I bet you nearly half Americans would change places if they knew.

TECH: Cerner stock heading up again?

Following almost a 30% fall from its heights late last year, Cerner’s stock seems to be on the move again. Its numbers had lower profits than the analysts guessed but higher revenue, and then they raised guidance for profits and revenue for Q3. After so many months of bad news the stock was up over 14% on Friday. It’s still 20% of its all time high, but the UK may start delivering (as in cash—as no one there’s got paid yet) and sales in the US still seem to be chunking away. Perhaps the people who piled in today know something?

HEALTH PLANS/POLICY: eHealthinsurance still skipping stats 101

eHealthinsurance is out with its annual report of what premiums are in different cities and they’re still comparing the price of rotten month old apples with sweet juicy, juicy mangoes. And amazingly enough they’re different. Basically some states ban underwriting and therefore have insurance which is more expensive. So what I said last year when they said that prices were going down still applies—

On further review there are more questions than answers. Who got insurance? Was this group more underwritten (i.e. healthier) than the previous year? And what benefits were they getting compared to last year?  And were there changes in deductibles, co-pays and out of pocket maximums?

Just saying that the premium went down is a bit like saying the average price of a BMW 3 series is less this year on average because more people are buying them without the fully loaded options. And if it’s really true that apples for apples the premiums went down why didn’t eHealthinsurance.com put that information in the report?

Although last year apparently “prices went down” and this year they didn’t say that, so it’s pretty damn likely that if you compared apples to apples of the stripped-down underwritten plans they’re looking at, prices went up.

Of course in practical terms this report is useless. I’m a great example in that I applied for two identical policies from different carriers on eHealthinsurance—both quotes about $100 a month for a $2500 deductible plan. But when the underwriting was done, one was still $100 a month and the other wouldn’t take me at all and suggested I went in the guaranteed issue pool at $400 a month for a $4000 deductible. So quoting price without knowing what the individuals concerned need to go through to get the insurance and therefore knowing the actual price is useless.

I do note one little thing in their report. They say that St Louis Missouri has the cheapest children’s insurance premiums ($29 a month) and yet there are 119,000 uninsured kids in Missouri. In other words very cheap—or even free given the numbers who don’t sign up for the SCHIP programs—isn’t cheap enough to get kids (and adults) insured. eHealthinsurance seems to be surprised about this.

The only logical conclusion is that health insurance needs to be compulsory and automatic (although not of course free to those who can afford it). And in fact even eHealthinsurance could do OK in such a system, although the logical ramifications of it would be horrendous for many of the plans they broker for.

TECH: Why we love HISTalk

Every so often Mr HIStalk reminds me why he’s the best blogger in Healthcare IT and possibly far beyond:

Kaiser Permanente’s Northwest region president resigns, seemingly because of computer problems that hurt earnings. "Kaiser launched a computer system to govern billing for its high-deductible health plan and for Medicare enrollees, but halted billing for both products in June 2005 due to a technical glitch." If you had all the money that various tentacles of Kaiser have spent on botched IT projects, you could be up there on the dais with Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, giving it away to the less fortunate, which would be just about everyone.

assetto corsa mods