The Health Care Blog – Page 204 – Everything you always wanted to know about the Health Care system. But were afraid to ask.

Above the Fold

WTF are Digital Therapeutics? | Digital Therapeutics Alliance Executive Director, Megan Coder

Sep 24, 2019

By JESSICA DaMASSA, WTF HEALTH

Digital therapeutics has exploded as the new hot buzzword in digital health. But how are digital therapeutics different from digital health applications, applied health signals, or m-health technologies? The Digital Therapeutics Alliance was formed to answer that exact question. DTA Executive Director Megan Coder sets the record straight, hint: it involves software algorithms.

Filmed at JP Morgan Healthcare in San Francisco, CA, January 2019.

Jessica DaMassa is the host of the WTF Health show & stars in Health in 2 Point 00 with Matthew Holt.

Get a glimpse of the future of healthcare by meeting the people who are going to change it. Find more WTF Health interviews here or check out www.wtf.health.

How Are Hospitals Supposed to Reduce Readmissions? | Part I

Sep 24, 2019• 4

By KIP SULLIVAN

The notion that hospital readmission rates are a “quality” measure reached the status of conventional wisdom by the late 2000s. In their 2007 and 2008 reports to Congress, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) recommended that Congress authorize a program that would punish hospitals for “excess readmissions” of Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) enrollees. In 2010, Congress accepted MedPAC’s recommendation and, in Section 3025 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) (p. 328), ordered the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to start the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP). Section 3025 instructed CMS to target heart failure (HF) and other diseases MedPAC listed in their 2007 report. [1] State Medicaid programs and the insurance industry followed suit.

Today, twelve years after MedPAC recommended the HRRP and seven years after CMS implemented it, it is still not clear how hospitals are supposed to reduce the readmissions targeted by the HRRP, which are all unplanned readmissions that follow discharges within 30 days of patients diagnosed with HF and five other conditions. It is not even clear that hospitals have reduced return visits to hospitals within 30 days of discharge. The ten highly respected organizations that participated in CMS’s first “accountable care organization” (ACO) demonstration, the Physician Group Practice (PGP) Demonstration (which ran from 2005 to 2010), were unable to reduce readmissions (see Table 9.3 p. 147 of the final evaluation) The research consistently shows, however, that at some point in the 2000s many hospitals began to cut 30-day readmissions of Medicare FFS patients. But research also suggests that this decline in readmissions was achieved in part by diverting patients to emergency rooms and observation units, and that the rising rate of ER visits and observation stays may be putting sicker patients at risk [2] Responses like this to incentives imposed by regulators, employers, etc. are often called “unintended consequences” and “gaming.”

To determine whether hospitals are gaming the HRRP, it would help to know, first of all, whether it’s possible for hospitals to reduce readmissions, as the HRRP defines them, without gaming. If there are few or no proven methods of reducing readmissions by improving quality of care (as opposed to gaming), it is reasonable to assume the HRRP has induced gaming. If, on the other hand, (a) proven interventions exist that reduce readmissions as the HRRP defines them, and (b) those interventions cost less than, or no more than, the savings hospitals would reap from the intervention (in the form of avoided penalties or shared savings), then we should expect much less gaming. (As long as risk-adjustment of readmission rates remains crude, we cannot expect gaming to disappear completely even if both conditions are met.)

Announcing GuideWell’s Caring for Caregivers Challenge

Sep 23, 2019

Consumerism is the answer to health care? Maybe not

Sep 21, 2019• 4

By MATTHEW HOLT

After 3 days at the Health 2.0 conference, everyone is agreed with Jane Sarasohn-Kahn that more consumer choice and better transparency and an “Amazon like shopping experience” would improve health care. In fact in her wonderful book, HealthConsuming, Jane talks a lot about the dark side of putting this much pressure on consumers, but I just had an experience that revealed what might go wrong. Bear with me, this does get back to health care…

The short answer is that BestBuy‘s home appliance service delivery and fulfillment seriously sucks. It has gone off the rails in a massively bad way. You’d think they’d have a multi-platform CRM that worked but it’s a disaster

The story. The washer in an apartment I used to live in but now rent out broke after 9 years–fair enough. And I spent a long time on a customer IM chat with Best Buy figuring out if there was an available washer that would stack under the still working dryer (which was stacked on top of it). But the answer was no.

So in the same IM chat the Best Buy agent suggests a replacement washer and dryer, and all the stuff required to put it in, and added installation and delivery. And he gets me a page where I can fill in my details, credit card and buy it all, then return to the chat to set a delivery date. Pretty snazzy BUT apparently the agent forgot to add removing the old ones to the order (even though most of the conversation was about the old ones!) Remember that for later…

Health in 2 Point 00, Episode 95 | Health 2.0 Wrap-Up Edition

Sep 20, 2019

Jess and I are at Health 2.0 for Episode 95 of Health in 2 Point 00! To wrap up the conference, Jess and I talk about Jonathan Bush’s reappearance in health care on the stage at Health 2.0, with Firefly Health, with echoes of this direction in primary care by Tony Miller on the insurance panel. We talk about all the winners at Health 2.0, including the RWJF Challenge winners, Ooney with Prehab Pal and Social AI Impact Lab, and Omny who won Launch. My favorites from the conference were Indu Subaiya’s Unacceptables panel with two amazing speakers, Melissa Hanna, CEO of Mahmee & Joia Crear Perry, Founder and President of the National Birth Equity Collaborative. Catch highlights from Jess’s panel on social movements in health care as well! —Matthew Holt

Health 2.0: Why I’m (Freaking) Excited…and a (Bit) Concerned

Sep 20, 2019

By DAVE LEVIN, MD

The 2019 Health 2.0 conference just wrapped up after several days of compelling presentations, panels, and networking. As in the past, attendees were a cross section of the industry: providers, payers, health IT (HIT) companies, investors, and others who are passionate about innovation in healthcare.

Tech-enabled Services

One of the more refreshing themes of the conference was an emphasis on how health IT can enable the delivery of services. This is a welcome perspective as too often organizations believe that simply deploying technology will solve their problems. In my 30+ years in healthcare, I’ve never seen that work. What does work is careful attention to the iron triad of people, process, and technology. Neglect one of these and you will fall short of your goals. Framing opportunities as services that are enabled and enhanced by technology helps us avoid the common pitfall of believing “Tech = Solution” and forces us to account for process and people.

Provider Burn-out and Health IT

Several sessions focused on the impact technology is having on end-users, especially clinicians. One session featured a “reverse-pitch” where practicing physicians “pitched” to health IT experts on the challenges they face, especially with EHRs, and what they need in order to do their job and have a life. This was summed up elegantly by a physician participant as, “Please make all the stupid sh*t stop!” There’s increasing evidence that the deployment of EHRs is a major factor for clinician burnout and the impassioned pleas of the attendees resonated throughout the conference.

Other sessions explored how to we might address these problems with improvements in user-interface design, workflow, and interoperability. Demonstrations of advanced technologies like voice-driven interfaces, artificial intelligence, enhanced communications, and smart devices show where we are headed and hold out the promise of a more efficient and pleasing HIT for providers and patients.

We Can Stop America’s Surge in Opioid-Dependent Babies

Sep 18, 2019

By STUART H. SMITH

Imagine a massive public health crisis in the United States that affects tens of thousands of people. Now imagine that the government had a simple tool at its disposal that could prevent this kind of physical and psychological trauma. You might think that I’m writing about America’s deadly outbreak of gun violence, which has made headlines this summer from Dayton to El Paso.

But actually I’m talking about a different crisis that affects even more people – all of them children — and which could be sharply reduced with one simple step that lacks the bitter political animus of the gun debate. The issue at hand involves babies born to mothers who used opioids during pregnancy – babies who tend to develop a condition called Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome, or NAS.

Experts say that state and federal governments have grossly underestimated the number of NAS babies currently born in the United States, as the addiction crisis triggered by Big Pharma’s greed in pushing painkillers refuses to fade. They say an accurate accounting would find a minimum of 250,000 children — and possibly two or three times that every year born with NAS. These kids will face chronic symptoms such as trembling and seizures, gastrointestinal problems, and an inability to sleep. Their numbers are more than eight times higher than the last official estimate from the government.

For more than a year now, I’ve been working with a team of attorneyscalled the Opioid Justice Team who are fighting for any settlement of the massive court fight pitting more than 2,000 localities against Big Pharma to include a medical monitoring fund for the estimated hundreds of thousands of kids born with NAS syndrome. But our team has also been pushing for radical measures that would prevent many of these unfortunate cases.

Taking on Facebook for Health Data Privacy: Fred Trotter, CareSet Systems

Sep 18, 2019

By JESSICA DaMASSA, WTF HEALTH

While patients can often find comfort, compassion, and support in Facebook Groups dedicated to their health conditions, they don’t realize that their identity, location, and email addresses can be found quite easily by other members of their closed group — some of whom may not have well-meaning purposes for that information. Called a Strict Inclusion Closed Group Reverse Lookup (SICGRL) attack, this is a privacy violation of unprecedented magnitude.

Fred Trotter is one of the leaders of a group of activists co-led by Andrea Downing and David Harlow that is taking on Facebook to correct this health data privacy violation.

While this interview was filmed at Health Datapalooza in the Spring of this year, Fred has just published an update that details how Facebook continues to ignore the issue and remains unwilling to collaborate on a solution.

Catch up on the background behind this data privacy issue — currently, one of the most important opportunities we as healthcare innovators have to learn about what NOT to do when it comes to user privacy and sensitive data.

I Have a Strong Relationship with my Bank but I Almost Never Go There. How Could this Translate to Primary Care?

Sep 17, 2019

By HANS DUVEFELT, MD

Imagine if your bank handled all your online transactions for free but charged you only when you visited your local branch – and then kept pestering you to come in, pay money and chat with them every three months or at least once a year if you wanted to keep your accounts active.

Of course that’s not how banks operate. There are small ongoing charges (or margins off the interest they pay you) for keeping your money and for making it possible to do almost everything from your iPhone these days. Yes, there may be additional charges for things that can’t be done without the bank’s personalized assistance, but those things happen at your request, not by the bank’s insistence.

Compare that with primary care. The bulk of our income is “patient revenue”, what patients and their insurance companies pay us for services we provide “face to face”. We may also have grants if we are Federally Qualified Health Centers, mostly meant to cover sliding fee discounts and what we call “enabling services” – care coordination, loosely speaking.

Only a small fraction of our income comes from meeting quality or compliance “targets”, and those monies only come to us after we have reached those goals – they don’t help us create the needed infrastructure to get there.

Then look at how medical providers are scheduled and paid. We all have productivity targets, RVUs (Relative Value Units – number and complexity of visits combined) if our employer is paid that way and usually just straight visit counts in FQHCs (because all visits are reimbursed at the same rate there). Sometimes we have quality bonuses or incentives, which truthfully may be the combined result of both our own AND other staff members’ efforts.