The Health Care Blog – Page 673 – Everything you always wanted to know about the Health Care system. But were afraid to ask.

Above the Fold

How Doctors Are Trapped, Part II

Jan 26, 2012• 13

By JOHN GOODMAN

Of all the people in the health care system, none is more central than the physician. Fundamental reform that lowers costs, raises quality and improves access to care is almost inconceivable without physicians leading and directing the changes. Yet of all the actors in modern health care, none are more trapped than our nation’s doctors. Let’s consider just a few of the ways your doctor is constrained, unlike any other professional you deal with.

No Telephone. Sometime in the early part of the last century, all the other professionals in our society — lawyers, accountants, architects, engineers, etc. — discovered the telephone. It’s a handy device. Ideal for communicating with clients. Yet even today I find that I can rarely talk to a doctor by phone. Why is that?

The short answer is: Medicare doesn’t pay for telephone consultations. Medicare has a list of about 7,500 tasks it pays physicians to perform. And talking by phone isn’t on the list — at least in a way that makes it practical. Private insurance tends to pay the way Medicare pays. So do most employers.

At a time when doctors feel like they are being squeezed on their fees from every direction by third-party payers, most become very focused on which activities are billable and which are not. And most are going to try to minimize their non-billable time.Continue reading…

Listen to What Innovators Don’t Talk About

Jan 26, 2012• 6

By Michael Schrage

While working away on my laptop at a hotel breakfast, I couldn’t help but overhear the four gentlemen poring over an iPad two tables way. Their intense discussion revolved around rolling out their high-tech prototypes in a medical care complex. Since I’ve written about prototypes and prototyping, I couldn’t help but eavesdrop.

Forgive me.

The foursome represented a mix of medical care complex personnel and what was clearly an entrepreneurial innovator with a potentially high-impact idea. I’ll skip the technical details, but this was clearly a sophisticated group who were both smart and ambitious. The prototypes were their gateways to success. Their debates included whether it made more sense to field one or two more “finished” prototypes or whether they could get more information more quickly by fielding “roughs.” Were “staggered roll-outs” more cost-effective than “staggered builds”? They talked about the need to be able to “patch” quickly and whether their prototypes should optimize particular subsystems or overall system performance. They argued timelines and sequencing for test.

These questions are classic and it’s always fascinating to hear how — and what — decides them. Getting great value and insight from prototypes and pilots is more an art and craft than a science. Successful tech prototyping in health care contexts is particularly demanding.

That’s why the more passionately they spoke, the more nervous I got. Something was missing. Whenever innovators gather, I always listen for what’s not discussed. In almost 50 minutes of detailed discussion (yes, I am that kind of eavesdropper), I heard not a single mention, reference or allusion to the challenge of training the people onsite on how best to use or learn from the prototype. Details of prototype design and roll out were discussed as if the medical care personnel were irrelevant to the process. It reeked of “over the wall” technology transfer. OMG.

Our Cancer Journey – Week 6

Jan 26, 2012• 2

By John Halamka, MD

We’re halfway through the most challenging cycles of chemotherapy, Kathy has lost her hair, and her fatigue is getting worse but her mood is still very positive.

On Friday January 20th, Kathy received Cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan) 1200 mg, Doxorubicin (Adriamycin) 120 mg and her pre-chemotherapy supportive medications Fosaprepitant 150 mg, Dexamethasone 12 mg and Ondansetron 8 mg.

She tolerated it well.

Her Complete Blood Count shows that her Granulocyte Count has dropped from 6690 to 3610 since the chemotherapy affects her fast multiplying white cells as a side effect of targeting the cancer. Her hematocrit has fallen from 42 to 32. She tires more easily but her appetite is good. Small frequent meals enable her to overcome any GI symptoms.

We’ve been told that the Adriamycin/Cytoxan is the most difficult chemotherapy. Only two more cycles to go.

The photograph above shows Kathy and me at age 21 in our Stanford graduation photo. She’s always had long, luxuriant hair, even a waist length braid at one point.

On January 21st, her hair began falling out in clumps. It was not exactly painful, but felt very odd, as if her hair had not been washed in months and just did not lie on her scalp properly. In consultation with her cancer survivor friends, she decided to shave it off. Her hairdresser gave her a “GI Jane” cut realizing that the small hairs left will fall out soon, but in a more manageable and comfortable way. I seriously considered shaving my head in solidarity, but she asked me not to.

DSM-5: You’re Still Autistic. You’re Just Weird. You We’re Not Sure About. Call Us Tomorrow.

Jan 26, 2012• 95

By Anne Dachel

Reports of autism cases per 1,000 children grew dramatically in the US from 1996 to 2007. Source: Wikipedia.

It’s hard to imagine more chaos in the world of autism than what we see happening right now. Autism is more and more in the public spotlight. The numbers are huge and no one can explain them. Since 2009 we’ve been told that one percent of children have autism. Among boys alone, it’s almost two percent. Mainstream medicine can’t explain the stunning increase in a once rare disorder. For years health officials gave doctors credit for all the autism everywhere. They said it was the result of “greater awareness” and “better diagnosing.” Children who were mislabeled as something else were now correctly called autistic. The criteria for diagnosing autism was laid out in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and a child with symptoms would be placed somewhere on the autism spectrum, as it came to be known. This included very high functioning autism and Asperger’s syndrome all the way over to the other end of the spectrum to those with severe intellectual impairment and all the signs of classic autism.Continue reading…

Care Innovations Summit Live Blog

Jan 26, 2012• 2

By Connie Chen and Laura Montini

Wrapping up the CI Summit with a Health Affairs Chat

By Laura Montini

The Care Innovations Summit wrapped up with a fireside chat, and moderator Susan Dentzer observed that there hadn’t been much discussion about the Medicaid population throughout the day, even though the summit was co-hosted by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Dentzer asked Deputy Administrator Director of CMS Cindy Mann how innovation could play into the care of the Medicaid population.

Mann mentioned three major ways: experimentation (with payment rules and service delivery), peer to peer learning and data. Though she mentioned data last, she emphasized it the most.

“We need to be much more intentional about getting the data that we need to see what’s working, what’s not working,” Mann said.

Occupational Health In the Electronic Age

Jan 25, 2012• 1

By Sanjay Bansu, MD

When we say our products are made “in China”, what we really should say it that they’re made in Shenzhen–a city in Guangdong Province, just north of Hong Kong. Shenzhen is one of China’s “special economic zones” (SEZs)–754 square miles of industrial space in which foreign corporations are permitted unique rules and regulations, permitting them to run high-throughput factories that currently use 3.3 million people to make products for the Western consumer market. This is where Xboxes and cell phones come from, produced by Chinese contractors like Foxconn (which makes the new iPhone). There is an unusually high rate of suicide in Shenzhen, and in Foxconn factories in particular; behind these suicides are a broader set of public health issues among electronic workers–from those who make the new gadgets, to those who dismantle them after we throw them away.

The Rise of the Programmable Self

Jan 24, 2012

By Fred Trotter

Programmable self is a riff on the Quantified Self (QS). It is a simple concept:

Quantify what you want to change about yourself + motivational hacks = personal change success.

There are several potential “motivation hacks” that people regularly employ. The simplest of these is peer pressure. You could tell all of your co-workers every morning whether you kept your diet last night, for instance. Lots of research has shown that sort of thing is an effective motivator for change. Of course, you can make peer pressure digital by doing the same thing on Facebook/Twitter/Google+/whatever. Peer pressure has two components: shame and praise. It’s motivating to avoid shame and to get praise. Do it because of a tweet and viola, you have digital peer pressure motivation.

Several books have recently popularized using money, in one form or another, as a motivational tool. There is some evidence, for instance, that people feel worse about losing $10 than they feel good about earning $10. This is called loss aversion, and it can easily be turned into a motivational hack. Having trouble finishing that book? Give 10 envelopes with $100 each to your best friend. Instruct them to mail the envelopes to your favorite (or most hated) charity for each month that you do not finish a chapter. Essentially, you’ve made your friend a “referee” of your motivational hack.

Health 2.0 News

Jan 23, 2012• 2

Market for cloud-based storage of radiology images to reach $5.4B in 2017, 70% of health care organizations planning on health information exchange participation after half million personal health data downloads, Blue Button expands to most federal health care plans | Your weekly health tech news now on the Health 2.0 News Blog.

What Does Failure Mean?

Jan 23, 2012• 2

By Aaron Carroll, MD

I’ve seen a number of responses to the news that the Medicare demonstration projects were not successful. Some have claimed that they were only demonstration projects, and the fact that some succeeded means we should look into those further. Others asserted that this once again proves that the government is incapable of making the health care system better.

As to the first point, it’s hard to get excited about this. By chance alone, a couple of programs were likely to save money. Four out of 34 reducing hospitalizations (when the best of them might have had inadequate data)? Hardly something to get excited about. Remember that two out of the 34 actually saw increased hospitalizations, too. I think it’s totally reasonable to think hard before just assuming there was something special about those four programs, and throwing more money at them.

But I think the latter point, made by Peter Suderman, is a bit of an over-reach as well. It’s important to remember that these were attempts by private hospitals and private physicians to change the way they care for patients. Granted, government was paying the insurance bills through Medicare, but this would have looked awfully similar if a private company had footed the bill. And, yes, private insurance companies have tried to use care coordination and disease management to reduce costs as well.

A Promise Made to Be Broken

Jan 23, 2012• 8

By David Dranove

In last week’s Wall Street Journal, Princeton economist Alan Blinder exposes four myths about the federal deficit. He saves the most important myth for last. After noting that the long term deficit problem does not cut across all areas of spending, he observes that the problem is almost entirely rooted in the need to fund Medicare and Medicaid. If we base future spending projections on past trends, then Blinder is absolutely correct. Spending growth on Medicare and Medicaid nearly always outstrips the growth in tax revenues. The main contributors to spending growth – demographics, labor costs, and, especially, technology – are likely to keep this trend alive indefinitely. Blinder challenges us to focus the debate about the deficit on the key facts, which essentially means that we should focus on Medicare and Medicaid spending. Let me take up his challenge.

Let’s start with the obvious debating points. There is a lot of fat in both programs. CMS just acknowledged that as much as 10 percent of spending in Medicare and Medicaid is “improper.” This does not include spending on defensive medicine, unnecessary services demanded by fully insured patients, unwarranted variations in practice, and all the other usual suspects. Nor does it reckon with all the waste due to poor health behaviors, although eventually the grim reaper will have his say and dying is usually very costly no matter how well you have pampered your body along the way.