Categories

Above the Fold

Design for America–I declare the winner

I met with Clay Johnson from Sunlight Labs yesterday and we talked about hackathons for health (much more to come on that) and the current Sunlight Foundation prize contest called Design for America. There are six individual prizes with one focused on visualizing health data, using data provided from the Community Health Data Initiative started by Todd Park, CTO of HHS, as part of his “data liberacion” campaign.

The contest closed yesterday, but I’m pretty sure I know who the crowd favorite is going to be! (Hat-tip to Regina Holliday's partner in crime Ted Eytan from whom I pinched this video).

HCAHPS Visualization from Eidolon Films on Vimeo.

You can meet Regina as she'll be on a couple of panels at Health 2.0 Goes to Washington.

DrChrono shows their iPad chops

The guys from DrChrono have come a long way since we saw them first just last summer. They have a SaaS based practice management system, but at Health 2.0 at the Doctor’s Office they introduced an iPad-based tool for physicians. Here’s a quick video I took of them last month, with a live fake demo of what it might look like in a real encounter between a real doctor, and a fake patient.

Y’all Come Back Now, Ya Hear?

Picture 9My recent post on the patient who thought I wasn’t worth paying caused a lot of discussion.  Most of it focused on the financial stresses of a patient in our system – something I am all too well aware of.  But some commenters (one in particular) felt that I was being excessive in my requirements for the patient.

While I think the person was way off-base in their comments, it did get me thinking about a difficult topic: how much is too much?  How often does a person need to come back, and when does bringing people back for frequent follow-up become excessive?  Some psychiatrists bring patients back every month for prescription refills, even patients who are stable.  I’ve had patients complain about physical therapists and even chiropractors who bring them back for multiple visits, incurring multiple charges to the patient.  These may all have merit (I certainly understand the psychiatrist’s perspective), but in each case I have had patients suggest that the clinicians were bringing them back to make more money.

The more I thought about this, the more I realized that there is definitely cause for concern that docs may bring people back to ensure a full schedule.  Since my schedule is full and my income is adequate, I have no need or desire to generate more business than I already have.  I have practiced for fifteen years, so I seldom have a slow day.  This makes the temptation to bring people in these grey areas much lower.  But there certainly are times when people complain about us “forcing” them to come in to be seen.  These areas include:

  • Obvious symptoms of a urinary tract infection
  • Sinus symptoms
  • Allergy symptoms requiring prescription medications
  • Acne

Our policy is that we are unwilling to call in antibiotics unless there is a sore throat  and fever associated with exposure to a documented case of strep in the house (seen in our office).  That is our policy, but reality says that the policy gets bent on a regular basis.  If I know a woman has frequent UTI’s, I sometimes will call in a prescription.  Overall, however, we stick by these rules because we are taking the risk of prescribing a medication, and have often found unexpected findings (such as high blood pressure or wheezing) in cases that sound straightforward.

But how often should a diabetic get seen?  I go a maximum of 6 months for the stable type-2 diabetic, although I usually do every 3 or 4 months.  What about the person with hypertension?  I like to see them every 6 months, but I do sometimes flex to 12 months for the particularly stable patient.  Do I fault people who are more rigid with their guidelines?  Not at all.  Even other physicians within my own practice are more rigid than I am on seeing patients.  I have the biggest practice, though, and so am trying to get everyone seen.

When copays were only $10 or $20, people didn’t argue much with being brought in more frequently.  Now that deductibles and copays are high, the frequency of complaints is much greater.  Ideally, the decision would have nothing to do with the charge, but would be based on what was medically right.  But medical rightness is a very subjective thing, and many doctors will have different standards.  When I get patients from other practices, they often have to adjust to our more rigid rules.  Sometimes they complain, and occasionally they leave to find a doctor who doesn’t force them to come in.

I have enough patients now that I don’t worry about such things.  I practice in a way that I think is best for my patients and have enough business that I don’t have to generate my own business.

Still, would it be better if primary care was cheaper?  I am not sure.  A bad consequence of the $10 copay days is that patients began to think we were worth only $10.  The disconnect of people from the true cost of care made them much more likely to be high-utilizers.  In an ideal world, I would only be driven to see patients based on their medical needs, and patients would trust that this was the case.  But we don’t live in an ideal world.

We don’t even live in a mediocre world.  That means that the argument and misunderstanding will rage on until…well…until the politicians can fix healthcare.

Rob Lamberts, MD, is a primary care physician practicing somewhere in the southeastern United States. He blogs regularly at Musings of a Distractible Mind, where this post first appeared. For some strange reason, he is often stopped by strangers on the street who mistake him for former Atlanta Braves star John Smoltz and ask “Hey, are you John Smoltz?” He is not John Smoltz. He is not a former major league baseball player.  He is a primary care physician.

COMMENTOLOGY: Only Two of Millions Who Need Health care

089232-3d-transparent-glass-icon-signs-z-roadsign90 The purpose of this letter is to
produce another example of the health care crisis facing millions of
hardworking Americans.  Both my wife and I are facing medical and
financial hardship due to the pending lack of health insurance coupled
with being diagnosed with two serious illnesses.

My wife and I are 57 and 58 years old
respectively. Throughout our adult lives, we have carried and paid for
health insurance through our jobs for both ourselves as well as our
minor children. We have never gone a single day without health
insurance. In 2003, my wife accepted a promotion resulting in a move
out of state from Minnesota. Five months after moving I was diagnosed
with throat cancer; fortunately I am doing well. In December of 2008,
my wife’s position was eliminated leaving her unemployed. She worked
continuously for this company for 28 1/2 years at the time of her
termination.

Continue reading…

Will the NFIB please go away…..

By

Let’s be honest–I absolutely abhor the so-called National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB). It’s not a representative business group. In 2004 95% of their members said they voted for Bush, compared to 53% of all small business owners. (Remember that election was 50–50) Nonetheless, the first line of the recent NY Times article on NFIB joining the Republican Attorneys-General lawsuit on the individual mandate is that they’re trying to depoliticize the “largely Republican assault” on the new health care law. Ha, bloody ha.

But I’m not grumpy that the NFIB is joining this pointless lawsuit. I’m grumpy that they’re so blatantly going against the interest of small businesses. And yes I run one! So to remind you how stupid the NFIB is (in global not political terms) I’ve reprinted an article I wrote on Spot-on back in 2006–-and sadly nothing has changed. (The great thing about being a relatively veteran blogger is that I can really recycle material!)

* * *

Small Business Shock-troops That Can’t Do Basic Math

Long ago, back in 1994 when Democrats walked freely in Washington, an outfit called the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) took a large role in overturning the Clinton health care plan and, consequently, a supporting role in the Republican Congressional victory later that year. And in health care policy, as they say in the movies: They’re baaaaaack.

Now, The NFIB is a narrow-(minded) interest group like any other; typical of any Washington trade association. But in health care it’s policy involves cutting off its nose to spite its own face and doing so with a rather dull knife.

Continue reading…

Is Your Organization Too Flat?

6a00d8341c909d53ef0120a919772c970b-320wiMy friends and colleagues Jeff Stamps and Jessica Lipnack have made an art and science of studying complex organizations. Their particular focus is on how communication within and across networks of relationships either enhances or degrades a company’s ability to succeed. I recently looked at some draft work they have in progress, based on earlier work they have done. I think it is timely to share it with you (with their permission).

Jeff and Jessica raise provocative and timely questions for those of us implementing the Lean philosophy in complex hospital settings, or even for those who just are trying to manage in these kind of institutions.
Continue reading…

Americans and Their Medical Machines

Professor Brainstawm

“- The real problem is not whether machines think, but whether men do.”  — B. F. Skinner

“If you are designing a machine, you had better think of everything, because a machine cannot think for itself.”

—  Edgeware: Insights from Complexity Science for Health Care Leaders, 1998

Obsession with medical technologies and machines characterizes American’s cultural expectations. We tend to think of our bodies as perpetual motion machines, to be preserved in perpetuity. If the face of our machines sag, we lift its faces up. If our pipes clog, we roto rooter them out or stent them. If impurities gum up our machinery, we filter them out. If our joints give out or lock up, we replace them. If we want to remove something in the machine’s interior, we take it out through a laparoscope. If the fuel or metabolic mix is wrong, we alter the mix or correct the metabolic defect with drugs If anything else goes wrong, we diagnose it and rearrange it electronically.

We are reluctant to let nature take its course. We rely on half-way technologies and machines to do the job of keeping us looking young, active, functioning , and alive. This fixation on machines and technologies is the big reason American health care is 50% more costly than that of other nations. With rapid access to machines and our reliance on them, we deliver a different product than other countries – more technologies and more machines, faster and more often. Our belief system is : Give a specialist a machine, and he or she will do the job, and we or the government will pay for it.

Continue reading…

Reflections from “Health 2.0 in the Doctor’s Office”

Will Sellman has commented on a couple of panels at Health 2.0 and been very prescient. Now he’s spent a bit of time to pen his reflections on what happened in Health 2.0 in the Doctor’s Office, which was held late last month in Florida. Will is at Alameda Family Physicians and is Director of Performance Improvement at Affinity Medical Group

  • Why is there innovation in this sphere?
  • What problems are we really trying to solve, and how?
  • Is there any party missing from the discussion?

These are but three of a series of questions I asked myself during and after the enlightening, and perhaps prescient, Health 2.0 conference that took place last weekend in Jacksonville, Florida. But these particular questions are inextricable from one another when applied to the overarching goal of the movement afoot that Health 2.0 supports. I endeavor here to not only answer these questions, but to communicate their relevance to those striving to maximize a fluid patient experience through technology.

While Health 2.0 is, in my mind, a nexus of technology utilization and process revision with respect to health care, it is also a phenomenon that must be considered within the context of the healthcare industry as a whole if it is to be usefully deployed.

Continue reading…

Nancy Turett on Health Engagement

One of the more interesting surveys about health care in recent years has been the Edelman Health Engagement Barometer (HEB) first done in 2008 when I was tangentially involved—I wasn’t involved this year). Recently Edelman the global communications giant has redone the survey and it really pushed the boat out this year—doing the survey in 11 countries with a big oversample in the US.

A week or so ago I grabbed a few minutes with Nancy Turett who runs Edelman’s global health practice to get the overview of the new Health Engagement Barometer.

You can also hear more about all of this on Tuesday May 25 at 11 am EST when Nancy and a gang including the ever wonderful Jane Sarasohn-Kahn will be talking more about the HEB. You can get an invite to that by emailing hi***********@*****an.com

Are older patients ready for the personal healthcare revolution?

Our friend Michael Yuan at Ringful is working with some students in the business honors program at the University of Texas at Austin. They write:

As part of our class project, we are conducting a survey to understand how individuals and corporations are adopting new personal healthcare technologies. We need your help!

If you are managing a wellness or disease management program for an employer or insurer or hospital, we’d love to hear from you. Our goal is to survey members in your wellness / health plan on their perceptions of those potentially disruptive healthcare technologies. After the survey, we will share with you the aggregated results from your own employee/member population.

If you are able to help, please take 5 minutes to fill out a questionnaire. At the end of the questionnaire, we will ask for your email address. We will then get in touch via email and send you the link for your employees/members to fill out the consumer survey. Thank you so much!

 

assetto corsa mods