US Healthcare vs UK N.H.S.

 

Recent reports from the UK indicate changes that will decentralize control from it's present organization and distribute accountability and decision making authority to physicians.

This story represents when individuals have little or no control over their working environment.

 

Oxford hospital child heart ops 'should stay suspended'

The report cleared consultant Caner Salih of any wrongdoing

Child heart surgery should remain suspended at Oxford's John Radcliffe Hospital where four babies died until improvements are made, a report says.

Surgery was suspended when four children died between last December and February, after being operated on by consultant surgeon Caner Salih.

The report found the deaths were not due to errors of judgement but Mr Salih was not given appropriate supervision.

Mr Salih was cleared of any wrongdoing by the report.

The independent report, commissioned by the South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA), found there were problems in Mr Salih's induction and mentoring when he began work at the hospital.

All four deaths occurred shortly after his appointment.

He subsequently decided to stop operating and told the trust of his concerns, including a lack of support.

The SHA's chairman Dr Geoffrey Harris has apologised to the families of the babies who died.

"We offer our sincere condolences and we apologise that, in the cases, the standards of care were not what was expected," he said.

Analysis

Continue reading the main story

Fergus Walsh, BBC Medical Correspondent

At first glance this report has worrying echoes of the Bristol inquiry a decade ago.

Both dealt with the deaths of babies following heart surgery.

Both listed failings in the management of surgery and the poor culture of reporting concerns.

But the Bristol inquiry was on an altogether bigger scale and dealt with failures stretching over a decade during which time 29 babies died.

Doctors were struck off and a radical overhaul of paediatric heart surgery ordered.

In this case it was the surgeon who performed the operations who raised concerns and there is no suggestion that he performed poorly.

Action was taken within three months of the first death whereas at Bristol the high death rate continued for years.

Aida Lo, whose daughter Nathalie was one of the four babies who died, told BBC News: "It makes me angry because if they were not ready to do the operation they should have waited to do it.

"It's about human life.

"I can't believe it. It makes me sad. I have been crying, it has been very painful."

Mr Salih complained about the age of equipment and poor working practices at the paediatric care unit, asking for operations to cease, the report panel found.

The report does not criticise his care, saying "all the cases were complex and surgery was high risk".

It found that arrangements for clinical management were "less than adequate".

"In Mr Salih's four cases, we found no evidence of poor surgical practice, but that he would have benefited from help or mentoring by a more experienced surgeon; and that it was an error of judgment for him to undertake the fourth case," the report found.

It recommended an overhaul of the way the hospital deals with serious incidents, better clinical and managerial leadership and to develop ways to identify adverse trends in surgical outcomes earlier.

The hospital's children's heart unit is the smallest in England, carrying out just 120 or so operations a year.

The report also recommended that there needed to be an adequate caseload so surgeons "can maintain their expertise", by a mix of expanding the trust's service and forging links with another centre.

Sir Jonathan Michael, chief executive of the Oxford Radcliffe Hospitals NHS Trust, which runs the hospital, said the hospital had improved its procedures since the deaths.

Continue reading the main story

Aida Lo, whose daughter Nathalie was one of the babies who died, said the report was "very painful"

• Mother's grief over heart death

But he added he did not believe child heart surgery should remain suspended, saying the unit had "a lot to offer the NHS".

In a statement, the trust said it understood the past few months had been "difficult for the families of the children whose deaths resulted in this investigation".

"Children's heart surgery has been carried out at Oxford since 1986, with good outcomes," it said.

It said a review of clinical governance and risk management had begun in April to "streamline our internal systems and reporting lines".

"We recognise that in such a large organisation, processes can become over-complex and we are working to address this issue and ensure that we adopt a more uniform approach across the whole trust in the future.

"We want to be clear that where there are things to learn from the report published today, we will develop plans to tackle those issues as a matter of urgency."

It has until 17 September to report back to the SHA with an action plan.

The Care Quality Commission, which independently regulates health and social care in England, said the hospital was being monitored and its quality and safety standards were to be reviewed.

Meanwhile a helpline has been set up by the hospital trust for patient inquiries: 01865 572900.

More on This Story

Related stories

• Mother's grief over heart death 29 JULY 2010, OXFORD
• Heart surgery unit under review 26 APRIL 2010, OXFORDSHIRE
• Children's heart surgeon leaves 05 MARCH 2010, OXFORDSHIRE
• Surgery halted after child deaths 04 MARCH 2010, OXFORDSHIRE
• Hospital suspends child heart surgery 03

Competition for Medi-Cal Patients

 

Although many physicians do not accept medi-cal as compared to private insurance, there is a trend toward accepting medi-cal patients.

Strange as it may seem, a recent analysis of the number of physicians accepting Medi-Cal is on the rise.

Physician Participation in Medi-Cal, 2008 (1.12Mb)

Physician Participation in Medi-Cal, 2001 (800k)

Physician Participation in Medi-Cal, 1996-1998 (402k)

Read more: http://www.chcf.org/publications/2010/07/physician-participation-in-medical#ixzz0v6FET6U4

 

Although these statistics seem to fly in the wrong direction, especially since physicians are so opposed to government intrusions into medical care there may be reasons this is occuring

1.The development of Managed Care Medi-Cal programs. This affords much easier billing and reimbursement guarrantees.

2. The shift from private small practices to larger medical groups, which afford more administrative support..

3. The real impact of decreased reimbursement by medicare and private carriers. 

4. The increasing number of patients who rely only on medi-cal for insurance. 

5. The increase in premiums for private insurance

6. The expansion of the CHIP program, and HealthyFamilys program.

Health Reform and the APPA will tilt the balance even further, if the states can even afford it. 

It Takes a Village.....

Recently I was sent an email regarding the development of "Healthy Howard".   No, it's not the "Truman Show".

 

Tech Firm, Howard County Partner to Help Uninsured

BETHESDA, MD (July 22) -- Howard County, Maryland, has enlisted local technology firm Healthcare Interactive to help manage its Healthy Howard program for uninsured residents.

"We're thrilled to count Healthcare Interactive among our partners in delivering critical healthcare services to Howard County residents who need them," said Liddy Garcia-Bunuel, Executive Director of Healthy Howard.

The program -- the first of its kind in the nation -- provides basic medical services at low cost to Howard County residents who cannot afford or obtain health insurance. For a small monthly fee, participants have access to primary care, discounted prescription drugs, emergency treatment, and inpatient hospital care, among other services. Concierge nurses and health coaches work with participants in their own homes and help them create personalized action plans for achieving their health goals.

Healthy Howard will serve as a model for the state-based co-ops and insurance exchanges that will soon be set up as a result of federal health reform legislation.

With Healthcare Interactive's innovative point-to-point (P2P) software, Healthy Howard administrators will be able to interact with beneficiaries as they receive care. The technology will also support the program's health coaching initiatives by connecting participants directly with healthcare professionals.

"It's critical that Healthy Howard's participants take steps to lead healthy lifestyles," said Dr. Peter Beilenson, Howard County Health Officer. "Healthcare Interactive's software will help us engage members directly and support their efforts to stay healthy."

"With Healthy Howard, we're working to build a model public health community right here in Howard County," said County Executive Ken Ulman. "Healthcare Interactive's technology will help us reach that goal."

"The Healthy Howard Plan is an exemplary way of expanding access to health care," said Henry Cha, President of Healthcare Interactive. "We're proud to help Howard County extend low-cost health services to those in need."

###

Howard County Executive Ken Ulman, Howard County Health Officer Dr. Peter Beilenson, Health Howard Executive Director Liddy Garcia-Bunuel, and Healthcare Interactive President Henry Cha are all available for interviews.

For more information or to set up an interview, please contact Melissa Garner at 202-471-4228 or melissa@keybridge.biz.  

About Healthy Howard

Healthy Howard Health Plan is a new program designed to connect Howard County residents to affordable health care services and help our community overcome barriers to healthy living. The Plan is not insurance, but offers basic medical and preventive care to eligible residents who would otherwise not be able to afford or obtain health insurance.

The Plan was created to address the Howard County administration’s goal of creating a model public health community. Even though the Health Department has been involved since its inception, the Plan will be administered through Healthy Howard, Inc., a non-profit organization.

About Healthcare Interactive

Healthcare Interactive is a software development company that has created a platform called Healthspace®, which is a development and integration platform for creating seamless healthcare applications. Healthspace has been used to create applications for employers, third-party administrators, PBMs, and disease management within both the private and federal industries.

A VERY NICE EXAMPLE OF PRIVATE-PUBLIC COLLABORATION

del.icio.us Tags: healthy howard,concierge,health care interactive

What tha !?

 

 

Seems like Don Berwick was preaching to the wrong choir several months ago when he addressed an audience in the U.K.

Today, The New York Times announced,

 

LONDON — Perhaps the only consistent thing about Britain’s socialized health care system is that it is in a perpetual state of flux, its structure constantly changing as governments search for the elusive formula that will deliver the best care for the cheapest price while costs and demand escalate.

 

The new British government’s plan to drastically reshape the socialized health care system would put local physicians like Dr. Marita Koumettou in north London in control of much of the national health budget.

Even as the new coalition government said it would make enormous cuts in the public sector, it initially promised to leave health care alone. But in one of its most surprising moves so far, it has done the opposite, proposing what would be the most radical reorganization of the National Health Service, as the system is called, since its inception in 1948.

Practical details of the plan are still sketchy. But its aim is clear: to shift control of England’s $160 billion annual health budget from a centralized bureaucracy to doctors at the local level. Under the plan, $100 billion to $125 billion a year would be meted out to general practitioners, who would use the money to buy services from hospitals and other health care providers.

The plan would also shrink the bureaucratic apparatus, in keeping with the government’s goal to effect $30 billion in “efficiency savings” in the health budget by 2014 and to reduce administrative costs by 45 percent. Tens of thousands of jobs would be lost because layers of bureaucracy would be abolished.

In a document, or white paper, outlining the plan, the government admitted that the changes would “cause significant disruption and loss of jobs.” But it said: “The current architecture of the health system has developed piecemeal, involves duplication and is unwieldy. Liberating the N.H.S., and putting power in the hands of patients and clinicians, means we will be able to effect a radical simplification, and remove layers of management.”

The health secretary, Andrew Lansley, also promised to put more power in the hands of patients. Currently, how and where patients are treated, and by whom, is largely determined by decisions made by 150 entities known as primary care trusts — all of which would be abolished under the plan, with some of those choices going to patients. It would also abolish many current government-set targets, like limits on how long patients have to wait for treatment.

The plan, with many elements that need legislative approval to be enacted, applies only to England; other parts of Britain have separate systems.

The government announced the proposals this month. Reactions to them range from pleased to highly skeptical.

Many critics say that the plans are far too ambitious, particularly in the short period of time allotted, and they doubt that general practitioners are the right people to decide how the health care budget should be spent. Currently, the 150 primary care trusts make most of those decisions. Under the proposals, general practitioners would band together in regional consortia to buy services from hospitals and other providers.

It is likely that many such groups would have to spend money to hire outside managers to manage their budgets and negotiate with the providers, thus canceling out some of the savings.

David Furness, head of strategic development at the Social Market Foundation, a study group, said that under the plan, every general practitioner in London would, in effect, be responsible for a $3.4 million budget.

“It’s like getting your waiter to manage a restaurant,” Mr. Furness said. “The government is saying that G.P.’s know what the patient wants, just the way a waiter knows what you want to eat. But a waiter isn’t necessarily any good at ordering stock, managing the premises, talking to the chef — why would they be? They’re waiters.”

But advocacy groups for general practitioners welcomed the proposals.

“One of the great attractions of this is that it will be able to focus on what local people need,” said Prof. Steve Field, chairman of the Royal College of General Practitioners, which represents about 40,000 of the 50,000 general practitioners in the country. “This is about clinicians taking responsibility for making these decisions.”

Dr. Richard Vautrey, deputy chairman of the general practitioner committee at the British Medical Association, said general practitioners had long felt there were “far too many bureaucratic hurdles to leap” in the system, impeding communication. “In many places, the communication between G.P.’s and consultants in hospitals has become fragmented and distant,” he said.

The plan would also require all National Health Service hospitals to become “foundation trusts,” enterprises that are independent of health service control and accountable to an independent regulator (some hospitals currently operate in this fashion). This would result in a further loss of jobs, health care unions say, and also open the door to further privatization of the service.

• Me?  I am moving to the U.K.

More Transparency Hospital Comparisons

HHS has released the latest comparison of hospital statistics website with searchable data on outpatient surgical infections, heart attack treatment success and more." Data released Wednesday "appeared to bolster that argument, at least for heart attack patients," which showed "a drop in the national 30-day mortality rate for heart attacks of 0.4 percent to 16.2 percent for the three fiscal years of 2006-09." Also, the new healthcare law will "likely" give the comparison data "even greater weight" because some of the information may be used to calculate hospitals' reimbursements after 2013. 

The Hospital Compare website was created through the efforts of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), an agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), along with the Hospital Quality Alliance (HQA). The HQA is a public-private collaboration established to promote reporting on hospital quality of care. The HQA consists of organizations that represent consumers, hospitals, doctors and nurses, employers, accrediting organizations, and Federal agencies. The information on this website can be used by any patients needing hospital care.

Patients searching for a hospital will now be able to compare how much they rely on medical imaging procedures, which can carry dangerous levels of radiation.

Information on the procedures has been added to HealthCare.gov, an online tool that lets users analyze and compare data on patient care from more than 4,700 hospitals across the country.

I examined the website and it appeared to be well designed with easy and intuitive interface, and depending on your choice it will display results in either graphic or numeric results.

This tool will give patients a means of analyzing a hospital of choice.  Whether these statistics are accurate, and/or biased by the particular demographics of patient responses, which could vary significantly depending on the patient's expectations of care. The statistics are based upon the percentage.  of patients who rate the hospital at 8 or above. This particular chart did not rate outcomes. 

There are two tabs at the header, one for consumers (patients) and another for professionals. 

The professional tab offers an outcome rating, based upon PQRI requirements, found at QUALITY NET

These numbers are more objective, not based upon subjective assessments by patients.

These tools represent part of   The plan for Open Government, the details of which can be read here.

I believe most patients will select the hospital at which  their doctor chooses to practice , or by convenience, perhaps limited by distance and socioeconomics.

I'd like to hear your comments..GML

 

del.icio.us Tags: HHS,PQRI,FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT,PATIENT SATISFACTION,HOSPITAL RATINGS,CMS,DHHS,HQA

The Gloves are Off

The gloves are off!!  I have always been a moderate politically and at times liberal in my thoughts about improving society with some radical ideas about poverty, homelessness and other important human issues.  Despite the fact we are the most affluent country in the world we see signs of 'slippage' in our respect from the rest of the world. We have always been the most generous country offering aid to other countries in times of crisis.  That is why I am particularly disturbed that our administration refused aid from other nations at the beginning of the crisis.  What was that all about? Was it our pride about needing, or asking for help? The Norwegians who have much experience in deep water drilling in a much harsher environment offered help immediately.  Who ever was responsible for refusing their assistance was more than negligent in ignoring their offer.  Perhaps this rose to the level of  the 'philosopher king' of our country. 

On another front, near and dear to most of us as physicians, Docs4PatientCare is on a new campaign to inform our patients the sheer 'chutzpah' of the administration regarding Don Berwick's appointment to Head of CMS.

After reading this post and watching the VIDEO, please comment and write your representative that you want Berwick's appointment rescinded  pending a thorough mandated confirmation hearing.

Docs4PatientCare's message warns of "Medical Dark Age"

SEARCH THE HEALTH TRAIN EXPRESS

 

You may notice a new SEARCH ENGINE WIDGET ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THIS BLOG. THIS IS A HEALTH TRAIN EXPRESS ONLY SEARCH ENGINE.

 

Doctor 2.0

The recent Health 2.0 conference in June of 2010 had a diverse collection of participants.

The comments from these younger physicians emphasizes the true basic nature  of medicine, and the common thread of passion and enthusiasm of these internet ennervated physicians to use these tools to practice medicine.

Doctor 2.0 is a video dialogue with several physicians and how they have transitioned their practice(s) into the modern era.

Dr Jay  Parkinson

Dr. Enoch Choi

are well known enthusiasts for blending their medical expertise, caring manner with the tools of the time.

We need to look at adopting these ideas in all our practices, be leaders to move forward, and stop looking at all the negatives. My favorite saying has been "build it and they will come" (Field of Dreams).  

I like to say use it, and it will happen.  If we wait for our 'government ' to write rules and regulate, nothing will ever happen, and when it does it will self destruct.

Health 2.0 OnScreen  offered many interesting comments from physicians and non physicians.

The Next Generation of Doctors

 

 

The Next Generation of Doctors, is a topic which is timely for all of us who are past the age of 55, or so.  Whether we like it or not, we are on the 'way out'. Given the average age of 28-30 when we completed our training (if we did not stop along the way to breathe, or entered medicine as a second career, our days are numbered.

Like it or not I noticed when I reached age 55 I was definitely not the human being I was at age 25,35,or 45 years of age.  Despite the best of my intentions the last ten years and especially the last five  years gave me a clue that things had changed.

 

The development of information technology and EMR as one example sharply punctuates generations of  physicians. B.EMR, and A.EMR (before & after) clarifies the pre-internet and post internet era for me.

There would be no Health 2.0 were it not for the information highway and html. 

Looking at the introductory video from Health 2.0 conference in D.C. in June it will be obvious except to the dedicated luddite that 'we ' are on the way out....As an active practicing clinician I want to  help  prepare the next generation to do a much better job than we have done.  They are learning what has been done wrong.

The practice environment has changed drastically with dramatic increases in the elderly, and new expensive diagnostic and therapeutic choices.  We cannot use the old paradigm and business methods if we expect the system (and us) to survive.

In my next blogpost I will bring you another video from Health 1.0, It is named  Doctor 2.0

Bundle your cable TV, Internet and Phone Service with Health Information Exchange

 

 

VERIZON LAUNCHES NATIONWIDE HEALTH INFORMATION NETWORK

 

It ran through my mind about six years ago when this whole thing about RHIOs , EMR and Health Information Exchange began.

There were multiple attempts at forming business entities which were sustainable. Millions of dollars were spent setting up 'pilot programs'.  Attempts were made to reinvent the wheel.  There was more time and money expended setting up committees, seeking stakeholders and the like. Redundant non profit entities were required to access precious grant money to start some of these entities. Most failed miserably.

Even now in California there are multiple entities circling the wagons around each other.  (CAEC, eHealth, CALIPSO) I sit in on many of these meetings via webinars.  There are a lot of well meaning advocates , and 'techies' in these calls.

An intense feeding frenzy has developed around ARRA, HITECH and other governmental eponyms. Government has become a four or five-letter word.

Any fool should have been able to figure out reinventing a network was not necessary. We already had a great network, call it Verizon, Comcast, AT&T or whatever.  Plug in your EMR and off you go.  The key was and is software.  These networks are already technically capable of providing HIPAA security as needed.

The key is interoperability and that has been established by CCHIT certification. It's been around for four years. Of course now the federal government wants to usurp their developmental success and supplant it with an "equal opportunity" organization that is appproved by some governmental regulatory agency, like the NIST. 

The reward for all the hard work of EMR vendors, and voluntary industry people is cancelled out by the 'do-gooders' in D.C.

Negative reward is always the fallout from governmental -come- lately- to the table, initiatives.  They sap entrepenurial initiative, investment and commitment to success rather than 1000 page documents  written by the government. 

So what happens now to the 40 or more vendors who have CCHIT certification, and the thousands of medical practices already invested in these ' legacy systems"?  Undoubtedly they will be grandfathered in in order to satisfy medicare requirements for meaningful use to meet the governments (read medicare) requirements for incentive payments.  44,000 dollars is not a great incentive, nor adequate for someone to discard a system that perhaps cost 100,000 dollars last year or the year before.

Well, back to my comments on the 'original network(s) Verizon,Comcast, or Charter.

Verizon has publicized it's involvement with MedVirginia. It is co-labelling it's HIE product with several other EMR vendors..

MedVirginia and Verizon have already partnered using the NHIN to link with Social Security for processing Disability Claims and medical records

Actually when one thinks about their 'offering' HIE, and/or Regional networks become superfluous and redundant.

Any practice EMR can 'plug in their cord and 'dial up" anywhere Verizon or a like system is in place.

Keep it Simple, Stupid !!!!  K.I.S.S.

As for me I am buying  VZW .  I thought of this five years ago, where is my cut?

If Lawyers worked like Doctors

Dr. Wes in a column from October 2009 writes a 'parody' on attorney billing. If you read it, you will chuckle....

I have a few other 'regulations' for attorneys.

Pass the Affordable Plaintiff and Defendant Act.

Establish legal preferred practice patterns

Establish evidence based legal decision making

Establish quality review and payment guidelines for outcomes.

Establish "never events" which allow clients to refuse payments to their counsel.

Incentivize attorneys to utilize legal information technology with decision making algorithms.

Encourage further the development of 'managed judicial organizations (MJO) and/or accountable judicial organizations (AJO)

Establish a sustainable growth rate formula (SGR).   This would include a built in 5% a year decrease in reimbursements, subject to a six month hold while waiting for congress to delay the changes.

Establish and publish on the internet a directory of all attorneys and a rating by clients. Call it "Legalgrades" Post uncorroborated complaints from clients about the attorney or the firm.

Establish 100 not for profit foundations and/or study groups to make recomendations to improve efficacy and safety of legal judgments. 

Establish a National Lawyer Database (NLB) to report the win/loss statistics and any disciplinary actions (to be posted on the internet) and other untoward events.

Require a search of the database prior to any legal actions posted by any attorney.

Require attorneys to become credentialled annually at the BAR for individual courts, and charge them annually for this privelege.

Washington and the Parasitic Economy

Following in the distinguished footsteps of Microsoft and Google, Apple is the latest innovative company to be targeted by politicians and regulators for being too successful. Will it be sucked into Washington's "parasite economy"?  Has medicine become a part of the government's parasitic economy?

David Boaz of the CATO Institute explores the history of success in America.

For more than a decade, Microsoft went about its business, developing software, selling it to customers, and — happily, legally — making money. Then in 1995, after repeated assaults by the Justice Department's antitrust division, Microsoft broke down and started playing the Beltway game — defensively at first.

Washington politicians and journalists sneered at Microsoft's initial political innocence. A congressional aide said, "They don't want to play the D.C. game, that's clear, and they've gotten away with it so far. The problem is, in the long run they won't be able to."

And Microsoft got the message: If you want to produce something in America, you'd better play the game. Contribute to politicians' campaigns, hire their friends, go hat in hand to a congressional hearing, and apologize for your success.

A decade later, it was Google. After a humble start in a Stanford dorm room, Google delivered a cheap and indispensable product and became the biggest success story of the early 21st century.

Politicians, seeing an opportunity to extend their power and rake in some campaign cash, are circling like sharks. When both Apple and Google declined to attend a Senate show trial on Internet privacy, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D., W.Va.) growled, "When people don't show up when we ask them to . . . all it does is increases our interest in what they're doing and why they didn't show up. It was a stupid mistake for them not to show up."

And that's what politicians and regulators are costing America: The brilliant minds of Silicon Valley and Redmond, Wash., are going to waste time and energy on protecting their companies instead of thinking up new products and new ways to deliver them to consumer

 

Does any of this sound familiar? For the past fifty years our patients enjoyed the best of healthcare and incredible advances in science and health. The miracles of antibiotics, vaccines and advanced cardiac treatments have  extended life to the point where degenerative diseases have replaced infectious disease as the major end of life events leading to death (in an extended manner)

This measure of success is discounted and totally ignored as the source of increased expenses for health care in America.

In the past physicians have largely ignored this parallel in general business and health finances. However the interest in pandering to political expediency peaked during the past debate on health reform.  Medicine showed up at the hearings and for several decades have attempted to 'lease' representatives interest with PACs and lobbying efforts.

Well, medicine is now wasting it's time and energy protecting itself and patients. Brilliant minds are also leaving patient care and clinical research to pursue other less stressful and more innovative methods to treat  patients. 

This sounds very familiar with Dave Boaz's analysis of the " Beltway Game."

It would be interesting to find out how you think about this analogy??