HHS Secretary Nominee Rep. Tom Price Questioned on ACA Repeal During Second Confirmation Hearing | Healthcare Informatics Magazine | Health IT | Information Technology Skip to content Skip to navigation

HHS Secretary Nominee Rep. Tom Price Questioned on ACA Repeal During Second Confirmation Hearing

January 24, 2017
by Heather Landi
| Reprints
Rep. Price continued to face questioning from Democratic senators about his trading in health care stocks during his time in Congress
Click To View Gallery

Rep. Tom Price (R-GA), President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, was questioned about his position on the Trump Administration's plans to repeal and place the Affordable Care Act (ACA) during his second confirmation hearing, held by the U.S. Senate Finance Committee on Tuesday.

The Senate Finance committee will vote on advancing his nomination to the full Senate.

During the four-hour hearing, senators questioned Price about his positions on the future of the ACA, the scope of Medicare and Medicaid and the Trump’s Administrations plan to repeal and replace the ACA. In response to a question about what his goals for an Obamacare replacement plan, Price did not offer specifics but only said, “It’s imperative that we have a system that is accessible for every American, affordable for every American and incentivizes high quality healthcare and provides choices; it’s complicated to do.”

President Trump on Jan. 20 signed an executive order that could open the door for federal agencies to curtail some aspects of the ACA, and in particular, the order aims to reverse "unwarranted economic and regulatory burdens" resulting from the ACA.

Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) asked Price, “If you’re confirmed in this position, will you use this executive order in any way to try to cut back on implementation or following the individual mandate before there is a replacement plan in place?”

“If confirmed, I’m humble enough to know I don’t have the all the answers. The talented people at the Department have incredible knowledge and an expertise and my first action is to gain that insight and information so that whatever decisions we make with you and governors and others can be the most informed and intelligent as possible,” Price said.

Warner continued “One of the reasons so many of us are anxious to see your replacement plan is that the President [Trump] says he wants to have insurance for everybody and he wants to keep the prohibition on pre-existing conditions and keep people on policies until 26 and it seems there is, at the same time, a rush to eliminate all the things that pay for the ability for Americans to have those services. I want assurances that you wouldn’t use this executive order prior to a legal replacement to eliminate the individual mandate, which I would believe helps to shore up the cost coverage and the shifting of cost that is required in an insurance system.”

Price replied, “Any replacement or reform or improvement of the program is imperative to be instituted simultaneously.”

Price also was questioned about his current involvement with the Trump administration’s plans to repeal and replace the ACA. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH), said, “President Trump said he’s working with you on a replacement plan for the ACA, which is nearly finished and will be revealed after your confirmation. Is that true?”

“It’s true that he said that, yes,” Price said. And, he added, “I’ve had conversations with the president about health care, yes.”

Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS) asserted that even if Congress does nothing to repeal or amend the ACA, “the law is not working and the market is collapsing.” “When your confirmed, what tools will you have that can be utilized to provide stability and improve the individual insurance markets so insurance carriers will want to come back during this transition?,” he asked Price.

Price said, “We need to reconstitute the individual and small group market and provide stability in our conversation and our tone. We need to lower the temperature in this debate and say to those providing insurance products, we hear your challenges. They are exiting the market, but there is help on the way to allow us to reconstitute the individual and small group market, so people can gain coverage they want and purchase at a reasonable amount.”

Before he was questioned by Senators, Price, an orthopedic surgeon and Georgia Republican Congressman, discussed his experience as a practicing physician and said, “Our healthcare system is losing focus on our number one priority – the patient.” Price also outlined the six pillars of what he thinks make up an effective healthcare system: affordability; accessibility; quality; innovation; responsibility; and choices.   

“Across the spectrum of issues the department [HHS] handles, we have to strengthen our resolve to keep our promise to those most in need of care and support and that means saving, strengthening and securing Medicare and that means ensuring the Medicaid population has access to quality of care and we need to expand our leading role in medical innovation,” Price said.

Senators questioned Price on his view of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation (CMMI), as the center has been questioned in the past by House Republicans, including Price, for overstepping its definition in statutes. The CMMI was established as an added section under ACA. Price said that CMMI has “gotten off track."

“Innovation is so incredibly important to healthcare…innovation is in fact what leads quality healthcare and expands the ability of healthcare professionals to be able to treat patients. I’m a strong supporter of innovation and we need to incentivize innovation. CMMI is a vehicle that might do just that, however, it’s gotten off track into defined areas where it is mandatorially dictating to providers how they must practice.”

He continued, “So whether it’s a geographic area, such as 67 areas of our country that have to perform a certain procedure in a certain way, or whether 75 percent of the Medicare part D demonstration that dictates to providers what drugs they must use, that to me that is no longer a trial. I hope we can move CMMI in a direction that makes sense for patients.”

Later in the hearing, Senator Warren asked Price if he supported CMMI delivery system reform demonstrations, to which Price replied, “I support making certain that we deliver care in a cost effective manner, but not do things that harms the quality of care being provided.” Warner also asked Price about his position on bundled and episodic payment models. “For certain populations, bundled payments make a lot of sense,” Price said. Further, when asked if he would allow, as HHS Secretary, expansion of these models across the system, Price didn't address the question but replied, “What we ought to do is allow for all sorts of innovation, we ought to incentivize innovation.”

When Senators brought up the regulatory burdens facing rural and critical access hospitals, Price highlighted the role of health IT, specifically telemedicine. “There are areas from a technology standpoint where we are missing the boat, in rural areas and critical access hospitals. In every other industry out there, the information technology age has arrived and is moving with rapid speed and it seems in healthcare we have put roadblocks up with regard to the expansion of technology, and we need to incentivize that. It’s possible now, in my state, that if an individual is suspected of having a stroke they can go to a critical access hospital and, via telemedicine, providers can access specialists at the University Health Center. That’s improving the lives and care of patients across our state and there are so many things we can do to mirror that technological expansion.”

Senator Roberts also brought up health information technology as it relates to Meaningful Use and electronic health records and specifically asked Price how he will ensure, what Roberts referred to as, “an effective, but smarter and less burdensome rulemaking process.”

Price responded that physicians “are leaving the practice, not because they have grown tired of it but the onerous nature of the regulatory scheme coming out of Washington, D.C.” “Meaningful use has turned physicians into data entry clerks,” he said. Although Price did not specify how he would change Meaningful Use or offer any specific details about regulatory policies if he were to be confirmed as HHS Secretary.

Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA) pointed out that as healthcare becomes more consumer-driven, there should be more focus on offering transparency on healthcare outcomes, and Price agreed, saying “Outcomes are important and measuring what makes sense from a quality standpoint, and transparency in pricing as well. Right now, we don’t have that, and if you want to know what healthcare costs, it’s hard to find that. We should be honest with ourselves as policymakers and make it patient friendly, we need to make that a priority,” he said.

But, before Price was questioned about healthcare policies, he faced rigorous ethics questions from Democratic Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon regarding his investments in healthcare firms and his trading in health care stocks during his time in Congress. Among Price’s holdings are some in Innate Immunotherapeutics, Ltd., an Australian biomedical company in which another lawmaker, Rep. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.) is a major shareholder. As Healthcare Informatics previously reported, according to  Price’s financial disclosure statements, on Aug. 31 he bought between $50,001 and $100,000 worth of stock in the firm, as noted in an article in the online publication STAT.

Wyden said he saw a conflict and said Price understated the value of his investments in Innate Immunotherapeutics. “It is hard to see this as anything but a conflict of interest and an abuse of position,” Wyden said.

“Everything I did was ethical, above board, legal and transparent, and he reason you know about these things is because we made that information available in real time as required by the House ethics committee,” Price responded.

Sens. Ron Wyden and Patty Murray, the top Democrats on the Finance and HELP committees respectively, wrote a letter to Price, which was released Monday, requesting his brokerage and equity holdings agreements in order to review his investment decisions.

Healthcare Informatics Editor-in-Chief Mark Hagland reported last week, during a courtesy confirmation hearing taking place in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, Democratic senators questioned Price about his investment in Innate Immunotherapeutics as well his purchase of shares in medical device manufacturer Zimmer Biomet last year. A CNN report last week noted that “Price bought between $1,001 to $15,000 worth of shares last March in Zimmer Biomet, and “less than a week after the transaction,” Price introduced legislation “that would have delayed until 2018 a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) regulation that industry analysts warned would significantly hurt Zimmer Biomet financially once fully implemented.”

Eight Senate Democrats wrote a letter calling on the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate Price's stock trading activities, saying they “raise serious questions about potential STOCK Act violations, illegal insider trading, and other conflicts of interest.”

 

 


The Health IT Summits gather 250+ healthcare leaders in cities across the U.S. to present important new insights, collaborate on ideas, and to have a little fun - Find a Summit Near You!


/article/payment/hhs-secretary-nominee-rep-tom-price-questioned-during-second-confirmation-hearing
/news-item/payment/cms-93-clinicians-get-positive-payment-adjustments-mips-year-1

CMS: 93% of Clinicians Get Positive Payment Adjustments for MIPS Year 1

November 8, 2018
by Rajiv Leventhal, Managing Editor
| Reprints

Ninety-three percent of MIPS (Merit-based Incentive Payment System)-eligible clinicians received a positive payment adjustment for their performance in 2017, and 95 percent overall avoided a negative payment adjustment, according to a CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) announcement today.

The first year of MIPS under MACRA’s Quality Payment Program (QPP) was dubbed by CMS as a “pick your pace year,” which essentially enabled clinicians to avoid payment penalties as long as they submitted at least the minimum amount of quality data. As such, in its announcement, CMS did admit that the overall performance threshold for MIPS was established at a relatively low level of three points, and the availability of “pick your pace” provided participation flexibility through three reporting options for clinicians: “test”, partial year, or full-year reporting.

CMS said that 93 percent of MIPS-eligible clinicians received a positive payment adjustment for their performance in 2017, and 95 percent overall avoided a negative payment adjustment. CMS specifically calculated that approximately 1.06 million MIPS-eligible clinicians in total will receive a MIPS payment adjustment, either positive, neutral, or negative. The payment adjustments for the 2017 program year get reflected in 2019.

Breaking down the 93 percent of participants that received a positive payment adjustment last year, 71 percent earned a positive payment adjustment and an adjustment for exceptional performance, while 22 percent earned a positive payment adjustment only. Meanwhile, just 5 percent of MIPS-eligible clinicians received a negative payment adjustment, and 2 percent received a neutral adjustment (no increase or decrease).

Of the total population, just over one million MIPS-eligible clinicians reported data as either an individual, as a part of a group, or through an Alternative Payment Model (APM), and received a neutral payment adjustment or better. Additionally, under the Advanced APM track, just more than 99,000 eligible clinicians earned Qualifying APM Participant (QP) status, according to the CMS data.

CMS Administrator Seema Verma noted on the first pick-your-pace year of the QPP, “This measured approach allowed more clinicians to successfully participate, which led to many clinicians exceeding the performance threshold and a wider distribution of positive payment adjustments. We expect that the gradual increases in the performance thresholds in future program years will create an evolving distribution of payment adjustments for high performing clinicians who continue to invest in improving quality and outcomes for beneficiaries.”

For 2018, the second year of the QPP, CMS raised the stakes for those participating clinicians. And in the third year of the program, set to start in January 2019, a final rule was just published with year three requirements. Undoubtedly, as time passes, eligible clinicians will be asked for greater participation at higher levels. At the same time, CMS continues to exempt certain clinicians who don’t meet a low-volume Medicare threshold.

Earlier this year, CMS said that 91 percent of all MIPS-eligible clinicians participated in the first year of the QPP, exceeding the agency’s internal goal.

What’s more, from a scoring perspective in 2017, the overall national mean score for MIPS-eligible clinicians was 74.01 points, and the national median was 88.97 points, on a 0 to 100 scale. Further breaking down the mean and median:

  • Clinicians participating in MIPS as individuals or groups (and not through an APM) received a mean score of 65.71 points and a median score of 83.04 points
  • Clinicians participating in MIPS through an APM received a mean score of 87.64 points and a median score of 91.67 points

Additionally, clinicians in small and rural practices who were not in APMs and who chose to participate in MIPS also performed well, CMS noted. On average, MIPS eligible clinicians in rural practices earned a mean score of 63.08 points, while clinicians in small practices received a mean score of 43.46 points.

Said Verma, “While we understand that challenges remain for clinicians in small practices, these results suggest that these clinicians and those in rural practices can successfully participate in the program. With these mean scores, clinicians in small and rural practices would still receive a neutral or positive payment adjustment for the 2017, 2018, and 2019 performance years due to the relatively modest performance thresholds that we have established. We will also continue to directly support these clinicians now and in future years of the program.”

More From Healthcare Informatics

/news-item/payment/hhs-secretary-azar-hhs-planning-new-mandatory-bundled-payment-models

HHS Secretary Azar: HHS Is Planning New Mandatory Bundled Payment Models

November 8, 2018
by Heather Landi, Associate Editor
| Reprints

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is revisiting mandatory bundled payment models, possibly for radiation oncology and cardiac care, according to Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, which signals a strong about-face in the Trump Administration’s policy about bundled payment initiatives.

HHS is reexamining the role that mandatory bundled payment models can play in the transition to value-based care, Azar said in a keynote speech at the Patient-Centered Primary Care Collaborative Conference on Thursday. HHS published Azar’s comments.

In the published remarks, Azar said the Trump Administration is revisiting mandatory bundled payments and exploring new voluntary bundled payments as part of the Administration’s goal of paying for outcomes, rather than process.

“We need results, American patients need change, and when we need mandatory models to deliver it, mandatory models are going to see a comeback,” Azar said.

In his speech, Azar said, “Imagine a system where physicians and other providers only had to worry about the outcome, rather than worrying about their staffing ratios and the individual reimbursements for every procedure they do and every drug they prescribe. That kind of payment system would radically reorient power in our healthcare system—away from the federal government and back to those closest to the patient.”

He continued, “One way we can do that is through bundling payments, rather than paying for every individual service. This is an area where you have already seen testing from CMMI for several years now—and I want to let you know today that you are going to see a lot more such ideas in the future.”

Azar highlighted the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI), which, he said, has shown significant savings in several common inpatient episodes, including joint replacement and pneumonia.

During his speech on Thursday, Azar said, “I want to share with all of you for the first time today: We intend to revisit some of the episodic cardiac models that we pulled back, and are actively exploring new and improved episode-based models in other areas, including radiation oncology. We’re also actively looking at ways to build on the lessons and successes of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model.

“We’re not going to stop there: We will use all avenues available to us—including mandatory and voluntary episode-based payment models,” he said.

One industry group, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), already has voiced concerns about a mandatory payment model. In a statement issued Thursday afternoon, Laura Thevenot, CEO of ASTRO, made it clear that the organizaiton strongly supports a radiation oncology alternative payment model (RO-APM). "ASTRO has worked for many years to craft a viable payment model that would stabilize payments, drive adherence to nationally-recognized clinical guidelines and improve patient care. ASTRO believes its proposed RO-APM will allow radiation oncologists to participate fully in the transition to value-based care that both improves cancer outcomes and reduces costs."

Thevenot said ASTRO has aggressively pursued adoption of this proposed model with the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI). However, Thevenot said the group has concerns "about the possibility of launching a model that requires mandatory participation from all radiation oncology practices at the outset."

Further, Thevenot said any radiation oncology payment model will represent "a significant departure from the status quo." "Care must be taken to protect access to treatments for all radiation oncology patients and not disadvantage certain types of practices, particularly given the very high fixed costs of running a radiation oncology clinic," Thevenot stated.

Back in January, CMS announced the launch of the voluntary BPCI Advanced model, noting that it “builds on the earlier success of bundled payment models and is an important step in the move away from fee-for-service and towards paying for value.” The BPCI Advanced model includes more than 1,000 participants that are receiving episode-based payments for over 30 clinical areas, Azar said.

“BPCI Advanced is a voluntary model, where potential participants can select whether they want to join. But we’re not going to stick to voluntary models. Real experimentation with episodic bundles requires a willingness to try mandatory models. We know they are the most effective way to know whether these bundles can successfully save money and improve quality,” Azar said.

The Obama Administration introduced mandatory bundled payment for care for heart attacks and for cardiac bypass surgery in July 2016.

In the past, CMS Administrator Seema Verma has said that she does not support making bundled payments mandatory, and former HHS Secretary Tom Price, M.D. had strongly opposed mandatory bundles, going so far as to direct the end of two mandatory bundled payment programs—one existing and one previously announced. In November 2017, CMS finalized a rule, proposed in August 2017, that cancelled mandatory hip fracture and cardiac bundled payment models.

As per that final rule, CMS also scaled back the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model (CJR), specifically reducing the number of mandatory geographic areas participating in CJR from 67 areas to 34 areas. And, in an effort to address the unique needs of rural providers, the federal agency also made participation voluntary for all low-volume and rural hospitals participating in the model in all 67 geographic areas.

On Thursday, Azar acknowledged that his statements signaled HHS was reversing course on its previous stance, noting that last year the administration reduced the size of the CJR model and pulled back the other episode payment models, including those on cardiac care, before they could launch.

Azar, who was confirmed as HHS Secretary earlier this year, signaled early on that he diverged from Verma and Price on his views about mandatory bundled payments. During a Senate Finance Committee hearing in January on his nomination for HHS Secretary, he said, on the topic of CMMI [the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation] pilot programs, “I believe that we need to be able to test hypotheses, and if we have to test a hypothesis, I want to be a reliable partner, I want to be collaborative in doing this, I want to be transparent, and follow appropriate procedures; but if to test a hypothesis there around changing our healthcare system, it needs to be mandatory there as opposed to voluntary, then so be it.”

During his speech Thursday, Azar pointed to the Administration’s first mandatory model, which was unveiled two weeks ago, called the International Pricing Index (IPI) Model for payments for Part B drugs. Azar said the model is a “mandatory model that will help address the inequity between what the U.S. and other countries pay for many costly drugs.”

Further, Azar said CMMI also will launch new primary care payment models before the end of the year, with the aim of introducing a spectrum of risk for primary care providers, Azar said.

“Before the end of this year, you will see new payment models coming forth from CMMI that will give primary care physicians more flexibility in how they care for their patients, while offering them significant rewards for successfully keeping them healthy and out of the hospital,” he said.

“Different sizes and types of practices can take on different levels of risk. As many of you know, even smaller practices want to be, and can be, compensated based on their patients’ outcomes,” he said. “We want to incentivize that, with a spectrum of flexibility, too: The more risk you are willing to take on, the less we’re going to micromanage your work.”

Azar also noted HHS’ efforts to examine impediments to care coordination, such as examining the Stark Law, the Anti-Kickback Statute, HIPAA, and 42 CFR Part 2. CMS has already launched and concluded a request for information on the Stark Law, and the Office of the Inspector General has done the same on the Anti-Kickback Statute, he noted.

Related Insights For: Payment

/blogs/rajiv-leventhal/payment/dr-sanjay-gupta-s-heartening-speech-chime18-should-inspire-us

Dr. Sanjay Gupta’s Heartening Speech at CHIME18 Should Inspire U.S. Healthcare Leaders

| Reprints
The story of an Amazonian tribe could serve as a motivational lesson for U.S. healthcare stakeholders

It was inspiring to hear Sanjay Gupta, M.D., the well-known neurosurgeon and medical reporter, give the closing keynote at the College of Healthcare Information Management Executives (CHIME) 2018 Fall CIO Forum in San Diego last week. Dr. Gupta, who serves as associate chief of the neurosurgery service at Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta, while also best known as CNN's multiple Emmy Award-winning chief medical correspondent, discussed the fascinating balance that he strikes between medicine and media.

“Oftentimes, I see people at their best, and sometimes at their worst. I get to travel the world, where I learn so much, but also teach others. Sometimes the dance between medicine and media can be awkward and emotionally challenging. But almost always, the stories we do have a significant impact,” Gupta told the Fall CIO Forum attendees.

What was perhaps most captivating about Gupta’s speech was when he spoke about visiting a primitive Amazonian tribe that appears to have the best heart health in the world. The Tsimane people of Bolivia do not speak a language, live a simple existence, and are disease-free, explained Gupta. So he went to visit the tribe with the goal to understand its lifestyle and what led to its members having such healthy hearts.  

Sanjay Gupta, M.D.

“I went spearfishing with one [tribe member], who thought he was 84-years-old, but he really didn’t know for sure. His shirt was off, and he was ripped, balancing himself on the canoe, just looking at the water, spearing fish. His eyesight was perfect. The entire indigenous tribe was just like this,” Gupta recalled.

After examining the Tsimane tribe’s diet, Gupta noted it was a hunter-gatherer society, meaning there was nothing technological. “The most mechanical thing I saw was a pulley for the well,” he said. Seventy percent of what they eat is carbohydrates—unrefined and unprocessed—while 15 percent of their diet is protein, and 15 percent fat, he added. “You need farmed food because oftentimes you don’t have successful hunting days, so the farmed food was the food in the bank. And they would do intermitting fasting, too. These are the people with the healthiest hearts in the world,” Gupta exclaimed.

When it comes to activity, when hunters are hunting, they’re never outrunning their prey, but rather outlasting it, noted Gupta. “We found that they walked about 17,000 steps per day. But they didn’t run; they only walked. They are active, but not intensively active. They also hardly every sit—they are either lying or standing all the time. And they would get nine hours of sleep per night, waking up to the rooster’s crow. There are no devices. Again, these are the people who have the healthiest hearts in world. They don’t have a healthcare system and don’t spend a dollar on healthcare,” Gupta stated.

What’s even more interesting about this tribe is that each of its members lives with some degree of a parasitic infection, which they usually get it early in life, have a few days of illness, and then just live with these parasites in their bodies for their entire lives. “The belief is that so much of the disease we talk about—that leads to this $3.3 trillion price tag [the total cost of U.S. healthcare spending in 2016]—is actually ignited or worsened by our immune systems. So the parasitic infections could be part of the reason they are protected from all types of diseases,” Gupta offered.

Essentially, it’s living this basic, undeveloped life that “inadvertently provides them extraordinary protection against heart disease,” noted a report in HealthDay last year. “Thanks to their unique lifestyle, most Tsimane [members] have arteries unclogged by the cholesterol plaques that drastically increase the risk of heart attack and stroke in modern Americans,” Gregory Thomas, M.D., medical director of the Memorial Care Heart & Vascular Institute at Long Beach Memorial, in California, said in that report.

Tsimane tribe (source: University of New Mexico)

You might be asking what the story of the Tsimane tribe has to do with U.S. healthcare since its lifestyle would obviously never be replicated in a developed country. And while that is true, it’s tough to ignore the $1 billion per day that our healthcare system spends on heart disease—compared to the Tsimane tribe that doesn’t spend a single dime, yet has the healthiest hearts in the world.

In this sense, perhaps we can use the Tsimane story to push ourselves to develop a greater understanding of why we spend so much money on healthcare and don’t have the results to show for it. Gupta asked this $3.3 trillion-dollar question in his speech—why does healthcare in the U.S. cost so much and what do we get in return?

“If you look at the statistics, it’s not impressive. More people die from preventable disease in the U.S. than in 12 other nations. People live longer in 30 other countries compared to the U.S.—including places like Chile and Costa Rica. We still have tens of millions of people who don’t have access, and we still spend all this money on healthcare. Why?” he asked.

Gupta explained that the nation’s high healthcare costs come down to the following: high administrative costs, technology, new drugs and development, and the cost of chronic disease—the last which is incredibly self-inflicted. About 70 to 80 percent of chronic disease is self-preventable, he said.

Indeed, as most of us know, about 5 percent of the U.S. population accounts for 50 percent of the healthcare costs. These are folks who are defined by illness, not by health, Gupta stated. This is why the modern-day healthcare system has proactively taken to targeting that 5 percent to improve their chances of preventing disease and staying healthy. “Data shows that home visits, nutritional counseling, one-on-one coaching, and diligent follow-up care can go a long way in preventing someone from getting sick in the first place, and from turning a disease into something more chronic. Some of these interventions can actually reverse disease. The die is not cast,” Gupta said.

For me, Gupta’s keynote highlighted the need for efforts around value-based care, care management, and population health to be intensified. A big part of that, as noted in the speech, is addressing patients’ social and environmental factors. It’s not at all surprising to see studies such as this one from earlier this year, conducted by researchers at the University of South Florida (USF) College of Public Health, Tampa, and WellCare Health Plans, and published in Population Health Management, which found that healthcare spending is substantially reduced when people are successfully connected to social services that address social barriers, or social determinants of health, such as secure housing, medical transportation, healthy food programs, and utility and financial assistance.

And with that, there is also an enormous opportunity for data and IT to play a role. Information sharing, so that providers have access to the right information at the point of care—no matter where the patient is—will be critical to reducing unnecessary costs. As will the robust use of data analytics, so that patient care organizations can be proactive in predicting which patients are at highest risk, when they might need services, and how to intervene at the appropriate time.

But to this point, Gupta, who noted that our society can get too caught up in high-tech, also suggested that “medicine seems to play by slightly different rules when it comes to innovation as opposed to other sectors. Sometimes, innovation moves painstakingly slow in respect to medicine.” At the end of the day, he said, it will be “the innovations that make us, [as a society], healthier, happier, and connect us in frictionless ways, that will be the biggest winners.”

So, will the U.S. population suddenly turn off their iPhone alarms, wake up to the rooster’s crow, and become a hunter-gatherer society? No, I would say that’s quite unlikely to happen. But hearing stories such as the one of the Tsimane tribe might just serve as good enough motivation to bring down the astronomical and unsustainable costs of U.S. healthcare.

See more on Payment

betebet sohbet hattı betebet bahis siteleringsbahis