FCC Releases Data-Driven Broadband Health Mapping Tool | Healthcare Informatics Magazine | Health IT | Information Technology Skip to content Skip to navigation

FCC Releases Data-Driven Broadband Health Mapping Tool

August 3, 2016
by Heather Landi
| Reprints
Click To ViewThe five states in purple —Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Oklahoma —experience incidences of chronic disease above the national average, and fixed broadband access percentages are on average below 50 percent.

The Federal Communications Commission’s Connect2Health Task Force launched a web-based mapping tool that visualizes and overlays broadband and health data to enable further study of the connection of health outcomes and broadband availability.

The data-driven tool, Mapping Broadband Health in America (available at www.fcc.gov/health/maps) was designed to enable data-driven decision making on broadband health policies and connected health solutions and to help the public and private sector, and local communities, identify opportunities and gaps in connectivity and care, according to FCC officials. The goal is to drive public-private partnerships, private sector collaborations and focus policy efforts on addressing gaps and disparities in connectivity and care.

“The mapping tool is an interactive experience, showing various aspects of connectivity and health for every state and county in the United States. Users can generate customized maps that display broadband access, adoption and speed data alongside various health measures (e.g., obesity, diabetes, disabilities and physician access) in urban and rural areas. These maps can be used by both public and private sectors and local communities to identify not only gaps, but also opportunities,” the FCC stated in a press release.

“We are excited to make this state-of-the-art tool available to the public,” FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said in a prepared statement. “The unique insights revealed by this mapping platform can be utilized by businesses and policymakers to effect change and innovation.”

According to the FCC when unveiling the new mapping tool, initial findings from studies using the mapping tool indicates that there is a connection between lack of broadband availability and poor health.

As an example, the least connected counties generally have the highest rates of chronic disease, and this holds true across access to care, quality of care and health outcome metrics, according to the FCC. Studies of the broadband health data on the mapping tool found that obesity prevalence is 25 percent higher and diabetes prevalence is 35 percent higher in these counties (i.e. where 60 percent of households lack access to broadband and more than 60 percent lack basic Internet connections at home.)

And, according to the FCC, there is a significant gap between rural and urban counties. Almost 60 percent of rural Americans live in counties that have high burdens of chronic disease as well as a need for greater broadband connectivity, while less than 5 percent of urban America falls into the same category.

“This is a groundbreaking effort at the nexus of broadband and health,” FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn said in a statement. “The map makes clear that there are some communities that bear a double burden...they have the lowest connectivity and highest need. Today, we identify challenges and point to sustainable and innovative solutions.”

According to the FCC’s key findings, almost half of U.S. counties have high burdens of chronic disease (e.g., diabetes) as well as a need for greater broadband connectivity (e.g., these counties are below 80 percent access to broadband at 25/3 mbps). That translates to over 35 million people who live in counties with a “double burden” of need.

Rural counties are 10 times as likely as urban areas to be in low broadband access (below 50 percent), high diabetes areas (above 10 percent).

And, FCC data indicates that the distribution of “double burden” counties is not random, but includes sizeable clusters that could be targeted for intervention. Specifically, the majority of “double burden” areas —high chronic disease, lower broadband access —fall into “clusters” of five or more counties with total populations over 100,000. This has significant implications for crafting successful and sustainable business models for connected health in rural areas.

And, the FCC also identified counties that have a “critical need” for better broadband and these critical need counties were divided into a Priority 100 list and a Rural 100 list. For the Rural 100 list includes only counties with majority rural populations.

“The Priority 100 and Rural 100 lists we release today identify those counties by name, with the hope this will catalyze action and provide a roadmap for private investment and coordinated public support to follow,” Clyburn said in a statement.

“Many of these priority counties are concentrated in the South and Midwest, where they average 8 percent fixed broadband access, have a 34 percent higher diabetes prevalence and 24 percent higher obesity prevalence than the national average. And no, these statistics are not typos. These are real figures and real places where awareness must be raised, issues must be characterized, collaborations must be forged, and data-driven efforts among stakeholders, must be facilitated,” Clyburn said.

Since 2014, the Task Force has traveled to several states as part of its “Beyond the Beltway Series” to learn how communities are leveraging broadband technologies and next-generation communications services to improve access to health and care services.

“This platform reflects the creative genius of a tireless, dedicated, multi-disciplinary team,” task force chair Michele Ellison said. “The map cleverly reveals otherwise hidden realities about broadband and health at the county level. We have seen the faces behind this data and we know firsthand what a difference connectivity can make.”

 

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!


/news-item/population-health/fcc-releases-data-driven-broadband-health-mapping-tool
/webinar/can-informatics-drive-clinical-quality-improvements-alongside-operational-improvements

Can Informatics Drive Clinical Quality Improvements Alongside Operational Improvements in Cancer Care?

Thursday, December 13, 2018 | 3:00 p.m. ET, 2:00 p.m. CT

Due to the complexity of the disease biology, rapidly increasing treatment options, patient mobility, multi-disciplinary care teams, and high costs of treatment - informatics canplay a more substantial role in improving outcomes and reducing cost of cancer care.

In this webinar, we will review how tumor board solutions, precision medicine frameworks, and oncology pathways are being used within clinical quality programs as well as understanding their role in driving operational improvements and increasing patient retention. We will demonstrate the requirements around both interoperability and the clinical depth needed to ensure adoption and effective capture and use of information to accomplish these goals.

More From Healthcare Informatics

/article/population-health/dc-department-health-care-digging-data-issues-collaborate-across

At the D.C. Department of Health Care Finance, Digging into Data Issues to Collaborate Across Healthcare

November 22, 2018
by Mark Hagland, Editor-in-Chief
| Reprints
The D.C. Department of Health Care of Finance’s Kerda DeHaan shares her perspectives on data management for healthcare collaboration

Collaboration is taking place more and more across different types of healthcare entities these days—not only between hospitals and health insurers, for example, but also very much between local government entities on the one hand, and both providers (hospitals and physicians) and managed Medicaid plans, as well.

Among those government agencies moving forward to engage more fully with providers and provider organizations is the District of Columbia Department of Health Care Finance (DHCF), which is working across numerous lines in order to improve both the care management and cost profiles of care delivery for Medicaid recipients in Washington, D.C.

The work that Kerda DeHaan, a management analyst with the D.C. Department of Health Care, is helping to lead with colleagues in her area is ongoing, and involves multiple elements, including data management, project management, and health information exchange. DeHaan spoke recently with Healthcare Informatics Editor-in-Chief Mark Hagland regarding this ongoing work. Below are excerpts from that interview.

You’re involved in a number of data management-related types of work right now, correct?

Yes. Among other things, we’re in the midst of building our Medicaid data warehouse; we’ve been going through the independent validation and verification (IVV) process with CMS [the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services]. We’ve been working with HealthEC, incorporating all of our Medicaid claims data into their platform. So we are creating endless reports.

Webinar

Can Informatics Drive Clinical Quality Improvements Alongside Operational Improvements in Cancer Care?

Due to the complexity of the disease biology, rapidly increasing treatment options, patient mobility, multi-disciplinary care teams, and high costs of treatment - informatics canplay a more...


Kerda DeHaan

We track utilization, cost, we track on the managed health plan side the capitation payments we pay them versus MLR [medical loss ratio data]; our fraud and abuse team has been making great use of it. They’ve identified $8 million in costs from beneficiaries no longer in the District of Columbia, but who’ve remained on our rolls. And for the reconciliation of our payments, we can use the data warehouse for our payments. Previously, we’d have to get a report from the MMIS [Medicaid management information system] vendor, in order to [match and verify data]. With HealthEC, we’ve got a 3D analytics platform that we’re using, and we’ve saved money in identifying the beneficiaries who should not be on the rolls, and improved the time it takes for us to process payments, and we can now more closely track MCO [managed care organization] payments—the capitation payments.

That involves a very high volume of healthcare payments, correct?

Yes. For every beneficiary, we pay the managed care organizations a certain amount of money every month to handle the care for that beneficiary. We’ve got 190,000 people covered. And the MCOs report to us what the provider payments were, on a monthly basis. Now we can track better what the MCOs are spending to pay the providers. The dashboard makes it much easier to track those payments. It’s improved our overall functioning.

We have over 250,000 between managed care and FFS. Managed care 190,000, FFS, around 60,000. We also manage the Alliance population—that’s another program that the district has for individuals who are legal non-citizen residents.

What are the underlying functional challenges in this area of data management?

Before we’d implemented the data warehouse, we had to rely on our data analysis and research division to run all the reports for us. We’d have to put in a data request and hope for results within a week. This allows anyone in the agency to run their own reports and get access to data. And they’re really backed up: they do both internal and external data reports. And so you could be waiting for a while, especially during the time of the year when we have budget questions; and anything the director might want would be their top priority.

So now, the concern is, having everyone understand what they’re seeing, and looking at the data in the same way, and standardizing what they’re meaning; before, we couldn’t even get access.

Has budget been an issue?

So far, budget has not been an issue; I know the warehouse cost more than originally anticipated; but we haven’t had any constraints so far.

What are the lessons learned so far in going through a process like this?

One big lesson was that, in the beginning, we didn’t really understand the scope of what really needed to happen. So it was underfunded initially just because there wasn’t a clear understanding of how to accomplish this project. So the first lesson would be, to do more analysis upfront, to really understand the requirements. But in a lot of cases, we feel the pressure to move ahead.

Second, you really need strong project management from the outset. There was a time when we didn’t have the appropriate resources applied to this. And, just as when you’re building a house, one thing needs to happen before another, we were trying to do too many things simultaneously at the time.

Ultimately, where is this going for your organization in the next few years?

What we’re hoping is that this would be incorporated into our health information exchange. We have a separate project for that, utilizing the claims data in our warehouse to share it with providers. We’d like to improve on that, so there’s sharing between what’s in the electronic health record, and claims. So there’s an effort to access the EHR [electronic health record] data, especially from the FQHCs [federally qualified health centers] that we work closely with, and expanding out from there. The data warehouse is quite capable of ingesting that information. Some paperwork has to be worked through, to facilitate that. And then, ultimately, helping providers see their own performance. So as we move towards more value-based arrangements—and we already have P4P with some of the MCOs, FQHCs, and nursing homes—they’ll be able to track their own performance, and see what we’re seeing, all in real time. So that’s the long-term goal.

With regard to pulling EHR information from the FQHCs, have there been some process issues involved?

Yes, absolutely. There have been quite a few process issues in general, and sometimes, it comes down to other organizations requiring us to help them procure whatever systems they might need to connect to us, which we’re not against doing, but those things take time. And then there’s the ownership piece: can we trust the data? But for the most part, especially with the FHQCs and some of our sister agencies, we’re getting to the point where everyone sees it as a win-wing, and there’s enough of a consensus in order to move forward.

What might CIOs and CMIOs think about, around all this, especially around the potential for collaboration with government agencies like yours?

Ideally, we’d like for hospitals to partner with us and our managed care organizations in solving some of these issues in healthcare, including the cost of emergency department care, and so on. That would be the biggest thing. Right now, and this is not a secret, a couple of our hospital systems in the District are hoping to hold out for better contracts with our managed care organizations, and 80 percent of our beneficiaries are served by those MCOs. So we’d like to understand that we’re trying to help folks who need care, and not focus so much on the revenues involved. We’re over 96-percent insured now in the District. So there’s probably enough to go around, so we’d love for them to move forward with us collaboratively. And we have to ponder whether we should encourage the development and participation in ACOs, including among our FQHCs. Things have to be seen as helping our beneficiaries.

What does the future of data management for population health and care management, look like to you, in the next several years?

For us in the District, the future is going to be not only a robust warehouse that includes claims information, vital records information, and EHR data, but also, more connectivity with our community partners, and forming more of a robust referral network, so that if one agency sees someone who has a problem, say, with housing, they can immediately send the referral, seamlessly through the system, to get care. We’re looking at it as very inter-connected. You can develop a pretty good snapshot, based on a variety of sources.

The social determinants of health are clearly a big element in all this; and you’re already focused on those, obviously.

Yes, we are very focused on those; we’re just very limited in terms of our access to that data. We’re working with our human services and public health agencies, to improve access. And I should mention a big initiative within the Department of Health Care Finance: we have two health home programs, one for people with serious mental illness issues, the other with chronic conditions. The Department of Behavioral Health manages the first, and the Department of Health Care Finance, my agency, DC Medicaid, manages the second. You have to have three or more chronic conditions in order to qualify.

We have partnerships with 12 providers, in those, mostly FQHCs, a few community providers, and a couple of hospital systems. We’ve been using another module from HealthEC for those programs. We need to get permission to have external users to come in; but at that point, they’d be able to capture a lot of the social determinants as well. We feel we’re a bit closer to the providers, in that sense, since they work closely with the beneficiaries. And we’ve got a technical assistance grant to help them understand how to incorporate this kind of care management into their practice, to move into a value-based planning mode. That’s a big effort. We’re just now developing our performance measures on that, to see how we’ve been doing. It’s been live for about a year. It’s called MyHealth GPS, Guiding Patients to Services. And we’re using the HealthEC Care Manager Module, which we call the Care Coordination Navigation Program; it’s a case management system. Also, we do plan to expand that to incorporate medication therapy management. We have a pharmacist on board who will be using part of that care management module to manage his side of things.

 

 


Related Insights For: Population Health

/article/population-health/beverly-hills-hit-summit-apg-s-crane-offers-vision-future-medical-care

At the Beverly Hills HIT Summit, APG’s Crane Offers a Vision of the Future of Medical Care

November 11, 2018
by Mark Hagland, Editor-in-Chief
| Reprints
Don Crane, CEO of APG, a nationwide association of physician groups involved in risk-based contracting, offered Beverly Hills HIT Summit attendees a vision of a coordinated care-based future

The signs are that the policy and payment incentives around value-based healthcare are accelerating now and may soon become much clearer, a nationwide physician leader told attendees at the Beverly Hills Health IT Summit, being held in Los Angeles this week and sponsored by Healthcare Informatics. Don Crane, the president and CEO of the Los Angeles-based APG (America’s Physician Groups), a nationwide association of more than 300 physician groups involved in risk-based contracting in healthcare, though participation in accountable care organizations (ACOs) and in all types of value-based contracting, which his association refers to as coordinated care.

Crane, whose organization counts member physician groups in 43 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, told his audience at the Sofitel Hotel Los Angeles at Beverly Hills that he believes that the most senior federal health officials—at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and at the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI), are planning to move forward rapidly and decisively to push as many physicians and physician organizations as possible into risk-based contracting, through a variety of means. Statements from HHS Secretary Alex Azar, CMS Administrator Seema Verma, and CMMI director Adam Boehler, have made it clear that plans are afoot to accelerate the transition from fee-for-service payment to risk-based and value-based reimbursement, he said.


Don Crane

Speaking of his own organization, Crane said, “What distinguishes us from similar trade organizations is that capitation is the preferred model. Probably half of my members are already there in terms of professional or global risk. And what we’re developing is the antithesis of fee-for-service [healthcare delivery]. We’re very much central to the value movement.” Further, he said, “Capitation is the destination” of the current evolution of the U.S. healthcare system. “Groups everywhere are experimenting with Medicare ACOs, other kinds of programs and projects,” he noted, adding that physician groups are advancing forward organically through a series of phases, “starting with fee-for-service with some sort of bonus-based quality incentives, moving next to some sort of shared savings program, then shared-risk, leading to primary care-based capitation or shared risk, and ultimately to global capitation or full risk.”

Further, speaking of APG’s member organizations, Crane told his audience, “All of us see capitation as the destination; our hair is on fire about it; we’re excited about it. We want to move the system to that model, because it produces higher quality at lower cost. As you all know, we’re at 18 percent of GDP right now, with really poor results, and we want to change that, through coordinated care.”

Webinar

Can Informatics Drive Clinical Quality Improvements Alongside Operational Improvements in Cancer Care?

Due to the complexity of the disease biology, rapidly increasing treatment options, patient mobility, multi-disciplinary care teams, and high costs of treatment - informatics canplay a more...

Speaking of the mid-term legislative elections that had taken place three days earlier, Crane told his audience, “This election on Tuesday means a number of things: for one thing, repeal and replace is dead, yes,” referring to efforts to eliminate the Affordable Care Act over the past two years. “The big takeaway for us in the healthcare industry is the extent to which the ACA has been cemented into our landscape, right there with Medicare and Medicaid,” he said, referring to the legislation, which had been signed into law by President Barack Obama in March 2010. “So with the Democrats controlling the House, there’s nary a chance that it will be repealed or replaced in the next two years. Also, in three states, initiatives were passed that would expand Medicaid.”

Asked by an audience member about the sustainability of the state-based health insurance exchanges, Crane said, “The notion is that, if you don’t get everybody to pay into the risk pool, how can you get everyone covered? The answer is, time will tell. People have worried that the repeal of the mandate would undermine the exchanges; that hasn’t happened. And in fact, premium costs have seen a fairly moderate risk in the past year of about 2 percent.”

Meanwhile, Crane said, moving into the core of his presentation, “Whither and what of the value movement? The value moment got started with the ACA in 2010 with ACOs. More recently, in 2015, MACRA, the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act, was passed, and that gave us MIPS [the Merit-based Incentive Performance System] and APMs”—alternative payment models. “So a big tailwind was put behind the whole value movement, where physicians and physician groups would be graded on quality measures, and that so that was brought into the fabric in 2015. And we’re well into the value landscape now.”

Documented evidence of the value of coordinated care

What’s more, Crane told the audience of healthcare leaders, “the announcements that you’re hearing from Alex Azar”—the Secretary of Health and Human Services—“are ones in which he repeatedly says that one of their missions is to accelerate the value movement.” Indeed, he said, referring to the proposal by CMS and referred to as “Pathways to Success,” “We’ve seen a pending rule soon to be made final, that will basically push these 400-plus Medicare ACOs much more rapidly into downside risk. And that’s hard to do unless you’ve got a sophisticated system with rich informatics. Many will be afraid of that, but those who are afraid will be winnowed out, and it will leave a more robust, stalwart cohort.”

And, Crane continued, referring to Adam Boehler of CMMI, “We’ve participated in a number of roundtables with Adam Boehler; in fact, I’m seeing him again next Thursday. We haven’t seen any pending rules yet, but we need to get ready for some bold moves in Medicare, where they accelerate the movement. One thing that’s gotten a lot of attention is delegating large portions of the country to players that want to take risk, and then turn around with physicians and hospitals to deliver care to employers like Google. That would allow for prime contracting that would lead to subcontracting for the delivery of care. Much of it is conjectural, but I think it’s coming. With regard to their request for proposals on direct contracting a few months ago—one can see, coming in from out of the mist, as you read the tea leaves, you can see some profound changes in original Medicare that will accelerate this forward.”

Crane went on to review in some detail the results of a study released on March 1 of this year. As the press release announcing those results noted, “Health care quality and cost for commercially insured Californians varied dramatically in 2015, indicating that where you live affects the care you receive and how much it costs, just one of the new findings from the California Regional Health Care Cost & Quality Atlas. Developed by the nonprofit IHA, in partnership with the California Health Care Foundation (CHCF) and California Health and Human Services (CHHS) Agency, the Atlas is the state’s source of comparable performance information about the quality and cost of care provided to 29 million Californians.”

Further, the March 1 press release noted, “The second edition of the Atlas brings together 2013 and 2015 multi-payer data by geographic region—including commercial insurance, Medicare, and Medi-Cal—on more than 30 standardized measures of health care quality, cost, patient cost sharing and utilization to help purchasers, health plans, and policymakers target performance improvement initiatives. An IHA fact sheet provides more details about the Atlas and measures. In 2015, clinical quality varied across the state’s 19 geographic regions by an average of 25 percentage points and costs ranged from 22 percent below to 29 percent above the statewide average. These differences mean: If care for all commercially insured Californians were provided at the same quality as top-performing regions, nearly 205,000 more people would have been screened for colorectal cancer and 31,000 more women would have been screened for breast cancer in 2015. [And] If care for all commercially insured Californians were provided at the same cost as observed in San Diego―a relatively high-quality, low-cost region―overall cost of care would decrease by an estimated $2.6 billion annually, or about 5 percent of the $55 billion total cost of care for the commercially insured.”

That study’s press release included a comment by CHHS Secretary Diana Dooley, who noted that “Increasing transparency is essential for improving quality, lowering cost and gaining consumer confidence. Atlas 2 shows where quality and cost are trending in the right direction and where there is room for more improvement.”

As Crane noted at the Summit, “This was a meta-study commissioned by the Secretary of State for California and the California Health Care Foundation. It aggregated the data of 29 million Californians participating with 10 of the major health plans in CA, all the physician groups. The study had two purposes: one, it looked at geographic variation; the other focus was to compare and contrast the two predominant models in California and elsewhere—fragmented, fee-for-service PPO, compared to capitated, integrated HMO. They were looking at products, but that’s how they looked at the delivery and payment models under those products.

There were three domains—familiar HEDIS measures in the quality domain, which was the first domain; hospital utilization measures in the second domain; and then third and finally, and this is where this is such a distinguishing study, total cost of care—not just premium, hospital fees, physician fees, but also the patient’s share of the premium pay and of co-pays and deductibles. So you get quality and spend, so you have what you need to get to the question of where the value is,” when evaluating data from all those domains.

“So you see 19 different contracting regions through CoverCalifornia, the California exchange,” Crane noted, as he shared a slide with visual results from Atlas 2. “The chief thing is that you should look at the little blue pyramids, commercial HMO, and the orange dots, commercial PPO results. The HMO measures show HMOs outperforming PPOs on quality—very important,” he said, referring to the slide, which showed all the blue pyramids rising above the orange dots. “The chief takeaway here is that PPO products are costlier nearly everywhere, with a few small outliers; and we’re not talking about premium here, but about total cost of care. HMOs—representing capitated, integrated delivery models—performed better on cost and quality across the board.”

Importantly, Crane noted, with regard to quality outcomes among Medicare Advantage-enrolled seniors in California over those enrolled in basic Medicare, “Medicare Advantage outcomes were all superior to those in original Medicare.” Indeed, he noted, “Medicare Advantage outperforms fee-for-service Medicare on hospital utilization, on all-cause readmissions, on ED use, on length of inpatient stays. In short, all Medicare Advantage is shown to be of higher quality and lower-cost than original Medicare—and, importantly, our APG members outperformed everyone else on all of these measures.”

Further, Crane said, “Capitated, integrated care delivery was found to be 14 points higher in quality, and 9 percent lower in total cost of care in commercial health insurance products. And there was $4,450 less total cost of care PMPY [per member per year] in Medicare Advantage in California.”

As the Atlas 2 report itself notes, “In 2015, HMO products delivered clinical quality that averaged 14 percentage points higher than PPO products at an 8% lower total cost when member cost sharing is included. PPO members paid, on average, $620 more out of pocket for care in 2015 than HMO members. HMO hospital utilization was generally higher than PPO even though total cost was lower. Given HMO products typically offer networks composed of integrated providers to a greater degree than PPO products, integrated care (HMOs) offered superior value.”

What’s more, Crane said, “Atlas 2 confirmed a total spend of $16,000 a year on average for seniors; that’s 25 percent lower than in original Medicare. Think of the savings that would be achieved if we overlaid this across all the seniors in California or the United States. This is proof positive of a better model, the model of the future, and one on which we will depend on your participation and your leadership.”

APG’s initiatives around advanced payment models

Crane went on to describe initiatives taking place at APG; in particular, he pointed to the Risk Evolution Task Force, and Third Option, two programs that he said show the way to the future for physician groups and for coordinated care. “The Risk Evolution Task Force,” he explained, “is essentially a benchmarking program mostly for our Medicare ACO and Next Gen participants. In the past, twice, I tried to initiate benchmarking programs, in which members had to submit data.” The mechanics of doing so turned out to be difficult to sustain those past initiatives, he conceded. “But moving forward, this data will be freely available in Medicare off 1500 forms.” Meanwhile, he continued, “Third Option is our proposal that we think will see light of day in a month or so. A few months ago,” he said, “CMMI issued an RFI on director-provider contracting. We said, we have the model. Direct contracting with CMS and a sophisticated qualifying medical group. It would have a capitated payment model. The benefit design would be a hybrid of Medicare Advantage—integrated, capitated; but it would be like original Medicare in that enrollees would still have freedom of choice; but the catch is if you went out of network, you’d pay more. It’s very much like a point-of-service model. So it drives patients in network. We think we’ll see a model that bears some resemblance to this model, coming out of CMMI. That will be a red-letter day for us.”

Importantly, Crane said, “We see a model like this as offering the antidote to single-payer proposals,” including proposals that governor-elect Gavin Newsom indicated interest in, during the gubernatorial campaign that he won on Tuesday. “We’ve been dialoguing with Gavin Newsom,” he reported, “and we’ve said, look, look, if you were to take the capitated, integrated model and spread it across all of California, the savings would be more than the savings needed to generated universal coverage. All we would need would be subsidies and other support.”

In response to a question from the audience about physicians’ reactions to practicing under capitation, Crane said, “The overarching reaction has been extremely good. Physician burnout nationwide is driven by the fee-for-service model. The fee-for-service physician is a hamster on a wheel, continuing to try to see more and more patients, as Medicare payments go down. Contrast that to where you can focus on the patients with highest needs. Take WellMed in Texas,” Crane said, referring to one APG member group, WellMed Medical Group, based in the Dallas area. “Their PCPs are seeing 15 patients a day, and they want to drive that down to 13, using a multidisciplinary team of clinicians and others to drive down the levels of work” to allied health professionals, in order to relieve some of the burdens physicians are facing in their work lives. “And so one of the byproducts is higher levels of physician satisfaction. So just as this model produces results around the Triple Aim, a byproduct is improved physician satisfaction.”

Finally, in closing his address, Crane addressed the healthcare IT leadership audience directly, saying, “You guys are so central to the management of a population. Informatics has been important in the FFS world to a certain extent. But to a physician group being paid through capitated, needs to know who’s’ diabetic, who’s being admitted to hospitals, who will become sicker in the next year, all of that depends on informatics. So I see our fates as inextricably linked.”

 

 


See more on Population Health

betebet sohbet hattı betebet bahis siteleringsbahis