e-Patient Dave

Power to the Patient!

By 4 Comments

The Big Ugly continues: “Hospital charges bring a backlash”

Here’s the next episode in what I’m starting to call “The Big Ugly” – a wave of suffering that will happen as the medical industry contracts, and everyone tries to find ways to maintain their income. Unfortunately when an industry shrinks, everyone can’t maintain the same income. As anyone knows who’s seen an industry die (like mine, typesetting; or steel in America, or what Detroit went through), it’s painful. Good people get hurt, and organizations fight for survival.

Medicine’s certainly not going to die – we need it – but the Institute of Medicine says (see links below) we have massive overspending, and when the overspending shrinks, that too will hurt.

Today’s Boston Globe has the newest item: Hospital charges bring a backlash:

Patients, angered by surprise surcharges that hospitals tack on bills for doctor visits, are increasingly challenging these fees — sometimes even refusing to pay.

Hospitals say the charges cover their overhead, but the fees are sometimes added to the bill even when patients are treated in offices miles away from the medical centers. …

The Globe published a story in January about a patient charged $1,525 in operating room and facility fees for a minor skin procedure. Yeah, the doctor charged $354 for her services, and the hospital (Lahey Clinic) added $1525 of overhead. Another patient is quoted as sounding like (amazingly) an empowered consumer:

“I am willing to spend my money for my doctor — I am getting expert care,’’ said the New Hampshire resident. “I am not willing to pay $500 to sit in a waiting room.’’

Watch for more stories of overhead charges, and more, as organizations gasp for air, and ask consumers to bear the burden. See other stories in the links below, like the chain that put its E.R. docs on quota.

What to do: [Read more…]

By 3 Comments

Collapse couldn’t happen in law, and it can’t happen in medicine. Right?

If you care (or worry) about the crunch-time that’s beginning in medicine, read this post last Tuesday on the Harvard Business Review blog:

Creative Destruction Visits the Legal Profession

It has strong echoes of what I wrote last month in As the crunch hits, will the best survive? That post talked about how much pain there’s likely to be as we try to solve the $750 billion of unnecessary spending in US medicine.  Until now I wasn’t aware of how much the legal profession has been hit by changing realities. Items from the HBR post:

  • “In the ten years or so since running that course, the assumptions underpinning a lot of the business models at law firms have come unraveled. Just as we argued, a lot of the lower-end, but profitable, work is now being done by cheaper providers or has been automated”
  • “Legal budgets have come under intense scrutiny as the Great Recession’s aftermath grinds on.”
  • “And — gasp — lawyers are now realizing that if nobody is looking after the business end of things — ahem — in other words, being strategic, the entire operation can come to a crashing halt. Witness the spectacular bankruptcy of once high-flying Dewey & LeBoeuf.”

Yeah, the bankruptcy of a once-high-flying law firm. More:

  • “The problems started to become urgent when young lawyers, armed with freshly minted degrees, either couldn’t get legal jobs or, worse yet, couldn’t get jobs at all.” Only 55% percent of 2011 graduates had a law-related job nine months after graduation.

Imagine if only 55% of med school graduates could find a job. Can’t happen, right?

That’s at the low end. And at the top?

By 2 Comments

Pricing visibility – video interview with HealthWorks Collective

Last month I was interviewed by Joan Justice of HealthWorks Collective. She’d picked up on my “visible pricing” rant, and couldn’t agree more, so we did this nine minute Skype interview.  Her full post about it is here.

Her entire series of interviews on high quality, low cost healthcare is here. Thanks for including me, Joan – it was stimulating!

By 1 Comment

Reprise: The healthcare waste pit is BIGGER than the fiscal cliff.

For my last post of the year, as word filters out that Washington still can’t fix “the cliff,” I’ll do something rare: repeat something from just a few days ago. This needs to sink in for everyone who wants to fix America’s medical costs:

The “fiscal cliff” is big, but America’s excess medical costs are 30% bigger.
(Not total costs – just the waste that needs to be trimmed.)

As we start 2013, think about that.
Think how much commitment and guidance
it will take to fix it.

Some providers are working really hard to improve effectiveness,
and some insurance companies are too.

Some aren’t.

A lot of people’s income depends
on keeping things the way they are.

During the change, how will we ensure
that families and the best workers in the system are protected
while inefficiencies are pruned?

Here’s this week’s post again, tweaked just a little:

[Read more…]

By 9 Comments

What “patient centered” means to me: a realization from Holland on the role of the patient in research

patients included badge

I’m sensing a number of things coming together, creating a new view of what’s possible and what’s changing in healthcare. I want to take a moment to present some background, then share the mind-pop that hit me yesterday while writing something. It clarified my shifting view of the role of the patient in medical research – no small subject!

Background: different views of the role of the patient

As regular readers know, patient engagement got a big boost in April 2011, when I was invited to speak at TEDx Maastricht in Holland. My talk there continues to be in the top half of most viewed TED Talks of all time – an enormous boost to any cause.

Well, it’s no accident that it happened there. Organized by my now-friend @LucienEngelen, it was the first in a series of conferences he now calls “the Future of Health,” and for him it’s all about the patients – so much so that it was the first conference I know of where the first speaker announced (a year in advance) was a patient.

That’s an unconventional way to announce a new conference in medicine – and that was two years ago. He’s so patient-centered that a year later he announced he’d no longer attend or even accept speaking invitations to conferences that don’t actively support patient participation. He announced the Patients Included badge  you see above. In his TEDxMaastricht talk this year he mentioned his parents’ deaths from cancer and his thoughts about his own odds. Describing the badge, he cites leaders like Gunther Eysenbach, Denise Silber and Larry Chu whose events do include patients.

TEDMED pill warning graphic

His university’s med school mission is “The patient as partner.” This touches, massively, on the TEDMED 2013 Great Challenge, Role of the Patient. TEDMED has tended to think of it in terms of whether patients follow orders: the signature graphic for this challenge (right) is a blow-up of warning labels on a pill bottle! Really, TEDMED?? This signifies the role of the patient?

And in the crowdsourced discussion, question 2 was “Is there a conflict between empowering patients and honoring the expertise and authority of medical professionals?” I have bigger possibilities in mind than whether patients heed warnings and honor authority.:-)

Taking it to the world of research

[Read more…]

By 3 Comments

The healthcare waste pit is bigger than the fiscal cliff.

Two weeks ago I talked about the magnitude of America’s $750 billion of unnecessary spending (per the Institute of Medicine). I put it this way:

If Intel, Microsoft, Apple, GM, IBM, Ford, Chrysler and Dell all went out of business, it still wouldn’t add up to that much.

I found another way to comprehend it. Hold onto your hat: $750 billion is bigger than the whole Fiscal Cliff we’re so scared about.

Yes, way bigger than that cliff in the news – the fiscal cliff that’s so big Grover Norquist caved in on his tax pledge, so big it embarrassed Speaker Boehner when he STILL couldn’t rally his troops – that cliff is “only” $560 billion, according to Wikipedia as of today.

I do amateur arithmetic :-) so I was quickly able to calculate that $750 billion is 30% bigger than $560 billion – even without a calculator!:-)

$560 billion + 30% (another $168 billion) = $728 billion.
(Okay, so that’s still shy of the $750b. My point stands.)

Our august leaders Norquist, Boehner and Obama speak of the Fiscal Cliff in desperate terms – but I don’t hear anyone speaking with the same urgency about the healthcare waste pit. But it’s going to hit us all, so  you and I – all of us who have a stake in the future of healthcare – ought to be thinking what we’ll do in the coming years as this industry rationalizes to a saner spending level.

The changes will be substantial. As I said in the earlier post, we must detect and protect the good work of the best providers. And above all as fights unfold over the shrinking ocean of money, we must ensure that families who need care are indeed taken care of.
__________

(While we’re at it, recall this 2009 post: I’m sick of hearing Washington talk about savings “over ten years” … how are we supposed to make sensible judgements if a $5 billion saving (a drop in this bucket) is inflated to “$50 billion over ten years”?)