Wednesday, May 1, 2013

Health Insurance's $4.4 Billion Bunker Buster


Health Insurance's $4.4 Billion Bunker Buster - Part I

Dave Chase, Contributor
CEO of Avado: Powering the disruptive innovators reinventing healthcare

English: President Barack Obama's signature on...
English: President Barack Obama's signature on the health insurance reform bill at the White House, March 23, 2010. The President signed the bill with 22 different pens. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Aetna‘s CEO, Mark Bertolini, has been the most powerful voice in the health insurance industry articulating how their business model has been flawed. This is what has driven Bertolini to reinvent Aetna into what he has described as a “healthIT company with an insurance component.” [See also Aetna's Remarkable Reinvention Underway.] Obamacare has simply been an accelerant to an inexorable trend. If it is overturned, it will slow the change, but not necessarily alter it due to a push by employers who have been fed up with the “get less for more” bargain that is unique to healthcare costs unlike any other cost in their income statement.
In the first part of this two-part series, I will outline two under-reported facets of Obamacare that will have far-reaching impacts. In the second part, I will outline how DaVita has made a smart move with their recent $4.4 billion of acquisitions pushing them ahead of virtually all other healthcare provider organizations in the country.
Two portions of Obamacare have received relatively little attention and are a backdrop to DaVita’s prescient moves.  Taken together, these provisions could have a long-term effect that is going to be devastating to the traditional health insurance business while also creating huge new opportunities for them and others.  The first is the new “Medical Loss Ratio” (MLR) requirement. The second is allowing flat-fee primary care practices, also referred to as Direct Primary Care Medical Homes (DPC for short), to compete within the state-based insurance exchanges. The DPC models have a membership model that isn’t insurance-based and so they avoid the 40% or more of the costs associated with insurance that doesn’t positively impact patient well-being.
Medical Loss Ratio Will Drive Insurance Companies to Spike Rates or Opt Out
The new law requires health insurers, starting in 2011, to spend at least 80 to 85 percent of the premiums they collect on medical services or activities that improve the quality of care or else they have to rebate money back to consumers. (That percentage is the MLR.) The remainder can be allocated to administration or profits that don’t benefit patients (e.g., administrative overhead, advertising, etc.).
Many insurance companies have been operating at a 65% MLR (common in the individual and small business market). Consequently, the logical response is to to either jack up their rates or opt out of serving that end of the market. [Note that the large group market is closer to the target already.] It’s not hard to imagine that a small business or individual will look for an alternative if they are faced with a 40% rate increase. In many places such as those reported on by the NY Times, rates have dramatically increased. Sometimes it was through direct increases. Most of the time, it was a combination of a rate increase, coverage limitations and deductible/co-pay increases that obfuscated the full scope of the increase. [For more explanation of unintended consequences of MLR requirements, Forbes' Avik Roy highlighted impacts in Obamacare's MLR 'Bomb' Will Create Private Insurance Monopolies and Drive Premiums Skyward. Hallelujah!]
The better alternative for the buyer of healthcare is DPC combined with a high deductible wrap-around insurance policy. When a large employer has a concentration of employees in one location, they are also increasingly using onsite clinics. For smaller employers, DPC enables the similar objective of expanding access to primary care which employers, unions and others recognize as the best bang for the buck as outlined in “Primary Care Spring” unleashed by IBM.
Direct Primary Care Can Lower Costs by 40% or More
Allowing for DPC is the best example in Obamacare of what can actually bend the cost curve, as it removes 40+% of the cost out of the equation. Previously, that 40% has gone to insurance overhead and profits. This relatively little-known provision in the law creates an affordable new choice for individuals and businesses by allowing flat-fee DPC practices to compete within the state-based insurance exchanges. This is where many Americans and small businesses will be able to shop for health coverage beginning in 2014 although there’s no need to wait until then from a consumer perspective. Smart health insurers have begun to recognize that a way they will compete on insurance exchanges is based on price, so they are actively developing their DPC strategy since the combination of DPC and a high-deductible policy can lead to lower overall costs.
The DPC provision enables Americans to elect a more affordable health care option compared to traditional insurance plans — an alternative in which patients and/or employers pay a flat monthly fee directly to a primary care provider for all primary and preventive care, chronic disease management and care coordination throughout the entire health care system. Under the new law, a flat-fee DPC membership can be bundled with a new, lower-cost “wrap-around” insurance plan that covers unpredictable and expensive services outside its scope, such as specialist care, hospital stays or emergency room visits. Not unlike a health club, DPC practices allow unlimited use. Despite that, over-utilization hasn’t proven to be an issue. Further, since primary care providers don’t have to spend so much time and money on Rube Goldbergian insurance billing procedures, they are able to spend far more time with their patients.
Today, flat-fee practices offer affordable, high-quality health care at up to 40 percent less than the cost of traditional insurance, even when combined with a lower-cost “wrap-around” insurance plan. Benefits of DPC membership vary by provider, but typically include many of the following:
  • Unhurried 30- to 60-minute office visits versus typical 10 minute appointments
  • No limits for pre-existing conditions
  • No deductibles or co-pays
  • Open or accessible 7 days per week, with 24 hour cell phone and email access to a physician
  • Low, predictable monthly fees plus savings on third-party wrap-around insurance plans
  • On-site x-ray, laboratory and “first-fill” prescription drug dispensary
  • Routine care including vaccinations, routine blood tests, women’s health services, pediatric care, on-site procedures and ongoing management of chronic conditions
When you start with a situation where two of the three parties (the patient and primary care physician) involved with a critical transaction are confused or unhappy and the cost to the consumer of that service is going up 20-30% every year, it is ripe for disruption. Talk to virtually any primary care provider (PCP) and they will tell you how challenging their professional lives have become. This has led PCP’s to leave their practices in record numbers with fewer medical students going into the field. Most still love the patient interaction side of the equation, but are extremely frustrated with how insurance has taken away their freedom to practice as they believe is best for their patients. [Dr. Ted Epperly, the recent past president of the American Academy of Family Physicians describes how this has created a shortage of primary care physicians (and other consequences) in his just-released book “Fractured: America’s Broken Health Care System and What We Must Do to Heal It.”]
To understand just how convoluted our health payment system is today, it helps to draw an analogy. What if homeowner’s insurance was like health insurance and was used for regular house upkeep such as having an appliance serviced. Each time we had an appliance serviced, it would require the same inspection, approval, paperwork, and billing hassles that we endure after a fire or major incident at our home. When you had the appliance guy come, he wouldn’t be able to tell you how much it was going to cost. Worse, he wouldn’t even know until he found out whether you were an entrepreneur or worked for a larger employer. If you happened to not work for a large employer, you would likely pay 30% or more than if you’d worked for a large employer since they get price breaks. Home contractors would spend an extraordinary amount of time filling out forms and negotiating reimbursement for every appliance serviced. The overall cost of homeowner’s maintenance would increase exponentially to cover the business overhead. Fewer Americans would be able to afford homeowner’s insurance, laying the groundwork for a national crisis. Sound crazy? This is how it America health insurance works today.
In its place, insurance companies will return to being insurance companies. By that, I mean insurance companies in every other realm underwrite risk for relatively rare items such as house fires, car accidents and the like. They don’t burden day-to-day items such as a visit to Jiffy Lube with the insurance infrastructure that would otherwise jack up the cost of those day to day items. When faced with a 40% increase in premium costs for a model they aren’t particularly satisfied with, it’s not hard to imagine individuals and employers moving en masse to a model that not only costs less but delivers a dramatically higher level of service. As a result, the MLR combined with DPC model is likely to blow a gigantic hole in insurance companies’ traditional business. At the same time, it opens up many opportunities that health insurers such as Aetna have already begun to capitalize upon.

Health Insurance's $4.4 Billion Bunker Buster - Part II

In the first part of this two-part series, I highlighted how the Medical Loss Ratio and Direct Primary Care facets of Obamacare would have far-reaching impacts beyond what most commentators have observed. Healthcare providers and plans (with a few exceptions) are still flat-footed on these critical game-changers. In contrast, DaVita has made some wise moves that should position them well for the future.
DaVita’s Multi-billion Dollar Acquisition Spree
Davita’s $4.4 billion acquisition of Healthcare Partners is further evidence of a radically altered health insurance landscape that is taking shape. DaVita is a dialysis powerhouse that has been expanding beyond its core to capitalize on the dramatic shifts reshaping healthcare. Healthcare Partners is the largest owner/operator of physician practices in the country. HealthCare Partners manages medical groups and physician networks under a system that rewards lowering health costs. Healthcare Partners’ focus on savings and improved outcomes drew DaVita’s interest because its model is “where the puck is headed for American health care,” DaVita Chief Executive Officer Kent Thiry told analysts on a recent conference call.
The Healthcare Partners acquisition comes on the heals of DaVita’s acquisition of ModernMed, a Direct Primary Care (DPC) practice. See news report here and company release here about DaVita’s new Paladina Healthdivision. The combination of aggressive moves in DPC with the Healthcare Partners acquisition could be a potent combination. [See also The Marcus Welby/Steve Jobs Solution to the Medicaid-driven State & County Budget Crisis for more on this game-changing healthcare delivery model that disruptive innvators such as Jeff Bezos and Michael Dell have invested in.]
DaVita’s moves are the best example I have seen of a healthcare organization aggressively repositioning itself to leverage its resources into growing market opportunities.
Change with or without Obamacare
With or without Obamacare, it’s clear to this observer that healthcare is entering a deflationary period that has parallels with the reshaping of the media landscape.  Like healthcare, local media is another industry that has been dominated by market-specific monopolies and oligopolies and where massive capital investments represented a competitive barrier to entry. In newspapers, it entailed owning printing presses whereas in healthcare it has been owning large hospitals.

However, as I highlighted in Nimble Medicine Reshaping Healthcare, more and more medical procedures that could only be done in hospitals in the past can now be done outside of what is always the most expensive place to deliver healthcare. Instead, they can be delivered in healthcare settings such as those now owned by DaVita. This parallels what we have already seen in the local media where lower overhead businesses can thrive in a deflationary environment. Substitutes to newspapers such as Craigslist, OpenTable, Zillow and countless others have demonstrated one can still profit in a deflationary environment, but it can be nightmarish for incumbents.
 Once upon a time, we relied on newspapers for stock quotes, international news, real estate listings, sports news and much more. Today most people receive that information from sources other than newspapers. These alternative channels operate on a much lower cost basis and thus the advertising rates to reach the same number of people have dropped precipitously. It’s not surprising that the healthcare industry has thus far been able to successfully keep pricing as opaque as possible with the massive lobbying investment that has been made. Avik Roy reported recently how a Republican-controlled state (Arizona) government has kept a $250 procedure priced at $4,423. However, businesses being crushed by healthcare costs are fighting for price transparency by signing up for services such as Castlight Health’s price transparency tools. In light of this startup receiving a massive $180 million funding, it appears they are getting a strong response from their corporate customers.
Healthcare providers would be wise to learn from DaVita’s move. Many are focused on automating flawed healthcare reimbursement models as outlined in Health Systems Spending Billions to Prepare for the “Last Battle”. In contrast, DaVita is well positioned to apply their resources and expertise to capitalize on a promising model.
 Note: Dave Chase will be presenting on Patient Engagement during the Accountable Care Organization session moderated by author and Harvard surgeon, Dr. Atul Gawande at the HealthData Initiative “Health Datapalooza” event. The forum is hosted by the United States Chief Technology Officer, Todd Park. Chase’s presentation takes place on June 6, 2012 at theWashington DC Convention Center. He will be making himself available to Forbes readers during the event. He can be contacted at dave{at}avado[dot]com. Information on the event is at www.hdiforum.org. 

Docs' Charting Falls Short of ICD-10 Demands


Docs' Charting Falls Short of ICD-10 Demands

SAN FRANCISCO -- Nearly 65% of clinical documentation doesn't contain enough information for coders to use for billing under the upcoming ICD-10 coding system, a coding expert said here at the American College of Physicians annual meeting.
The switch to the new coding system will greatly increase the specificity of diagnostic codes, and most doctors don't provide enough detail for office coders to translate that to ICD-10, said Rhonda Buckholtz, vice-president of ICD-10 education and training at AAPC, a medical coding society based in Salt Lake City, Utah. Her estimate of the percentage of charts that were inadequately documented came from a survey of patient charts done by the AAPC, but further detail on the survey was not provided.
Complicating the switch for physicians, most payers said they won't reimburse for unspecified codes, which are commonly used by doctors who may not know how to exactly diagnose a patient when they see them, she said. "Under ICD-10, if we're not ready, we're not going to get paid."
Doctors have bemoaned the switch to ICD-10 -- short for International Classification of Diseases, version 10 -- because of the tremendous increase in complexity from the current ICD-9. The number of diagnostic codes will increase from nearly 14,000 to around 69,000. The number of procedure codes will jump from around 3,000 to roughly 87,000.
ICD-10 requires much greater detail on location of ailments, cause and type, and complications or manifestations compared with ICD-9. For example, diabetes will require complications to be incorporated within a single code. And asthma is listed as "mild," "mild intermittent," "mild persistent," "moderate persistent," or "severe."
Therefore, Buckholtz said physicians need to start work now to ensure they will provide enough information for billers to properly code.
Like it or not, the ICD-10 coding switch will occur on Oct. 1, 2014, a date the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has stood firm on after delaying the launch by a year already.
Jeannine Engel, MD, from the University of Utah School of Medicine in Salt Lake City, said studies range from 4% to 11% in the amount of extra time they estimate doctors will spend because of ICD-10.
Complicating the issue for physicians, ICD-9 won't be going completely away next fall. ICD-10 only applies to patients covered under HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, so Workers Compensation patients -- who aren't covered under HIPAA -- will still be billed under ICD-9.
Buckholtz provided a number of tips for physicians, including:
  • Review contracts with health plans and see what additional information they need or what will be changing
  • Test systems and procedures before October 2014 to make sure your office is ready to go
  • Budget costs of the change
  • Train and educate clinicians and other staff members on the changes they need to make
  • Update forms, documentation, and internal processes
"You don't want to wait 'till the last minute because there's no quick fix for ICD-10," Buckholtz said.
CMS has produced tip sheets, handbooks, and other content to aid providers on the transition, Dickon Chan of the CMS regional office in San Francisco told attendees. The agency also hosts periodic teleconferences and sends updates via email.
Chan recommended providers not focus on the more than 100,000 codes in ICD-10, but zero in on the ones that are most applicable to their practice. "You don't need to know every single number in the telephone book, but when it's there, you need it," he said.
John Guzek, MD, an internist at Commonwealth Health in Scranton, Pa., attended the talk and said the changes aren't as extreme as he first thought. He'll note what changes there are.
"I've downloaded an app on my iPad to look at the ICD-10 codes," he told MedPage Today in a video interview. "I'm probably going to be looking through that and seeing what the differences are going to be."
Engel said ICD-9 was first employed in 1975 and hasn't been updated much since then.
"Would you use a 30-year-old cardiac stent? Probably not," she said. "With medicine, 30 is pretty old."
Engel argued that the more granular data will provide insurers and researchers with additional information to track public health risks and quality data, and to design payment systems.

The Hot Spotters Sequel: Population Health Heroes


The Hot Spotters Sequel: Population Health Heroes


Dave Chase, Contributor
CEO of Avado: Powering the disruptive innovators reinventing healthcare

Frail elderly and polychronic patients are a special challenge for our healthcare system. Many have tried and failed to get these two tough cohorts of patients on track to better health. Atul Gawande’s refers to them in his New Yorker piece as The Hot Spotters. Just as law enforcement in community policing identifies crime hotspots, the most challenging (and expensive) patients in a community are identified and become a part of a model that is very proactive about reaching out to them.
The primary focus of Gawande’s article was on a program put in place in Camden, New Jersey by Dr. Jeff Brenner that has received much acclaim. Dr. Brenner has justifiably been lauded for his work and is on the speaking circuit. Less noticed was another physician featured in that article — Dr. Rushika Fernandopulle — who has gone on to aggressively expand on the model that was written about. Dr. Fernandopulle is one of the examples of DIY Health Reform that is providing guideposts to government-driven health reform.
I’ll highlight a few examples of DIY Health Reform that kicked in before Obamacare, yet provide a road-map to programs such as a major program in New York that are building off of these DIY Health Reform approaches. To the extent that the evolving landscape follows models such as the pioneers outlined here, I’m optimistic about the future of healthcare. On the other hand, if Medicare squashes proven models, we’ll be doomed to a continuation of a healthcare system not realizing its full potential. Each of the examples here stand in stark contrast to the common problems outlined in the recent Kaiser Health News/Washington Post article Health Care’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’: No One May Be Coordinating Care.
I have outlined three overarching themes followed by a few examples of providers who have adopted a Hot Spotters type model. Kaiser Permanente is often held up as the future of healthcare in the U.S.  However, I would argue that the models pioneered by Iora Health, the Nuka Model, CareMore, and the New York Health Home program offer a more replicable set of models. Read on for more on each program.
Overarching Theme # 1: Population Health Management
Population Health Management (PHM) has been defined as “the technical field of endeavor which utilizes a variety of individual, organizational and cultural interventions to help improve the morbidity patterns (i.e., the illness and injury burden) and the health care use behavior of defined populations.” Though they take different approaches, they all recognize that the most important medical instrument is communications – something that is woefully under-prioritized in our expensive and inefficient healthcare system.
Brenner describes it vividly. “There is a bias in medicine against talking to people and for cutting, scanning and chopping into them. If this was a pill or or a machine with these results it would be front-page news in the Wall Street Journal. If we could get these results for your grandmother, you’d say, ‘Of course I want that.’ But then you’d say, what are the risks? Does she need to have chemotherapy? Does she need to be put in a scanner? Is it a surgery? And you’d say, no, you just have to have a nurse come visit her every week.” In other words, yet again, patient engagement is the blockbuster “drug” of the century.
A recent past president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, Dr. Ted Epperly, described to me the failing of our present model during a tour through his clinic (disclosure: Dr. Epperly is an advisor to my patient relationship management software company). We stopped at the waiting room in one of the clinics he runs and he simply stated “this is a failure.” When I asked why, he described how they were essentially sitting there waiting for patients to present themselves. Instead, he outlined a vision of a dashboard that proactively manages which patients should be seen if they haven’t heard from them and one that is tracking other patients looking for signals where they should intervene before some issue flares up. The metaphor is less catcher’s mitt and more NASA control center (astronauts were, after all, the original Quantified Self crowd).
Last week, as part of the Oliver Wyman Health Innovation Center advisory board (see Healthcare’s Trillion Dollar Disruption for more), we had a half-day site visit to one of the most successful Medicare Advantage programs in the country (read about CareMore below). Core to their PHM approach is they state that primary care should be an outbound activity, not an inbound activity.
Overarching Theme # 2: Primary Care isn’t Milk in the Back of the Store
As Leeba Lessin (CareMore President) stated ”Primary care has become a specialty referring mechanism, not care driven.” Said differently, our flawed reimbursement model has effectively turned primary care physicians (PCP) into “milk in the back of the store” — i.e., a low margin service intended to direct people to high margin products/services. If a PCP can only make a good living by averaging 7-minute visits with patients, there is little choice but to rapidly figure out whether the presenting symptom is best addressed by a pill, test, or procedure. It’s no wonder that the most unsatisfied physicians are PCPs operating in that broken model. In contrast, the most satisfied physicians I know are operating in one of the models described below that get them off of the 7-minute-per-patient hamster wheel.
All of the models outlined below have rethought their primary care focused models from the ground up. Dr. Fernandopulle stated “What everyone else is trying to do is improve existing practices, making incremental improvements. We figured out that maybe what we need to do is start from scratch.” In one conversation we had, he put it more colorfully as “others are putting wings on cars and calling them airplanes” when I asked him about a popular new model called patient centered medical homes (PCMH). While he agreed with many of the PCMH principles, he believed that simply layering on some new payment structure on top of a severely flawed model was doomed to under-perform.
Team-based primary care is central. For example, Maimonides Medical Center is a pioneer in New York running the “Health Home” program for Brooklyn. [Disclosure: Maimonides Medical Center is a customer of my patient relationship management software company.]  In New York, the Department of Health led by Dr. Nirav Shah is deploying a Health Home program Maimonides is helping to pioneer. The Health Home program has many care team members coordinating care that contrasts sharply with the uncoordinated model of care that is a defining element of today’s healthcare system.
Overarching Theme # 3: Highly Patient-centric Providers
Despite far outperforming their peers, the health organizations highlighted here are tough on themselves. When asked how they’d improve, their comments universally mapped to addressing The 7 Habits of Highly Patient Centric Providers listed below (follow link for more detail on each of the habits).
  1. Multi-provider patient portal/tools
  2. Medical information is made relevant
  3. Patient-generated data is sought out
  4. Portable and on the patient’s terms
  5. Collaborative care process with shared decision making tools
  6. Patient-facing tools that are inviting to use
  7. Recognize the importance of caregivers and the Family proxy

While they are far ahead of their competition, even the organizations outlined here don’t have all of these items. They all recognize that in order to maintain their leadership, they will relentlessly improve in these areas.
Unfortunately, stating one is “patient-centric” has become an overused and abused term. Here is how the leader’s of the Nuka Model described what they do in Family Practice Management (PDF) in contrast to the platitudinal use of “patient-centric.”
There’s a lot of talk about being “patient-centered.” Unfortunately what that usually means is that the patient is put in the middle and then all “really smart professional people” stand around and try to decide what’s best for that person.
In the Nuka model, they use “customer-driven”. This means that everything the customer-owner defines as needs, goals and values become the system’s focus. The doctor and clinical team provide expertise, keep track of preventive matters, explain options and make recommendations. But the customer-owner is in control and makes decisions, rather than the providers trying to decide what is best.
It turns out that when given this kind of control and partnership over time, customers make knowledgeable, informed decisions about their health care treatment and generally choose less aggressive treatments than medical professionals would choose for them.
For the Nuka Model and the programs outlined below, being “patient-centric” isn’t a market platitude — it’s a central design point of their programs and technology. In all of the examples below, the most important enabling software was homegrown or came from a startup. Naturally, the incumbent vendors are profiting and optimizing from the old models. Like any market shift, newer vendors have an advantage as they can nimbly address the nascent market segments that aren’t big enough to get the full focus of the incumbent vendors. Rather than simplistic and silo’ed patient portals that are merely a marketing checkbox, as leading healthIT thinker Shahid Shah has stated, “sophisticated patient relationship management software is the #1 requirement of new accountable models.”
Example # 1: Medicare Advantage Program Wildly Outperforming Its Peers
If you want to get both excited and depressed at the same time, study CareMore. It’s exciting that they have achieved such impressive results within a federally-funded program (Medicare Advantage). On the other hand, it’s somewhat depressing that it hasn’t expanded faster and doesn’t have greater market presence. While it’s a great validation that Wellpoint acquired CareMore for $800 million, it doesn’t appear Wellpoint has done much to embrace and aggressively expand upon this successful model beyond the organic growth CareMore leaders continue to drive.
Oliver Wyman’s head of their Health Innovation Center, Tom Main, co-wrote a piece outlining CareMore’s success entitled The Quiet Health-Care Revolution for The Atlantic. Take a moment to read it. As you’ll see, CareMore is dramatically outperforming their peers with much better health outcomes, lowered costs, and highly satisfied patients. During the site visit, I took notes on what stood out. Here’s a summary:
  • Early intervention is central to their model. CareMore has proprietary resources and predictive modeling allowing for early intervention to prevent acute episodes. See The Atlantic article for an example of how they repeatedly save 98% off of what is typically spent for a common scenario. They’ve learned that many patients fare better with less complex healthcare interventions.
  • At every turn, CareMore challenges the status quo. In their experience, they believe 50% of healthcare costs for chronically ill can be avoided. Though they were founded by a physician they state “A high percentage of physician services can be delivered by non-physicians.”
  • They believe prepayment (capitation) is freedom, not risk.
  • In their experience, a patient can go from being in the Easy chair to ICU in 12 hours so they must rapidly intervene. They talk about “Speedy Delivery” — i.e., services and programs that can be delivered within minutes.
  • CareMore has a “Longitudinal Patient Record” that collects information from several sources — the EHR is only one of 8-10 sources. See Health Systems Spending Billions to Prepare for the “Last Battle” for a contrast with what typical organizations are doing. CareMore’s Longitudinal Patient Record approach is the future. A silo’ed EHR is the past. While I prefer the term Collaborative Health Record to Longitudinal Patient Record, CareMore’s approach is visionary.
  • CareMore states that “Education is a large part of what a patient needs.” See Khan Academy Approach Poised to Solve a “Wicked Problem” in Healthcare for more on one approach to addressing this issue (besides face-to-face encounters).
Example # 2: Direct Primary Care: Secret Weapon Hidden in Obamacare
The simplest way to explain Direct Primary Care (DPC) is “concierge medicine for the masses.” Because it’s a small portion of the Obamacare bill and it has bipartisan support, I’ve called DPC the “David Clause” in Obamacare Ready to Slay the Healthcare Cost Beast. Recognizing its significance, the California Health Care Foundation commissioned a paper to be written about DPC. As they did several years ago when retail clinics emerged, the CHCF analyzes emerging trends on the cusp of high growth.  The release of the paper couldn’t be more timely as the biggest obstacle to DPC exploding more broadly has been the lack of a national insurance player getting behind it — that will change in the next month. On a related note, a regional Blue Shield recently invested in the pioneer of DPC, Qliance. It’s not hard to imagine that they’ll also develop a DPC wraparound policy.
The other obstacle to DPC gaining a big footprint is a national player on the provider side getting behind it. The closest so far is DaVita’s Paladina Health division. With DaVita’s national footprint with their dialysis clinics and their recent $4.4 billion purchase of HealthCare Partners, it’s clear they have their sites set on something larger. It is only a matter of time before a national player that has retail and/or onsite clinics such as Walgreen’s or Walmart will partner with a national insurance carrier. It’s notable that the national insurance carrier isn’t a traditional health insurer. In other words, they have nothing to lose.
Contact me via LinkedIn at http://www.linkedin.com/in/chasedave if you’d like a copy of the seminal study of Direct Primary Care
Perhaps the best demonstration of applying the hot spotting approach in DPC is Iora Health (click link for a previous profile with a slideshow of their outcomes). Dr. Fernandopulle founded Iora Health which just received another round of funding bringing its total to over $20 million raised including funding from Zappos founder, Tony Hsieh. We now have Tony Hsieh, Jeff Bezos, Michael Dell, and Rich Barton (Expedia & Zillow founder) having backed DPC practices.
Two concerns have been raised about DPC. Most recently, I was speaking with Tom Main, the head of Oliver Wyman’s Health Innovation Center who raised these same concerns.
  1. The movement towards DPC could exacerbate the shortage of primary care physicians. As I outlined in WSJ Underestimates the Power of the Market and Healthcare Entrepreneurs, our flawed healthcare reimbursement system has done a masterful job of making primary care increasingly a miserable existence. The most unsatisfied physicians I meet are in fee-for-service-based primary care. In contrast, the most satisfied physicians (of any kind) are those in DPC models. The comment of one who had made the shift was striking when I asked him why he opened a DPC practice. He stated that he found that in order to meet his “productivity” requirements, he was only using 40% of his medical training and felt that it was borderline unethical to continue practicing in a fee-for-service model. While it is true DPC practices have smaller patient panels (typically 500-1000 patients), so do the Extensivists (intensive primary care) in models such as CareMore. They typically have 250 patients.
  2. DPC isn’t supportive of population health management. As mentioned above, DPC providers such as Iora Health are some of the most effective population health managers around. In contrast to the myth that DPC skims the cream, it’s actually the opposite of that. For example, unions have been among the early adopters of DPC models. They work with organizations such has Iora Health and Qliance to identify their highest cost members and put them into team-based care models strikingly similar to CareMore. I would argue that DPC care teams are more prepared than traditional primary care teams who have been operating in fee-for-service models. In fee-for-service, they do the opposite of what CareMore discussed. That is, fee-for-service primary care providers are referral machines.
Example # 3: Indian Health Service Funded Organization Wins Baldrige Award
Read more about the Nuka Model in DIY Health Reform from Massachusetts to Alaska. Following the link will get you to videos from the leaders of the Nuka model describing their approach. You can also read more about the Nuka Model in Family Practice Management (PDF) and Indian Country. The following are excerpts from those articles.
The system’s results—measured from Nuka’s start to today—speak for its strength: 50 percent decrease in visits to specialists, 40 percent decline in urgent care and emergency visits, 30 percent drop in hospital days and admissions, 20 percent decline in primary care visits, and 92 percent employee and customer satisfaction rates.
“Prior to our redesign, the SCF medical system suffered from one of the key problems in health care today. The system misunderstood the core product as being tests, diagnoses, pills and procedures,” she said. “When individuals sought health care services, providers would take their signs and symptoms, perform a physical examination, and produce a different diagnosis. Then, providers would do what health care does really well: order a bunch of tests,” she said.
How Models Can Scale or be Replicated
The following is a summary of how models referenced above should scale or be replicated by others:
  • Nuka Model: The SouthCentral Foundation has regular events in Alaska to teach other organizations how to replicate their model.
  • CareMore: Wellpoint can use its massive scale and customer base to expand upon CareMore. In addition, the past president of CareMore (John Kao) has founded Alignment Healthcare which is designed to scale many of the successes CareMore achieved in tandem with other healthcare organizations seeking to replicate the CareMore model. A recurring theme I hear from forward-looking healthcare organizations is they are using the Obamacare funded programs such as the Pioneer ACO or Medicare Shared Savings programs to build their competency on the federal nickel and then are going all-in on full capitation with Medicare Advantage and other similar programs. As Dr. Jim Bonnette (Chief Medical Officer of Oliver Wyman) stated, “the government is going to be surprised by how fast Medicare Advantage programs grow.”
  • Direct Primary Care: Both Iora Health and Qliance have gotten large funding rounds to expand their footprint. DaVita’s Paladina Health division is quietly expanding their footprint. In the near future, a national health insurer will team with a national player in primary care such as Walgreen’s to offer DPC at scale to consumers via a gym-like monthly membership fee taking DPC from a niche offering to a new model consumers begin to understand. Increasingly health-literate consumers will recognize the waste associated with doing the equivalent of using one’s auto insurance policy for getting oil changed, new tires and other day-to-day needs. As satisfied DPC customers have learned, their monthly membership fee is lower than the co-pays one pay in insurance-burdened primary care.
In a follow-on piece, The Hot Spotters Sequel: New York Health Home, the New York program referenced above targeting the high cost, complex Medicaid population (1 million citizens) is highlighted. It will go into detail on the challenges they face and how they will overcome them. Already they are applying lessons from Camden, NJ and other areas that have had success. At the same time, given the unique challenges of Brooklyn, they’ll have new challenges to face.





Mayo Clinic Wins Two Edison Awards for Healthcare Innovations

Mayo Clinic Wins Two Edison Awards for Healthcare Innovations

AMA: A new initiative to improve health outcomes


AMA: A new initiative to improve health outcomes

AMA: A new initiative to improve health outcomes A guest column by the American Medical Association, exclusive to KevinMD.com.
While the patient populations of individual physician practices vary greatly, nearly all physicians – regardless of practice location or specialty – see patients who have diabetes or cardiovascular disease or are at risk for developing them. Because cardiovascular disease accounts for one third of all deaths in the U.S., and 100 million Americans have diabetes or prediabetes, the American Medical Association (AMA) has launched a multi-year, multi-million dollar initiative to reduce the prevalence of these two diseases and improve outcomes for those already living with these conditions.
Cardiovascular disease and diabetes cause a tremendous amount of human suffering and the costs associated with the conditions are staggering. We will begin this initiative by first addressing the key risk factors for these conditions: high blood pressure and prediabetes.
One in three American adults has high blood pressure, the number one risk factor worldwide for disability and death. The AMA will partner with the Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, a research institute within Johns Hopkins Medicine, to help meet and exceed the goal of the Department of Health and Human Services’ “Million Hearts®” initiative to bring the high blood pressure of 10 million more Americans under control by 2017. We will initially focus on improving outcomes for the 30 million people with hypertension who are receiving medical care but do not have their blood pressure under control. The AMA, working side-by-side with physicians and care teams, patients and families, communities and public health agencies, will seek to better understand the reasons for uncontrolled hypertension, find meaningful solutions and share lessons learned across the nation.
One in three U.S. adults has prediabetes, and those with this condition are at greatly increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Our initial efforts will be in support of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Diabetes Prevention Program. In partnership with the YMCA of the USA, the AMA will work to increase physician referrals of patients with prediabetes to the evidence-based prevention programs offered by the Y that help increase physical activity, improve diet and achieve moderate weight loss. We have researched barriers to referrals and we will use this information to help physicians and medical practice staff, local Ys and other organizations develop new, streamlined approaches to getting patients at risk in diabetes prevention programs.
As physicians, we see firsthand how proper medical interventions coupled with the utilization of community resources can dramatically reduce the impact of cardiovascular disease and diabetes on our population. As the largest physician organization in the nation, the AMA is uniquely positioned to join the efforts currently underway to tackle these diseases, reduce health care spending and create a healthier America.
Jeremy Lazarus is president, American Medical Association.

New ADR Limits Good News for Providers


New ADR Limits Good News for Providers





April 15 is typically a day of dread for many U.S. taxpayers. This year, however, it's a day for celebration among providers participating in Medicare's fee-for-service RAC program. Beginning April 15, 2013, additional documentation request (ADR) limits for the RAC program are essentially reduced for Medicare providers (excluding suppliers and physicians).
Prior to April 15, RACs could select up to 100 percent of any claim type for review. Now they are limited to a maximum of 75 percent on any particular claim type. When combined with the maximum number of ADRs and percent of claims limitations, providers should see a reduction in requests for the most burdensome of RAC audits—acute hospital inpatient (IPPS) stays.
More variability in the type of requests may equate to less paperwork and smaller administrative burdens. Here are the two changes to understand.

Claim Type Combines with ADR Limits to Reduce Administrative Burden

Now only 75 percent of a campus's ADR limit from any single claim type can be requested by the RAC. This is down from 100 percent previously and represents good news for hospitals with a high number of inpatient RAC requests.
The administrative burden of processing ADRs for acute hospital inpatient cases is huge. Now, just 75 percent of the ADRs per 45-day period can be for IPPS records. The remaining 25 percent can be requested from all other types (OPPS, SNF, IRF, IPF, ASC, or physician claims). This change is good news for larger organizations, where the 2 percent Medicare claims volume limit calculation often pushes the number of ADRs received over the limit of 400 or 600 every 45 days.
In other words, while Medicare's original calculations for ADR limits still apply, the layering of the new 75 percent limitation by claim type will reduce the number of inpatient ADRs campuses must process every 45 days.

New Minimum Number of ADRs Helps Smaller Hospitals

Smaller hospitals also benefit from the changes on April 15. In the past, RACs were able to request a minimum of 35 records every 45 days. Smaller facilities often reached their 2 percent Medicare claims volume limit before reaching the 35-record minimum, allowing the RAC to request more records than initially intended.
Now, the minimum number of ADRs that RACs may request is 20 records per 45 days. We expect this change to reduce the number of requests received by smaller hospitals, regardless of claim type.

What Remains the Same

Three pieces of the ADR limit calculation remain the same.
400 or 600 ADR maximum every 45 days
There is still a maximum number of ADRs per 45 days of 400 for providers with less than $100M in MS-DRG payments and 600 for providers with over $100M in MS-DRG payments. Both the 400 and 600 request limits are per every 45 days and across all claim types, including professional services.
2 percent of Medicare claims volume
The AHA-supported Medicare Audit Improvement Act (HR 1250) introduced March 19 also limits RAC medical record requests by campus to 2 percent of the Medicare claims submitted for a particular care setting in the previous calendar year. When combined with the 400 or 600 maximum and 2 percent claims volume calculation, the 75 percent limitation in ADRs from any single claim type is expected to minimize the number of inpatient records requested—relieving the RAC administrative burden for healthcare providers.
Campus concept
Finally, the campus concept is still in use. Multiple locations with the same Tax Identification Number (TIN) and located nearby are now counted as one campus unit, and they share the maximum record request burden. Area is determined by the first three positions of the ZIP code. If the TIN and first three numbers of the ZIP code are the same, multiple locations are counted as one campus.

Demand Letter is Still Key to Managing ADRs

Regardless of the number of ADRs received, ensuring that initial RAC demand letters reach the right contact at each campus is still a serious provider issue nationwide—and a general complaint of the RAC program.
Centralizing audit management to cross all campuses and encompass all claim types is an important step in overcoming this issue. Once the audit management process is herded into one corral, a single point of contact can be established with the RAC or RACs.
It is only by ensuring that the right contact receives all initial demand letters that providers truly improve the audit process, reduce administrative burdens, and take full advantage of new ADR limits.

$65 Billion in Improper Payments in 2012, OAS Deputy Inspector General Tells Monitor Monday Listeners


$65 Billion in Improper Payments in 2012, OAS Deputy Inspector General Tells Monitor Monday Listeners





The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) reported $65 billion in improper payments across eight of its high-risk programs in 2012. This is just one of the morsels of information that listeners of the March 18 Monitor Monday broadcast heard from special guest Gloria Jarmon, Deputy Inspector General (IG) for the Office of Audit Services (OAS) in the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for HHS.
As some readers may know, the OAS is the largest civilian audit agency in the federal government and the biggest section of the OIG. It is the job of OAS investigators—about 600 of them (out of a total staff of 700)—to examine whether HHS and its affiliates are fulfilling their responsibilities.
To do so, the OAS conducts independent audits of HHS programs and operations, either by using its own resources or by overseeing audit work done by others. Investigators also audit the performance of HHS programs and/or its grantees and contractors to determine whether they are fulfilling their respective responsibilities. The goals, says Jarmon, are "to help reduce waste, abuse, and mismanagement and to promote economy and efficiency throughout the department."
In addition to explaining the audits on HHS programs, she provided examples of the amount of improper Medicare and Medicaid payments collected from providers. She also reviewed the purpose of, and results from, Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 (IPIA) as amended by the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010 (IPERA).

Obeying the IPERA

Lest healthcare providers think that they are the only ones undergoing federal government scrutiny, think again. Although many readers may not have heard of the IPERA, it's an important piece of legislation designed to ensure that DHHS is doing its job. (A summary can be found at https://oig.hhs.gov/oas/reports/region1/171352000.asp.)
Specifically, the legislation requires the OIG to review and report on annual improper payment information included in the agencies' financial reports (AFR). The OAS established the following objectives for this review:
  • Determine whether HHS complied with the IPIA for fiscal year 2012 in accordance with related Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance.
  • Evaluate the accuracy and completeness of the HHS's reporting.
  • Evaluate HHS's performance in reducing and recapturing improper payments.
Although HHS has met many of the requirements, it is not, says Jarmon, in full compliance—even though, as stated above, the department reported $64.8 billion in improper payments in 2012. The payment came from eight programs deemed to be high-risk by the OMB. It did not, however, report an error rate for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.
HHS also reported that four of the nine programs met their improper rate-reduction targets, but three of nine did not (Medicare fee-for-service, Medicare Advantage, and foster care). This requirement didn't apply to the two remaining programs (TANF and the Children's Health Insurance Program [CHIP] because a target hadn't been established for either of them. The department achieved improper payment rates below 10 percent—another requirement of the act—for each of the other programs reported on except Medicare Advantage.
As Jarmon says, "The challenge remains for the department to further reduce improper payments and to meet its target rates and develop error-rate reduction targets and corrective action plans for CHIP and ensure effective monitoring of TANF. We do acknowledge that the department plans to take action to address our recommendations."

Monitoring Medicare and Medicaid

A primary focus of the OIG is to identify and reduce improper payments and create opportunities to achieve cost savings, and Jarmon shared examples of audits being conducted to achieve these goals.
For example, in 2012, the HHS reported about $65 billion in improper payments—most from Medicare or Medicaid claims. Recent work has focused on improper hospital payments. The OAS reviewed and issued reports of its findings from 50 hospitals and performed audit work on another 50 hospitals for which no reports have yet been issued. The purpose of these audits, says Jarmon, is "to improve internal hospital controls, increase provider awareness and compliance with Medicare rules, and recommend recovery of identified overpayments."
OAS investigators also have recently reviewed the Medicare overpayment collection efforts of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and recommended improvements to those efforts. CMS has already taken steps to address those concerns.
Medicaid audits also are being conducted, and, like in the Medicare program, auditors are looking for improper payments and potential ways to achieve cost savings.
For example, "In New York, we reported on the issue of excessive rates charged to the federal government related to the care of small populations of developmentally disabled individuals at an intermediate care facility. This audit showed that the federal government would have saved $700 million in the audit year," she said. This uncovering resulted in a congressional hearing last September.
Another example: In the past six years, OAS has issued 20 reports on Medicaid personal care services' and conducted numerous investigations. For a full description of this program, Jarmon recommends consulting the OIG's portfolio entitled Personal Care Services: Trends, Vulnerabilities and Recommendations for Improvement, which outlines the steps taken to uncover about $580 million in questionable charges from several state programs.
The OAS also conducts Medicaid audits in home health agencies, military providers, and durable medical equipment suppliers.
"Our responsibility spans a department with a budget of $900 billion. We have a very large audit responsibility," said Jarmon.