Friday, April 25, 2014

The Next Generation of Healthcare: Games and E-Learning – high value, low cost!


Games drive engagement through consumer activation. We know this! They are a fantastic way to challenge learners and keep them engaged and interacting with the content at hand.

So, how do we improve on something that is already awesome? We embed it in a learning ecosystem that drives improvement through partnerships with all stakeholders. This new learning environment sets the stage for providers, patients and caregivers to connect and communicate - anytime, anywhere, any place and on any device.

As we move towards a healthcare system that reimburses for value instead of volume we will need tools that can capture this next generation of care.  We will need to automate the processes of education and learning much like the electronic claims we send today. All of this data will then need to be interpreted to understand and truly visualize the path to wellness. That feedback will allow us to refine the process and continually work to improve the delivery of care.

But what if we can already do this through fun, engaging, and cost effective e-learning games? I believe we can! With the help of new technology, such as the xAPI, we can now track and measure all those things that were so hard to track before.

These short games below can capture up to 32 data points vs. the traditional check boxes, and take days to get to market instead of months. Imagine the possibilities. 


Click on a game below to launch.  Bird Hunt is a flash game, so you will need a flash browser. The Olympic Mountain Summit game is not. 


Fred was just diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and now he is afraid to enjoy the things he used to. This game combines his love of hunting with diabetes education. 



Johnny Three-Scoops and Earl Strong-Fit will not only be fighting for their individual victories tonight, but the fate of their entire teams may lie in the outcome of this single event. With only 3 events left, and this being the only event in which their respective teams have a real contender, this could decide the gold.

Can you help TEAM HEALTH reach the top first by correctly answering the questions?



For more fun, FREE Games visit our website: www.mhealthgames.com

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Gamification in healthcare isn't just about playing games

There are a number of pilot projects, technology startups and other developers who are playing around with gamification in healthcare. It's not yet clear whether this approach -- mixing self-monitoring and entertainment -- is yielding the type of traction and adoption that will ultimately lead to sustainable patient behavior modifications and improved health outcomes. Still, I suspect there will be significant growth in this area over the next several years as more patients adopt a consumer mentality about their health and wellness.
For example, people using the Pact mobile app by GymPact risk losing money if they don't follow through on their commitment to exercise. The app requires them to set a personal goal to eat right and exercise several times each week. The users also designate a financial amount that they are willing to lose if they don't follow through on their promise. Those who faithfully exercise earn money that gets paid by those who don't keep their "pact," creating an ecosystem where some users are paying others.
We have only seen the beginning of how gamification principles will help patients improve their health.
The Pact app and its approach to improving health has some parallels to online gambling. Some people simply enjoy the entertainment aspect of online gambling, while others may have an addiction or are highly motivated by the desire to earn money. Similarly, there are people who are compelled to exercise and lose weight, while others are casually exercising to maintain an average level of fitness.
The concepts and principles of gamification are all around us, whether we recognize them or not. Many people are naturally competitive and like to compare themselves to others. That is why companies like to host walking competitions and measure their employees' performance and progress by giving them wearable activity trackers like Fitbits. This desire to compete is also why television shows like The Biggest Loser are so popular. So, even if you are not the type of person to spend countless hours on playful games like Angry Birds or FarmVille, we are all wired in a way to enjoy and to be motivated by the core principles behind gamification.
Accenture reported there are seven key elements behind gamification: status, milestones, competition, rankings, social connectedness, immersion reality and personalization. As consumers become more engaged with their own health, they will take greater responsibility for managing their own condition. People who have diabetes will feel the need to learn more about their condition, their medications, and how they can improve their self-management.
Those who are healthy can stay that way by becoming more knowledgeable about disease prevention, age-appropriate screenings, and maintaining active lifestyles. As people gain more knowledge and insight about their conditions, they will want to set goals, measure their progress against those goals, reach milestones, and compare their performance against certain benchmarks. If patients take these steps to be actively engaged in staying healthy, they will apply gamification principles whether they realize it or not.
We can't forget about those who enjoy smartphone games and spend many hours tapping on screens to play mind-numbing (but thoroughly entertaining) games. For these individuals, adding a gaming element to disease self-management could reduce their apprehension toward the medications and treatments associated with the condition. There are also examples of this targeted at children. Muppets Band-Aids incorporated a quick response code on the Band-Aids so a parent can scan the code with their smartphone to show an entertaining video to a toddler who just scraped his knee. When Kermit the Frog starts singing about feeling blue, will the child forget about his scraped knee? There is a more serious example of the Pain Squad iPhone app that is designed to help children dealing with cancer track their symptoms so their clinical care team can do a better job to manage their pain.
Simulation games such as PatientPartner are aimed at helping patients improve their medication adherence. By walking through a virtual role-playing game, patients can learn about the various clinical outcomes that may result if they fail to adequately manage their health conditions. Monster Manor is a game that engages young children with diabetes to be better at taking their insulin and to have fun while they are doing it.
We have only seen the beginning of how gamification principles will help patients improve their health. As healthcare providers, payers and innovators find successful ways to engage patients by applying gamification strategies to both children and adult patients, we will see a shift in population health that is driven by more engaged and motivated individuals. Gamification will motivate some patients to receive ongoing feedback, reminders and status updates about their progress in caring for their own health.
About the author:Joseph Kim is a physician technologist who has a passion for leveraging health IT to improve public health. Dr. Kim is the founder of NonClinicalJobs.com and is an active social media specialist. Let us know what you think about the story; email editor@searchhealthit.com or contact @SearchHealthIT on Twitter.

Digital healthcare is the way forward



The focus of modern healthcare is around lifestyle issues such as obesity and diabetes. Picture: PA

  • by GRANT CUMMING
Published on the 16 April 2014

Patients can be taught self-care, says Grant Cumming

A new building named the Alexander Graham Bell Centre, located on the campus of Moray College UHI in Elgin, will be officially opened in June to further the pioneering work already being done in the area on digital healthcare or e-health. Detailed attention has been paid to the internal architecture because the centre’s purpose is to bring together – and create a flow of ideas between – people working in digital healthcare in the public and private sectors as well as medics, social workers and academics.

Drawing on the “social physics” ideas of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, professor Alex Pentland, among others, the centre will be a hub for developing new and innovative ways of providing healthcare using information and communication technology (ICT).

Social physics outlines how human behaviour is driven by the exchange of ideas and learning from each other. It also identifies how large amounts of very specific data available on the internet through different types of computer technology can be used to help this process.

For example, one in four people in Moray consults the internet prior to visiting their GP, giving doctors an insight into the value of highlighting credible sources of information to patients which might allow them to look after themselves.

We can no longer afford to deliver healthcare under the existing model. Our system was built to deal with infection and while we will always have infection, the focus of modern healthcare is around lifestyle issues such as obesity and diabetes.

The traditional model is reactive when we need to be concentrating much more on preventative and personalised medicine – we need new ideas on how we engage with a person and their wellbeing throughout their life and that is what the centre is there to generate.

In part, the challenge is subtly to alter the behaviour of patients. As well as Alex Pentland’s, the work of behavioural economists Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein on nudging people to take action and that of psychologist Daniel Kahneman, whose global bestseller Thinking Fast and Slow contrasts fast, instinctive and emotional thinking with slower, more logical thinking in human decision-making, has been influential.

We can teach people to look after themselves. We need an element of nudging – persuading people to take action, for example by highlighting the dangers of smoking. We also need budging – making people take action, for example the ban on smoking in public spaces. We can use information and new technology, perhaps even gaming, to create, for instance, a fun way to exercise to get a message over to some groups.
The internet is now a social web where we can order goods and interact with people, where information within documents can be linked and disparate databases mined for more information.

We must look at how we can connect and collaborate and use that technology to improve the delivery of healthcare, and where better to develop that format than here in Moray?

Moray has already won global recognition for its excellence in the field of digital health, hosting a World Health Organisation conference on the subject in 2012. And two of the four projects in the UK to have received substantial funding under the DALLAS (Delivering Assisted Living Lifestyle at Scale) scheme are in Moray.

They are:

n Year Zero, an online application which enables people to manage their health information and includes an online family tree, a digital version of the red book that is given to all parents to record their child’s health and Rally Round, a social networking and planning tool to connect family, friends, carers and health and care professionals.

n Living It Up, which uses connected TVs to give people access to health and community information within their own homes. Moray is the test bed area for the project.

It is hoped that the Alexander Graham Bell Centre will further enhance the area’s reputation for digital healthcare.The centre has conference facilities, eight classrooms, custom-built corridor learning pods for students, a community hub and cafĂ©. It also has a mock hospital ward, a resuscitation training room, research facilities and space for new enterprises.

The whole place will be a melting pot for ideas, a safe space in which we hope we will be able to redesign how we deliver healthcare.

• The £6.5 million Alexander Graham Bell Centre has been funded by Highlands and Islands Enterprise, Moray College UHI, NHS Grampian and the European Regional Development Fund. 


Professor Grant Cumming, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Dr Gray’s Hospital, Elgin is one of the medical professionals behind the creation of the centre.


Monday, April 21, 2014

The serious business of gamification


If you’re interested in changing behaviour in your workplace, helping employees or customers to develop new skills, or spurring innovation, you may want to consider the approach known as gamification. If that scares you – given that the word is ugly and sounds as if you would just be encouraging staff to play video games – Brian Burke, a vice-president at technology research firm Gartner Inc., says you should relax.
Gamification is actually not about playing games. Games are about entertainment. Gamification is serious stuff, using game mechanics such as badges and awards to digitally engage and motivate people to achieve their goals.
“It’s not entertainment. It’s motivation,” Mr. Burke said in an interview.
He points to the Boy Scouts, which has long used badges to motivate youngsters, and Weight Watchers, which uses a points system and social encouragement to nudge dieters. Both are examples of gamification from the days before the term was even coined. “It provides them with the encouragement, motivation, and clear path to achieve a goal,” he said.
Mr. Burke stresses that when using gamification, it is vital that the emphasis not be on organizational goals but on motivating people to achieve their own goals. When those personal objectives are aligned with the organizational goals, you can hit the gamification jackpot.
Behavioural change is the most common use for gamification. It comes in handy because new habits must be created to change behaviour, and gamification can excite us to adopt those practices.
In his book Gamify, Mr. Burke notes that Spanish bank BBVA used gamification to encourage customers to use its online services. The BBVA Game, which has 80,000 users, rewards players for completing challenges that educate them about Web banking, encouraging them to use the service. Points are awarded, which can lead to prizes. It has led to a 5-per-cent increase in BBVA’s Web-banking users, who spend 60 per cent more time on the site. Because online banking can be easier than going to a branch, the game is aligned with customers’ needs. But it’s also aligned with BBVA’s needs, because it reduces costs.
Samsung Electronics focused on customers with its social loyalty program, dubbed Samsung Nation. Customers are rewarded with points, levels and badges for watching product videos or commenting on Samsung products. The program has doubled the number of items placed in online shopping carts.
A key to success for behavioural change is to increase complexity over time. The BBVA Game starts by encouraging customers to watch instructional videos and then try simple operations such as checking an account balance. As users become more confident with the help of coaching, they move to more complex tasks such as paying bills.
Gamification can also help people to build their skills. Learning new skills often requires a repetitive process of lectures and practice, which gamification can handle. Or if the skill is best learned in an experiential way – such as being presented with a problem to solve – gamification can provide a vehicle for collaboration with others.
There have long been games that can teach new skills, such as Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? (a series of video and computer games and TV shows designed to stimulate kids’ interest in geography, cultures and history). But Mr. Burke says those are games first, and skill-builders second. Gamification puts the skill-building first.
U.S. organizations such as Capital BlueCross are using it to educate members on the complexities of health care. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services applied a gamified solution to educate health-care practitioners on best practices about privacy and security.
A key element of design is to create theory-practice loops. Players are provided with instruction, a challenge, and feedback on their efforts. “Gamification breaks the learning process into small, achievable steps and provides constant feedback and encouragement throughout the process,” Mr. Burke writes in his book.
To spur innovation, gamification can encourage people to submit innovative ideas, evaluate proposals and then collaborate to refine the idea into reality. Quirky, a crowdsourcing product-development company that has more than 6,000 inventors as members and has launched more than 400 new products since 2009, uses gamification in this way.
Mr. Burke says the process can be captivating. During his research he found himself hooked as he submitted a name for an anti-theft rucksack – one of 1,400 possible choices – and watched his suggestion bounce up and down in the Quirky rankings.
While he is an enthusiast, Mr. Burke warns that the biggest challenge facing companies is to understand the limitations as well as the opportunities of gamification. “A lot of organizations are pursuing opportunities that are unlikely to be successful with gamification,” he said. Faced with a problem, they throw some points at it and hope a solution will materialize. But you need to figure out how a point system might work, how to employ collaboration, and whether what you are designing can hold for the long term as well as short term.
But if you get it right, he believes you can harness the power of game design to great benefit for your organization.
Harvey Schachter is a Battersea, Ont.-based writer specializing in management issues. He writes Monday Morning Manager and management book reviews for the print edition of Report on Business and an online work-life column Balance. E-mail Harvey Schachter

Sunday, April 20, 2014

"The Case of the Bad Blood Sugar" - Help Detective Wells solve this case!



 Mr. Bad Blood Sugar and his gang of carbohydrates have initiated a crime wave of epidemic proportions! 

Detective Wells is hot on their trail, but he needs you to help find the clues that will solve the mystery.

Click the image above to launch the game!

mHealthGames.com

Thursday, April 17, 2014

The European Commission has launched its long-awaited mHealth consultation, and hinted that policy action could be forthcoming as early as 2015.

mHealth consultation launched

The European Commission has launched its long-awaited mHealth consultation, and hinted that policy action could be forthcoming as early as 2015.


European Commission vice-president Neelie Kroes was unequivocal in her support for the emerging area: “mHealth will reduce costly visits to hospitals, help citizens take charge of their own health and well-being, and move towards prevention rather than cure. It is also a great opportunity for the booming app economy and for entrepreneurs,” she said.
Outlining benefits from better use of mHealth services the Commission said the technology would: put patients in control, enabling them with greater independence and helping to prevent health problems; make healthcare systems more efficient, with huge potential for cost savings; and create opportunities for innovative services, start-ups and the app economy.
The European app economy is already worth €17.5 billion and has generated 1.8 million jobs, thus the economic issue is an important one.
In addition, the Commission says that if the full potential of mHealth is “unlocked” it could save a further €99 billion in healthcare costs across the EU, providing issues like mHealth app safety, usage of data, etc. are addressed.
It is now more than two years since the first mobile health app was registered in the UK as a medical device. Subsequent developments of significance to the Commission include strategies in the USA, where for example the FDA took a tailored approach to mobile health app regulation last year.
The three month consultation will run until July and the Commission hopes to engage with a wide variety of stakeholders, including patient organizations, healthcare professionals, app developers and mobile device manufacturers.
European Commissioner for Health, Tonio Borg said: “mHealth has a great potential to empower citizens to manage their own health and stay healthy longer, to trigger greater quality of care and comfort for patients, and to assist health professionals in their work. As such, exploring mHealth solutions can contribute to modern, efficient and sustainable health systems.”

Sunday, April 13, 2014

Nearly 9 out 10 Adults May Lack the Skills Needed to Manage their Health and Prevent Disease


What is health literacy?

Health literacy is the degree to which individuals have the capacity to obtain, process, and understand basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions.1
Health literacy is dependent on individual and systemic factors:
  • Communication skills of lay persons and professionals
  • Lay and professional knowledge of health topics
  • Culture
  • Demands of the healthcare and public health systems
  • Demands of the situation/context
Health literacy affects people's ability to:
  • Navigate the healthcare system, including filling out complex forms and locating providers and services
  • Share personal information, such as health history, with providers
  • Engage in self-care and chronic-disease management
  • Understand mathematical concepts such as probability and risk
Health literacy includes numeracy skills. For example, calculating cholesterol and blood sugar levels, measuring medications, and understanding nutrition labels all require math skills. Choosing between health plans or comparing prescription drug coverage requires calculating premiums, copays, and deductibles.
In addition to basic literacy skills, health literacy requires knowledge of health topics. People with limited health literacy often lack knowledge or have misinformation about the body as well as the nature and causes of disease. Without this knowledge, they may not understand the relationship between lifestyle factors such as diet and exercise and various health outcomes.
Health information can overwhelm even persons with advanced literacy skills. Medical science progresses rapidly. What people may have learned about health or biology during their school years often becomes outdated or forgotten, or it is incomplete. Moreover, health information provided in a stressful or unfamiliar situation is unlikely to be retained.

Why is health literacy important?

Only 12 percent of adults have Proficient health literacy, according to the National Assessment of Adult Literacy.  In other words, nearly nine out of ten adults may lack the skills needed to manage their health and prevent disease.  Fourteen percent of adults (30 million people) have Below Basic health literacy.  These adults were more likely to report their health as poor (42 percent) and are more likely to lack health insurance (28 percent) than adults with Proficient health literacy.6
Low literacy has been linked to poor health outcomes such as higher rates of hospitalization and less frequent use of preventive services (see Fact Sheet: Health Literacy and Health Outcomes). Both of these outcomes are associated with higher healthcare costs.


Key research study findings on the relationship between health literacy and health outcomes:

Use of preventive services

According to research studies, persons with limited health literacy skills are more likely to skip important preventive measures such as mammograms, Pap smears, and flu shots.1 When compared to those with adequate health literacy skills, studies have shown that patients with limited health literacy skills enter the healthcare system when they are sicker.2

Knowledge about medical conditions and treatment

Persons with limited health literacy skills are more likely to have chronic conditions and are less able to manage them effectively. Studies have found that patients with high blood pressure,3 diabetes,3-5 asthma,6 or HIV/AIDS7-9who have limited health literacy skills have less knowledge of their illness and its management.

Rates of hospitalization

Limited health literacy skills are associated with an increase in preventable hospital visits and admissions.10-13 Studies have demonstrated a higher rate of hospitalization and use of emergency services among patients with limited literacy skills.12

Health status

Studies demonstrate that persons with limited health literacy skills are significantly more likely than persons with adequate health literacy skills to report their health as poor.10, 12 14

Healthcare costs

Persons with limited health literacy skills make greater use of services designed to treat complications of disease and less use of services designed to prevent complications.1, 11-13 Studies demonstrate a higher rate of hospitalization and use of emergency services among patients with limited health literacy skills.10-13 This higher use is associated with higher healthcare costs.15 16,

Stigma and shame

Low health literacy may also have negative psychological effects. One study found that those with limited health literacy skills reported a sense of shame about their skill level.17 As a result, they may hide reading or vocabulary difficulties to maintain their dignity.18

Partner with mHealth Games to promote health literacy and begin improving health outcomes today!





Friday, April 11, 2014

Data is at the heart of Somerset's integration masterpiece


South Somerset’s Symphony project constructs morbidity profiles for a range of long term conditions – showing the true cost and the extent of multi-morbidities. Andrew Street, Panos Kasteridis and Jeremy Martin explain
Nurse treating patient
Many people have complex and ongoing care needs and require support from multiple agencies and various professionals
Since the inception of the NHS, an ever-present challenge has been to improve integration of care within the health and social care system.
Many people have complex and ongoing care needs and require support from multiple agencies and various professionals. But care is often fragmented and uncoordinated, with no one agency taking overall responsibility, so it is often left to individuals and their families to negotiate the system as best they can.
‘It is designed to establish greater collaboration between primary, community, mental health, acute and social care, particularly for people with complex conditions’
In South Somerset, the county council, district hospital, community provider and clinical commissioning group have set up the Symphony project to develop a model of integrated care intended to both improve services and boost efficiency. It is designed to establish greater collaboration between primary, community, mental health, acute and social care, particularly for people with complex conditions.

Colloboration at heart

The project is based on the principle of collaborative care, centred on the needs of individual patients, facilitated by integrated financial arrangements and better pathway management. This means that all of the different organisations involved in delivering services will need to work together to deliver a tailored package of care.
Collaborative working is to be incentivised by a shared outcomes framework, with joint responsibility for all organisations to deliver the outcomes and linked financial structures under an “alliance contract”.
To be able to realise these ambitions, arrangements need to be targeted initially at a subset of the population that would be expected to benefit most from integrated care. We developed broad criteria to identify groups most amenable to integrated care:
  • The number in the group needs to form a sufficiently large “risk pool” so that those with high costs are offset by those with low costs.
  • To realise savings, initial focus should be directed toward groups for which current expenditure is relatively high.
  • Those using services across diverse settings are more likely to be benefit from integrated care.
  • There needs should be local consensus that changes to the care pathway are feasible.
We assessed the first three of these criteria by examining patterns of health and social care utilisation and costs for the local population of 114,874 people in 2012. The Symphony project has built a large dataset comprising information about each anonymised individual in the south Somerset population. The dataset has three key features:
  • it links acute, primary care, community, mental health and social care data;
  • costs are assigned to each individual according to the type of care they have received in each setting;
  • demographic characteristics are available for each individual, including age, gender, socio-economic measures, and indicators of morbidity.  
Each individual’s morbidity profile is constructed using United Health’s RISC tool used locally to predict unplanned hospital admissions. We identified 49 chronic conditions to construct the morbidity profile of each individual in the population. Individuals can, of course, have multiple chronic conditions.

Multi-morbidity the norm

The data reveals that for people who have a chronic condition it is unusual to have just a single condition: multi-morbidity is the norm, not the exception. Moreover, while it is well known that multi-morbidity increases with age, our analyses demonstrate that it is multi-morbidity not age that most drives health and social care costs. This insight changed the early focus of the Symphony project away from the frail elderly towards adults with multiple long term conditions.
We are also able to look at the annual costs involved in caring for people with particular conditions, according to the different health and social care settings in which they receive care. For example, figure 1 shows average cost broken down by setting for those with a selection of chronic conditions.
The average annual cost for the 45 people with occupational pulmonary disease (OPD) amounts to £14,142, with inpatient costs accounting for the largest proportion. The annual average cost for the 1,062 people with a diagnosis of dementia is £12,314, with the costs of continuing care and social care being most important.
Drilling down further, we can explore the relationship between costs and the number and type of chronic conditions that people have. The accompanying data video illustrates the analyses undertaken for people with diabetes, this being the fifth most prevalent condition in the South Somerset population (5,625 people, five per cent, with total annual costs amounting to £17m. More than 36 per cent of those with diabetes are treated in three or more settings, with inpatient care accounting for the largest proportion of costs (35 per cent), followed by social care (19 per cent) and prescribing (14 per cent).
Out of this 85 per cent of diabetics suffer from at least one other comorbidity and about 35 per cent have three or more chronic conditions. The average annual cost for someone with diabetes alone amounts to about £1,000, but costs increase progressively the more co-morbidities that a person has. We found that the number of conditions is almost as good at explaining costs as markers for particular conditions.

Cost profiles

We constructed similar morbidity and cost profiles for those with hypertension, asthma, diabetes, fractures, coronary artery disease, cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), stroke, dementia, and mental health (other than dementia). These showed multi-morbidity patterns and their relationship with utilisation and costs across health and social care settings. These profiles were shared at a workshop with local health and social care professionals and managers designed to inform the selection of the group.
Following the workshop, further analyses were conducted for those with a diagnosis of diabetes or of dementia. Futher analysis was also conducted for those with a combination of a limited set of comorbidities that local GPs viewed as most significant. These were diabetes, cardiac disease, COPD or OPD, chronic kidney disease or renal failure, depression or anxiety, dementia, stroke and cancer.
In South Somerset 1,458 people have some combination of three or more these conditions. They are older than the rest of the population (78 compared to 51 years), and have higher average annual costs (£8,152 compared to £1,094. Figure 2 shows the prevalence and costs associated with combinations of conditions among this group.
Costs involved for caring for people according to comorbidity
Figure 2: Average costs per Symphony group
The average annual cost of £8,152 is indicated by the red circle. Costs vary from the average according to particular conditions. Most notably, costs are about £14,000 if dementia is among the conditions and £12,000 if CKD/renal is a co-morbidity, but there is little difference to the overall average for the other conditions.
The project board decided that those with three or more conditions should form the initial cohort. The reasons for this included:
  • focusing on multiple conditions avoids Symphony being seen as condition or pathway specific;
  • the group of around 1,500 patients offers a reasonable high level of predictable costs variation, provides a sufficiently large risk pool and a more manageable scale than if the focus were solely on diabetes and/or dementia;
  • the group incurs costs across all settings, thereby offering the prospect of strengthening links across health, mental health and social care;
  • there is an opportunity to reduce inpatient costs, which currently account for 38 per cent of total costs;
  • it was felt possible to develop a service for complex patients, while still operating traditional models for those without diabetes or dementia.

Straightforward calculation

The dataset has made it relatively straightforward to calculate the capitated commissioning budget for this group of complex patients. The aim is to start with this initial cohort to demonstrate feasibility and improved outcomes, through the development of personalised care planning and supported self-management.
‘In many parts of the country health and social care data are not combined into a single individual-level dataset’
The hope is to move quickly to a much larger cohort including all patients with long term conditions, using the complex care team as a catalyst to spread a new culture and ethos across the whole health and social care system in south Somerset.
It is a key part of the foundations on which integrated care is being developed in south Somerset. In many parts of the country health and social care data are not combined into a single individual-level dataset.
In those areas where utilisation data have been joined together, information on costs is lacking. In south Somerset analysis of linked data about the use and costs of health and social care for the local population has made it possible to understand existing patterns of care utilisation and to identify for whom and in what way improvements can be made.
Moreover, by maintaining the dataset year on year, it will be possible to assess whether the efforts made to improve integrated care for the local population succeed in realising their ambition.
Andrew Street is professor of health economics; Panos Kasteridis is research fellow at University of York; Jeremy Martin is programme director at the symphony project

New Dartmouth study offers roadmap for better risk adjustment in Medicare

The methodology Medicare uses to adjust the billions of dollars it pays health plans and hospitals to account for how sick their patients are is flawed and should be replaced, according to a new study by Dartmouth investigators published in the journal BMJ that weighed the performance of Medicare's methodology against alternatives.

The researchers from the Dartmouth Atlas Project compared Medicare's current risk-adjustment methodology, which is based on the diagnoses recorded in patients' claims records, against adjustment indices based on wealth and health. The study found that using indices pegged to a region's poverty rate or the overall health of its population do a better job of explaining the mortality rate of local Medicare populations than the current diagnosis-based adjustment method, raising questions about its efficacy.

The study is the fourth in a series to raise important questions about how the government accounts for differences in the severity of illness in populations so it can make "apples to apples" comparisons that do not to penalize plans or health systems whose patients are sicker than average. This risk adjustment is a critical factor in how Medicare evaluates hospitals' readmission rates, which affects their Medicare payments, and how it pays Medicare Advantage health plans. Diagnosis-based risk adjustment is also used in comparative effectiveness research and in academic research into variations in medical care across America.

Medicare payments to Medicare Advantage plans are projected to surpass $154 billion in 2014, and account for more than a fourth of total Medicare spending, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Medicare Advantage plans use the CMS - Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) risk adjustment methodology to adjust their payments to health plans. HCC risk adjustment, based on the diagnoses recorded in claims, is so important to Medicare Advantage plans' revenue streams that a cottage industry has sprung up to help plans maximize their risk-adjustment revenue.

"We can and should do better," said David E. Wennberg, M.D., M.P.H. "Our body of work demonstrates that the way we adjust for risk now is biased, and when billions of tax dollars are at stake we need to hit the reset button. This paper gives a very good roadmap of how we can do risk adjustment right."

Three previous studies found significant regional variations in diagnosis patterns. In regions where Medicare patients see doctors more often or get more tests, one study found patients accumulate more diagnoses, even though the increased, accumulated diagnoses did not track with mortality rates, raising questions about the accuracy of a diagnosis-based risk adjustment method. This "observational intensity" suggested diagnosis is not solely an attribute of underlying disease burden, but could also reflect how often patients encounter the health care system.

This new study compared the current Medicare risk-adjustment methodology with three 
alternatives to see which better explain differences in the actual mortality of a population. It drew on the 2007 claims of more than 5 million Medicare beneficiaries in 306 U.S. regions. The first adjusted the current Medicare method to discount diagnoses for the region's observational intensity. The second was based solely on the percentage of a region's 65-plus population below the federal poverty level. The third was a population health index based on five factors: annual rates for hip fractures andstrokes, obesity, smoking status and surveys of self-reported illness. Each alternative performed better at predicting regional mortality than the current Medicare diagnosis-based method. The population health index was able to explain over 60% of the variation in regional mortality rates, while the HCC index explained less than 5%.

The article concludes that the federal government should expand its plans for national surveys to assess patients' experience with health care providers to include patient-level population health measures that can be used for risk adjustment as well as outcomes assessment.

Medicare payments to Medicare Advantage plans are projected to surpass $154 billion in 2014, and account for more than a fourth of total Medicare spending, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Risk adjustment is so important to Medicare Advantage plans' revenue streams that a cottage industry has spring up to help plans maximize their risk-adjustment revenue.


Thursday, April 10, 2014

International professors discuss healthcare concerns



By JULIA LISS, Daily Staff Reporter
Published April 9, 2014
Two speakers gave a joint lecture Wednesday on international health policies at the University’s School of Public Health, drawing around 40 graduate students and faculty.
Johan Mackenbach, professor of public health at Erasmus University Medical Center in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, spoke of the recent divergence of life expectancy in Europe and possible explanations for such a trend.
Mackenbach said the trends, which show health disparity based on national income gaps, are the result of a variety of cultural factors. Using charts, graphs and other data to help illustrate his point, Mackenbach showed that periods of democracy had historically higher life expectancies, while periods of more chaotic political climates showed dips in the life expectancies.
Mackenbach outlined 11 specific areas of focus for health policies, including tobacco control, alcohol control, child health and road traffic injury. He said countries that have more preventative health policies — contrary to most U.S. delivery models — showed fewer instances of health problems related to each area of concern.
For example, he said countries with stricter tobacco control regulations and preventative measures to discourage smoking had fewer smokers, lower cigarette sales and fewer smoking-related health issues in the population.
Mackenbach discussed possible reasons for the existing disparities. He found that many countries which could benefit from improved healthcare models often possess the means to do so, but are stymied by the political, social and cultural climate of the country.
John Frank, director of the Scottish Collaboration for Public Health Research & Policy and chair of Public Health Research & Policy at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, delivered the second address, titled “Influencing Child Health Policies with Scientific Evidence: Lessons from 5 Years in Scotland.”
His lecture aimed to demonstrate the importance of early access to education on an individual’s health and future success. Frank said early education implementation is the single most important indicator for a child’s future.
“You can make people’s chances in life much more equal in only one really cost effective way, and that is giving universal preschool high quality education, half day a week from age two, age one in high risk families,” Frank said.
Frank proposed a plan to combat societal challenges through education, while addressing some of the concerns of implementing potential reforms.
Public Health Prof. George Kaplan acted as the moderator and he introduced both Mackenbach and Frank’s speeches and led a question and answer session after each speaker. The Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, the University’s Robert Johnson Foundation Scholar’s in Health Policy Program and the Center for Social Epidemiology of Population Health sponsored the event.