Stanley Feld M.D., FACP, MACE Menu

Results found: 110

Permalink:

Obamacare Drives Premiums Up In 45 Of 50 States

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP, MACE

President Obama promised
during his campaign for passage of the Affordable Care Act that the Act would
cause premiums "for the typical family" to fall by $2500.

He also said it would bend
the healthcare cost curve and if you like your doctor you can keep him or her.
We all remember these sound bites. The sound bites are all turning out to be
false.

Many intelligent people who
believe in Obamacare refuse to consider these facts. I can understand the
denial.

They will pay attention as
soon as it effects them.   

The added required benefits mandated
in insurance coverage in the law and the way the healthcare insurance industry
is permitted to calculate its Medical Loss Ratio makes President Obama’s
calculation impossible.

President Obama has been telling
the American public a lie all the while. People are starting to understand.  

The average one month premium
change from buying insurance in the non-group market in 2013 versus the
Obamacare exchanges in 2014 is not revealed in any government statistics. Two
studies were completed by private sources.

 Premium comparisons between
2013 and 2014 are not available from Health and Human Services (HHS).

The 2013 premiums increased
by double digits from the 2012 premiums because of Obamacare. The traditional
media has not pressed the government to provide these comparisons.

The media continues to quote
the administration press releases of lower premium prices.  The Obama administration uses CBO estimates
of premium prices calculated in 2010 for 2016 by data provided by the Obama
administration. The tradition media refuses to report reality.

A 50-state study has found
that insurance premiums will increase the first year of Obamacare in 45 of 50
states.

Insurance cost under obamacare

Premiums paid outside the
health insurance exchange will increase the same percentage or more.

No one can
say the American public has not been warned.  

There is
going to be tremendous public outcry in the individual market for insurance
when the cost to individuals and the American taxpayers is realized.

October
1,2013 is open enrollment season for the individual and group insurance market.

President
Obama has exempted the group market from Obamacare until 2015.

One of the
reasons for the exemption for the group market is to try to mute the outcry by
splitting the non group insurance from the group insurance holders.

Some of the
premium increases have already been report in the traditional media.

 "Individuals in most states will end up
spending more on the exchanges," policy analyst Drew Gonshorowski writes”

The Department of Health and Human Services published a similar
report. The government’s report is incomprehensible to me.

It does not compare pre Obamacare premiums of 2013 to
Obamacare Health Insurance Exchange premiums of 2014.

There
are literally no comparisons to current rates. That is, [the Department of Health
and Human Services] has chosen to dodge the question of whose rates are going
up, and how much. Instead they try to distract with a comparison to a
hypothetical number that has nothing to do with the actual experience of real
people.

—Douglas
Holtz-Eakin
President, American Action Forum[1]

 

The Department of Health and Human Services has
declared a 16% decrease in premium costs compared to the CBO’s 2010 estimate of
premiums for 2016.

It is important to remember the CBO’s
calculation was with faulty data provided by the administration.

Based on a Manhattan Institute analysis of the HHS numbers,
Obamacare will increase underlying insurance rates for younger men by an
average of 97 to 99 percent, and for younger women by an average of 55 to 62
percent.
Worst off is North Carolina, which will see individual-market rates
triple for women, and quadruple for
men.”

  

http://youtu.be/JwPr59nA1fM

The Obama
administration’s methods of deception are cunning, powerful and effective.

He always blames others and hides his ideology.

President
Obama continues to try to fool a majority of the people most of the time.

Americans will
get the point where the rubber meets the road. The public is going to
have to reach into their pockets and pay these enormous increases in premiums
or not buy healthcare insurance coverage.

Taxpaying
Americans are also going to experience massive increases in taxes above and beyond those already experienced.

I predict the
public outcry will drown out the spin of the Obama administration. The
traditional media will not be able to ignore this public outcry.

People will
finally realize the enormous government grab of power and control of Obamacare at
taxpayers’ expense.

People
can’t complete applications or secure premium prices on the health insurance
exchanges because of technical problems resulting from ancient information technology
used by the government to construct the exchanges.

All of the
consumers’ demographics must be filled out before the government provides a
premium price. There is at tricky reason for this.

This
computer “glitch” solidifies my view that President Obama wants Obamacare to
fail in order to replace it with a single party payer system that America
cannot afford.

This last
statement is counterintuitive but I believe true.

Is it wise
for consumers to hand over all their medical decision making to a government
that has this much difficulty with executing a computer program and providing
healthcare insurance premiums?

Americans
must wake up soon. They have to insist on a consumer driven healthcare system
in which they have control over their healthcare and their healthcare dollars.

Americans have
to insist on having an Ideal Medical Saving Account healthcare system

I have described the Ideal Medical Saving Account System in great detail.

 

 
The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

Permalink:

What Are Private Insurance Exchanges?

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Corporations have been providing healthcare insurance
since after WWII. The cost of healthcare insurance has been rising since.

The increase in premiums became intolerable in the
1980’s when cost shifting occurred. Medicare decreased reimbursement and the
fees were shifted to private insurance.  Several experiments in healthcare coverage
were tried to reduce the cost to employers. All the schemes failed to control
costs.

The schemes include managed care and HMO’s. All the
insurance schemes were defined benefit plans. Employees were immune from
responsibility for themselves or their healthcare dollars.

As the costs have risen to unsustainable levels
corporations have been trying to figure out how to get out of providing
healthcare coverage for their employees as a benefit.

Most employers, large and small, want to limit their
exposure to healthcare premiums and Obamacare penalties.

A movement to limit employment to less than 30 hours
a week to avoid providing healthcare insurance to employees and avoid Obamacare
penalties has become viral.

No one has tackled the real reasons for the rising
healthcare costs. No one has tackled the perverse incentives and advantages
given to the healthcare insurance industry all these years.

I have argued that this perverse incentive can lead
to all the other perverse incentives initiated by the rest of the stakeholders
in the healthcare system in order to survive.

Once more the healthcare insurance industry figured
out how to increase their profits while making it appear they are helping both employers
and employees.

It must be remembered that the healthcare insurance
industry profits through both private insurance and government provided
healthcare coverage.

The industry makes its profits by providing
administrative services. The government outsources the administrative services
to the healthcare insurance industry.

The profit generated in both the private sector and
the government sector is far from transparent.

The healthcare industry’s new scheme converts defined
benefit coverage to defined contribution coverage for healthcare benefits.

In recent months we have seen large corporations
switch their employee healthcare benefits to defined contribution programs.

A partial list of companies includes Walgreens, Home
Depot, Sears, Trader Joes, Xerox and IBM retirees.

Rather than provide a healthcare insurance coverage
benefit through the corporation, the corporation is providing employees with a
defined contribution each year. The employees can then buy their insurance
through their employer’s contracted Private Health Insurance Exchange.

The Private Health Insurance Exchanges are provided
to the corporations by the healthcare insurance industry. There will be a menu
of insurance plans and premium levels employees eligible for coverage can
choose from.

The principals of healthcare coverage include all of
the basic requirements of Obamacare’s Health Insurance Exchanges. Employees
having a preexisting illness must be accepted. However, premiums might be
higher for patients with pre-existing conditions.

The defined contribution amount has not been defined.
It could be a couple of hundred dollars a year to a couple of thousand dollars
a year. In any event it does not sound as if it will be enough to cover the
cost of the healthcare insurance premium.

There will be high deductible plans with patients not
covered for the deductibles and co-pays.

If an employee doesn’t like what he buy in the
companies Private Insurance Exchange, he can always sign up for Obamacare’s
Health Insurance Exchange.

It sounds great for the employer because the employer
can predict costs. It is wonderful for the healthcare insurance industry.

It sounds terrible for the consumer.

It sounds both good and bad for the government. It
depends on how one looks at it.

The Obama administration will have more people sign
up for Obamacare’s Health Insurance Exchanges. The result will be greater
control over the healthcare system. I believe this is the reason the Obama administration has not opposed the Private Health Insurance Exchanges.

However, the consumers signing up for Obamacare Health Insurance Exchanges will be the sickest
consumers. These consumers will use the system more than average.

This will result in an increase in the deficit and
unsustainability of Obamacare. The only way out is to increase premiums and
taxes.

This is called a “redistribution of wealth” because
people making up to $40,000 per year do not pay taxes. If the tax increases are
means tested it will increase the amount of wealth that is redistributed will
increase.

The increase in taxes will decrease economic growth.

At the present time Obamacare’s Healthcare insurance
Exchanges do not have verification software. The system is vulnerable to fraud
and abuse even if it could work.

America is just becoming aware of the fraud and abuse
in the food stamp entitlement program. The food stamp entitlement has double. The
government has not fixed the food stamp program.

It is likely the same thing will happen with the government
run Health Insurance Exchanges. It will drive the federal deficit even higher.

Even though the Private Health Exchanges shift financial
responsibility to the consumer to pay for their own insurance it does not provide
financial incentive for patients to become responsible for their health.

It does not contain educational programs to help
patients deal with their chronic diseases. It does not teach consumers to be
responsible for their health and healthcare dollars.

Obamacare does not provide these incentives either.

The only plan that does is my Ideal Medical Saving
Accounts with employers providing support while shifting responsibility to
consumers by providing incentives for patients to lower the cost of their care.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

Permalink:

Maybe Obamacare Is Not Such A Good Idea

Stanley
Feld M.D.,FACP ,MACE

Dear
President Obama;

Maybe Obamacare
is not such a good idea.

I suspect
you will not read this nor have you read my letters to you when you were first
elected.

The letters
were about how our healthcare system became so dysfunctional and what solutions, that will work,
are needed to repair the healthcare system.

Dear President Obama Part 1

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2008/11/dear-president-elect-obama.html

Dear President Obama Part 2

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2008/11/dear-president-elect-obama-part-2.html

Dear President Obama Part 3

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2008/11/dear-president-elect-obama-part-3.html

Dear President Obama Part 4

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2008/12/dear-president-elect-obama-part-4.html

Dear President Obama Part 5

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2008/12/dear-president–elect-barack-obama-part-5.html

Dear President Obama Part 6

http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2008/12/dear-president-elect-obama-part-6-why-dont-you-listen-to-practicing-physicians.html

Respectfully,

Stanley Feld M.D., FACP, MACE

President Obama did not listen to me at all. It looks like his
agenda was not to "Repair the Healthcare System." It was to destroy it and
replace it with a government control single party payer system.

I continually think about the statement President Obama made to
Barney Frank and John Kerry when passing the law. They said the law must have a
public option and a single party payer to work.

President Obama told them not to worry about the public option.

Now Obamacare is experiencing objections from the interest
groups whose support is needed.

The unions, government workers in congress, the IRS, the healthcare
insurance industry, small businesses, large corporations, large fast food
businesses, privately insured Americans, Medicare insured seniors, physicians, hospital
systems all have objections to the law now.


Many states realized they would get stuck with the bill for the
health insurance exchange. Thirty-three states did not want to participate.
Many did not want to increase their budget deficits.   

All these stakeholders are realizing that President Obama has thrown
them under the bus despite his initial promises.

Obamacare does not serve the vested interests of any of these
stakeholders. 

Some of the stakeholders are going to get special treatment with
waivers.

For Obamacare to work, everyone must participate. The mandate was
included in the law to force everyone to participate.

The Supreme Court called it a tax to allow the Obamacare law to be
constitutional.

A basic insurance principle is that everyone must participate to spread
the risk for the insurance industry.

The present system and Obamacare exempts the insurance companies from incurring risk.
It also exempts patients from being responsible for their own health and
healthcare dollars. When Americans spend their own money the free market works as
we have seen in many industries. They support the best product within their
means.

The government could support the underprivileged by providing them with
their healthcare dollars and teaching them how to use them.

The biggest villains in the healthcare system are the healthcare
insurance companies. They take 40% of every healthcare dollar spent by private
and public insurers off the top.

The healthcare insurance industry is the administrative service
provider for all public employees, public healthcare entitilments and private health insurance plans. The 40% overhead is charged
to all. The charge is not transparent.

Obamacare sets the conditions for continued abuse by the healthcare
insurance industry.

The Obama Administration estimates that
of the projected 7 million exchange enrollees next year, 2.7 million need to be young adults (with a low
risk of being sick) to make the premiums work.

 If young people don’t show up for Obamacare,
premiums for everyone else in the exchanges will skyrocket—which, of course,
dramatically increases the cost for taxpayers.

Congress
and congressional government workers wanted to be exempt from Obamacare because

 “The 2010 law
generally requires lawmakers and aides who work in their personal offices to
get coverage through the exchanges.”


That implies that they would no longer receive
coverage through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program…

It does not clearly
authorize the government to pay premiums for federal employees who obtain
insurance through the exchanges.


Nor does it
authorize the government to reimburse federal employees who buy health
insurance on their own.”

Congress and their aides have
the best insurance coverage in the nation. Taxpayers subsidize their healthcare
insurance.

Through the years this
subsidy has been discussed.  Many have objected
to the cost of this Congressional benefit.

Congress has
objected to Obamacare changing the healthcare insurance they have enjoyed. Congress wants to be exempt from Obamacare.

President
Barack Obama privately told Democratic senators he is now personally involved
in resolving
a heated dispute over how Obamacare treats Capitol Hill aides and
lawmakers, according to senators in the meeting.”

Few on Capital Hill objected to President Obama changing the
rules of the law himself to protect their benefit.

A question should be asked, “Why should Congress and
congressional aides be treated differently than the general population?”

“At issue is whether
Obama’s health care law allows the federal government to continue to pay part
of the health insurance premiums for members of Congress and thousands of Hill
aides when they are nudged onto health exchanges.”


Currently, the government
pays nearly 75 percent of these premiums.

 The government’s contributions are in jeopardy
due to a controversial Republican amendment to Obamacare, which
says that by 2014, lawmakers and their staff must be covered by plans “created”
by the law or “offered through an exchange.”

President Obama declared,
“I'm on it”
to clear up Capital Hill’s objections to Obamacare’s effect on
Capital Hill’s healthcare insurance.

The IRS employees also want to be exempt from Obamacare.

IRS
chief Danny Werfel, the head of the agency charged with administering Obamacare
said that he would rather keep his own insurance than get coverage under the
system created by President Barack Obama's single domestic policy
achievement. 

Danny Werfel made this statement before the
House Ways and Means Committee,

"I would prefer to stay with the current policy that I'm
pleased with rather than go through a change if I don't need to go through that
change."

Like
most
other federal workers, IRS employees currently get their health insurance
through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which also covers
members of Congress.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp said he has long
believed, every American ought to be exempt from
the law, which is why he supports full repeal,”

IRS employees have the
responsibility to enforce much of the health insurance law
,
especially in terms of collecting the taxes and distributing subsidies that finance
the whole system.

IRS agents, in addition to
collecting taxes will also collect data and apply penalties for those who fail
to comply with many of Obamacare’s requirements.

The special favors are coming
next. The Obama administration will only create more dysfunction in the
healthcare system. President Obama’s published goals are good. However, the law
is bad and its execution is worse.

Maybe he ought to consider
my Ideal Medical Savings Accounts as a free market solution to our healthcare
system’s problems.

If you do
not like what is going on, please write your senator, congressman and the
President and tell them that,

“Maybe Obamacare Is Not Such A Good
Idea.”

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

Permalink:

President Obama – Do Something That Could Work!

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

The solution to repairing the healthcare system is simple. The
healthcare system must be consumer driven. If consumers were in control of their
healthcare dollars and were responsible for their health and their healthcare
choices the cost of the healthcare system would decrease to manageable levels.

My ideal Medical Savings Account puts the consumer in charge. Its
success is totally dependent on real transparency by all stakeholders including
healthcare insurance companies, hospital systems and physicians. 

A Health Savings Account does not give consumers enough of an
incentive
to shop for price and quality with the present lack of transparency.
In a transparent healthcare system Medical Saving Accounts would provide more
incentive than Health Savings Accounts.  

Presently President Obama is trying to eliminate Health Savings
Accounts. HSAs are the single greatest threat to his goal for a single party
payer system. They are also the fastest growing healthcare insurance product.

The lack of transparency for hospitals, healthcare insurance
companies, drug companies and physicians must be eliminated. The public must
demand that the healthcare insurance industry make their expenses transparent
so that its exorbitant salaries and profits can be clearly understood.   

There is no reason that this one stakeholder receives 40% of
every premium dollar
spent either by private corporations or the government.
The medical loss ratio as it is presently constructed by the Obama
administration provides 20% for expenses. The other 20% of the $40% is in the
direct patient care column.

The government should help consumers understand these prices and
understand the measurement of quality. Consumers of healthcare must be turned
into Prosumers of healthcare (Productive Consumers.)

When this happens the consumers can become independent
intelligent consumers. Consumers will become independent of government and its
bureaucracy.

The Obama administration wants consumers to be more dependent on
government not less dependent.

Intelligent independent Consumers will force the other
stakeholders to be competitive. Competition will drive healthcare costs down.

Government cost controls will not drive prices down. They will
simply distort prices and cause more spending.

Private sources such as Angie’s list help consumers decide on
which plumber to hire. It is important and creates competition and price
lowering. However the defect in Angie’s list is that it is based on other
consumers’ opinions.

It is not based on specific costs or origins of the cost to the
plumber or the measurement of the plumber’s skill. It only deals with price and
consumer satisfaction. Angie’s list does make plumbers competitive.

Competition for consumers will bring down the cost of healthcare.
 By forcing consolidation of doctors and
hospitals Obamacare will decrease competition and increase prices.

 Healthcare
policy wonks dismiss this concept because they believe consumers are not smart
enough or interested enough in learning to be intelligent healthcare consumers.
They are wrong.

Their thnking is correct if a system exists where consumers are
spending other people’s money. Obamacare is such a system. It will drive costs
up just as the private first dollar coverage system has driven healthcare
prices up.

There is no financial incentive for healthcare consumers to try
to save money and preserve their health.

Obamacare is a huge entitlement with an overwhelming budget that
will be impossible to execute. We have seen that to be true with ever increasing
waivers and the most recent delay in the mandate until 2015.  There will be delays in other critical
portions of Obamacare in the near future. It could be delayed forever because
it cannot be executed.

In my last blog I forgot to mention the delay in forming and
activating the Independent Physician Advisory Board.

Last year I wrote about the Obama administration’s infatuation
with the Canadian Healthcare System. I reviewed the 2011 Fraser report
explaining that the Canadian Healthcare System is unsustainable.


I also wrote about Canadian consumers’ healthcare experiences in
two provinces I visited.  The fact is the
system doesn’t work well and is unsustainable.

The Fraser Institute in a
2011 report concluded that Canada’s health care
system is spending money at an unsustainable rate
. Six of ten Canadian
provinces are on track to spend half of their revenues on health care,
according to the institute.

“In 2011, health care
spending consumed 50 percent of revenues in Canada’s two largest provinces,
Ontario and Quebec.

By 2017, four more
provinces — Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia and New Brunswick — will
spend half of their revenues on health care, according to the institute.

Total federal, provincial
and territorial government health spending has grown by 8.1 percent annually.
Canada’s GDP increased by 6.7 percent during the same period. The math is
obvious. The Canadian healthcare entitlement system is not working.

“In response to the rapidly
rising costs, provincial governments have raised taxes and rationed care,
increasing patient wait times. Provincial drug plans have also more often refused
to pay for most of the drugs that are certified as “safe and effective” by
Health Canada.

“Unsustainable rates of
growth in health care spending crowd out the resources available for other
purposes including education, public safety, and economic growth-enhancing tax
relief,” Fraser Institute Senior Fellow Nadeem Esmail told The Daily Caller
News Foundation in an email.”

Only 20% of the people utilize the healthcare system at any on
time. If consumers know they are entitled to healthcare and the healthcare
system will fix them if they get sick, consumers of healthcare feel protected. The
feelings of eighty percent of consumers who are not sick believe the system is
great until they have to interact with the system. In this system of
entitlement consumers have a tendency to not take care of their health.  This makes them more likely to interact with
the system in the future when they are very sick. The result is increasing
healthcare costs.

Once an entitlement is created it is almost impossible to
eliminate it even though it has proved ineffective and costly.

England’s NHS has shown this to be true. The NHS is struggling
right now to modify the NHS so it works
better for physicians and patients.
However, the new reform rules have been contaminated with so many amendments
that I suspect no progress will be made
.

Consumers are realizing that Obamacare is much too complicated
and impossible to execute. Rather than demanding repeal and eliminating the
concept of instituting an entitlement program, the New York Times is publishing
letters from readers that are demanding a single party payer system to simplify
the system.

Let us stop making the same mistakes over and over again.

 The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

 

Permalink:

The Anatomy of Healthcare Billing

Stanley
Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

The start of exposing the real cause of healthcare inflation has begun.  The billing and reimbursement system is
finally being questioned.

I hope the debate creates an uproar among consumers who are the most
important and most disadvantaged stakeholders in the debate. My hope is consumers will realize they
are pawns in the complex billing and reimbursement system created.

Consumers must also realize they have the power to demand control over their
healthcare dollars and not hope the government will protect them.

Steven
Brill’s article in TIME magazine started the debate.
The demand for transparent
pricing has started.  Steve Brill’s
numbers are far from accurate.  However,the
pricing information is close enough to get consumers mad as hell.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services finally released its massive database containing what 3,000 hospitals
charge for 100 of the most common medical procedures.

The database compares the hospital
“chargemaster” to the prices Medicare actually paid.

The reimbursement to hospitals is based
on the hospital system’s estimates of the actual hospital costs plus hospital
administrative overhead. These estimates are an error. The calculation should be the actual costs
and not an estimate of the actual cost.

The database only covers 100 of the
most common illnesses.

I have written about hospital
administrators’ salaries being in excess of 1 million dollars a year with many
being up to 15 million dollars a year.
These salaries are included in the
overhead covered by Medicare payment.

I have questioned the appropriateness
of these massive salaries. In Boston there seems to be a contest between hospital
systems for which CEO gets a bigger salary.

Another important question is how many
hospital administrators in a hospital system get an excessive salary for the
value they add to medical treatment.

Who is worth more, a physician or a
hospital administrator?

 In many cases the
reimbursement by Medicare to some hospitals is 10% of the hospital’s billing.  In other hospitals the difference is 20-40%.

The payment gap between hospital charges
for procedures and Medicare payments is also stunning. The average difference
between hospital charges for the 100 procedures tracked and what Medicare’s
average actually payment is a difference of 72%.

A good metric is to beware of the man
that quotes average percentages if you want to understand the actual
difference.

The best example I have seen to visualize the variation of these prices
in simple terms is as follows.

 

“Imagine a banana in a supermarket. It costs $1 for those paying
with Visa, $3 for those paying with MasterCard, and $32 for those paying with
cash.

You can't sign up for Visa until you're 65, and you can only get
a MasterCard if you have a nice employer or a decent income.


Worse, customers have no
idea that such price discrepancy exists. They don't even know how much they'll
pay for the banana until long after they've eaten it.”


“That would be absurd. No
one would put up with it.


But it's how our health
care system works.”


Why should healthcare consumers in
America put up with it? Isn’t it the government’s job to protect us from this
abuse and not have a system that encourages it? Obamacare claims to stop the
abuse as it has been going on its merry way to encourage it.

This is not the entire grizzly story.

The average prices by states shows
massive discrepancies. In California, the average hospital charges $101,844 to
treat respiratory infections. In Maryland the average price for the same respiratory
infection is $18,144. The difference is 82% for the same disease in two
different states. The government is the same payer for both states.

 New Jersey hospitals bill an average for
$72,084 for "simple pneumonia," while Massachusetts’ hospitals charges
an average of $20,722. Neither of the state’s hospitals receives that much
reimbursement for treating these infections from Medicare. However, New Jersey
hospitals receive more.

Uninsured patients and the indigent
without insurance are getting the shaft. These people will have to pay retail
hospital prices or get sued by the hospital system.

None of the hospital prices are
transparent. A patient cannot even beg the hospital system to get a price.

Many treatments can be administered as
an outpatient. The government pays at least three times more for chemotherapy
in a hospital setting or a hospital outpatient clinic as it would to a freestanding
private outpatient oncology clinic.

 What’s the deal? The government doesn’t
trust physicians. It is afraid physicians will overcharge.

What does the government think the
hospital systems are doing?

I have also written about primary care
physicians’ salary being about $100,000- $120,000 a year. Surveys of physician
salaries have shown salaries varying between $100,000 to $600,000 per year. Surgical
subspecialists receive more than primary care physicians.

Let us assume the average physician’s salary
is $300,000 per year. There are approximately 600,000 practicing physicians in
the U.S.

The total physician reimbursement is $180
billion dollars a year in a $2.7 trillion dollar industry
. This is less than
10% of the total dollars spent. Even if you doubled physicians’ salaries to
include an overhead of 50% physicians receive 13.2% of the healthcare dollars
spent.

A major question is where is the
remaining 2.5 trillion dollars going?

The healthcare insurance companies take
40% off the top of all care delivered including Medicare and Medicaid and other
government programs. They do all the government administrative services and
hide the fees through deductions that should go to expenses but with the
government’s permission go to direct patient care.

The most important metrics are never
discussed and inaccurately measured. 
They are clinical outcomes and quality of procedures performed with
respect to financial outcomes.

The reason this measurement is not done
is because there is no accurate definition or measurement of these metrics.
Clinical outcomes as it relates to cost of care has to be included in the
measurement of quality of care.  No one
knows how to do this.

How does all this get fixed?

Consumers must drive the healthcare
system.
My ideal medical saving account would go a long way in
dis-intermediating the healthcare insurance industry
.

An easy to use web site should be constructed
using the Travelocity, Expedia or the Orbitz formula.

All hospital and physicians’ prices
should be online. All insurance and government reimbursement should be
published on this web site, plus
insurance premiums and their justifications. The real government overhead
should also be available to consumers. 

A government web based educational
program to make consumers smart medical consumers would decrease healthcare
costs immediately.

All of the above would be a good start.

 The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

Permalink:

Obama Administration Continuously Declines To Renew Indiana’s Medicaid Waiver

 Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

In light of the recent alleged IRS
scandel targeting certain groups, I am reminded of the Medicaid incident in
Indiana. I believe the incident is resolved now with the Obama administration
granting a waiver to Indiana after two years of bureaucratic haggling.

In 2007 Governor Mitch Daniels (R.) was
successful in getting the Indiana state legislature to pass a Medicaid reform
plan called the Healthy Indiana Plan. It is an expansion of Medicaid. It uses a consumer-driven
health plan to encourage low-income beneficiaries to take control of their
health and healthcare dollars.

This healthcare plan is a variant of my
ideal medical saving account.

 The Healthy Indiana Plan has been very successful.

Healthy Indiana Plan has been the most
innovative and successful reform of Medicaid in the history of the Medicaid
program.

The federal government’s waiver for the
plan was given in 2007 and set to expire on December 31, 2012. Indiana applied
for an extension of the Medicaid wavier in early 2011. In November 2011 the
Obama Administration rejected the state’s request to extend its federal waiver.

Over 45,000 poor Hoosiers on Medicaid
were scheduled to lose this innovative Medicaid coverage in 2013.

Medicaid is theoretically run by the
states in cooperation with the federal government.  In reality, any time a state wants to make
the tiniest changes in its
Medicaid program, it has to go hat-in-hand to the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services with a formal request for a waiver and these waivers are usually
denied.

 This federal control has been part of the
disagreement states have with the federal government over health insurance
exchanges. The central government wants to shift the financial burden on the
states while controlling the states’ decisions.

Indiana succeeded in gaining a waiver in 2007
because it was seeking to expand Medicaid to
a group of people who weren’t then eligible for the program and because the
state’s effort required no additional outlays from the federal government.  Governor
Mitch Daniels paid for the
Medicaid expansion by increasing the state’s cigarette tax by 44 cents. It made
sense to everyone except the people that smoked. 

Patients had skin in the game because
they had to pay 2 -5% of their income for their insurance coverage. The plan
provided financial as well as wellness incentives.

We did a lot of reading on
criticism of health savings accounts,” says Seema Verma, who was the
architect of the Indiana
program. “One of the criticisms was that people didn’t have enough money to pay
for preventive care. So we took preventive care out, made that first-dollar
coverage.

“ Also, people said that people didn’t have enough for the
deductible, so we fully funded it. Then, you have to make your contribution
every month, with a 60-day grace period. If you don’t make the contribution,
you’re out of the program for 12 months. It’s a strong personal responsibility
mechanism.”

 I described the Healthy Indiana plan in
detail in January 2008 pre President Obama
.

Medicaid patients get a specified amount
of preventive care for free.  Included
are free annual physical exams, pap smears and mammograms for women,
cholesterol tests, flu shots, blood glucose screenings, and tetanus-diphtheria
screenings.

Medicaid beneficiaries have no
cost-sharing requirements (co-pays, deductibles, etc.) except for non-urgent
use of emergency rooms.

The money remaining in the Medicaid
patients’ POWER accounts at the end of the year can be applied to the following
year’s contribution only if they obtain the required free preventive disease
services.

“The program has been, by many measures, a smashing success. “What
we’re finding out is that, first of all, low-income people are just as capable
as anybody else of making wise decisions when it’s their own money that they’re
spending,” Mitch Daniels explains in a Heritage Foundation video.”

“And they’re also acting more like good consumers. They’re
visiting emergency rooms less, they’re using more generic drugs, they’re asking
for second opinions. And some real money is starting to accumulate in their
[health savings] accounts.”

The program has been
very popular. Ninety (90) percent of enrollees are
making their required monthly contributions. Employers didn’t dump their
workers onto the program, crowding others out, because you needed to be
uninsured for six months in order to be eligible for it.

 “The program’s level of
satisfaction is at an unheard-of 98 percent approval rating,” Verma told 
Kenneth Artz.

Lower income families are not too stupid
to be wise healthcare consumers despite popular belief.

2010 study by
Mathematica Policy Research found that in the program

71 percent met the preventive care
requirement and were able to roll the balances over to the following year.  Only 39% obtained preventive care in the
first six months. It proves financial incentives work.

The lack of physician access is the
biggest reason why health outcomes for Medicaid patients lag far behind those
of individuals with private insurance.

Healthy Indiana pays better than
traditional Medicaid. The physician access trend has been reversed. Preventive
care participation rates are higher than the
privately-insured population.

Why would the Obama administration, which
controls the states’ Medicaid programs, refuse to grant a waiver for Indiana’s successful
program?

The first excuse HHS used was “ HSS  hadn’t written the regulations for Obamacare
yet.”

According to Seema Verma  “the state will now have to file a much more
complex “State Plan Amendment” that may not get approved before the Healthy
Indiana program is set to expire.”

Before his term expired Gov. Daniels
had written to HHS Secretary
Kathleen Sebelius asking her for permission to use the Healthy Indiana Plan to
handle Obamacare’s mandatory expansion of Medicaid. He had not heard back.

The Obama Administration claims to be on
the side of the poor.  Why would it not
approve a waiver of a popular program for the poor that provides the poor with
superior health care?

Whatever the reason, tens of thousands of people will be
needlessly harmed.

Regulatory
burdens and “poison pills” have been thrown at the Indiana health plan. One
such poison pill is not allowing the state to include the $1100 Power account given to Medicaid patients to make
wise medical care choices.

Yet
the government pays the healthcare insurance industry for help desks and rent
for buildings where there are help desks as direct patient care instead of
expenses.

It is
not only bewildering, it is obscene.

The
controversy continued throughout 2012 past the expiration date of the 2007
waiver into 2013.

Mike
Pence, the new governor, kept fighting off bureaucratic rules but got nowhere
through March of 2013.

The subtext of all of this is the
Obama administration wants a top down centrally controlled Medicaid system with
the financial burden on the states and Indiana wants to control its own destiny
with its successful plan.

Stuff
like the following has been going on. Diane Gerrits, CMS' director of state
demonstrations and waivers, wrote in a Feb. 25 letter that the state will have
to resubmit its application because it had not yet held two public hearings
required by law.

CMS said as a result of the failure to comply with the transparency portion of
the proposal, the state must begin a 30-day state public comment and notice
period. The state must follow with an additional 30-day federal public comment.

This
has been going on since 2011

Governor
Mike Pence fired back,

 "The Feb. 25, 2013, letter from HHS does not
indicate in any way that the waiver application process has been
jeopardized," he wrote Thursday. "It does, however, speak to the
flawed bureaucratic process that has impeded progress on our successful Healthy
Indiana Plan."

The
Obama administration is trying to destroy all health savings accounts both
public and private. This is probably the reason for these artificial delays.

Suddenly,
in mid April, under public pressure and possibly the impending IRS scandal Indiana’s
waiver request was approved.

This
is a happy ending to the Indiana saga and perhaps a model to get all the
Medicaid programs out of the deep ditch they are in.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

 

Permalink:

Big Data Is A Major Problem For The Healthcare System.

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

President
Obama is blinded by his ideology. His healthcare policy goal is to eventually
have a single party payer system. Medical care will be commoditized with
treatment decisions made by the central government.

It
is a charade that his health insurance exchanges will lead to affordable
private insurance. It is misguided to believe that a non-elected central
committee (IPAB) will be tolerated to make treatment decisions for the
population.

The
larger pretense is that President Obama is building an inexpensive bureaucracy.
Last week he again stated that government overhead for Medicare and Medicaid is
very low. He again declared that the overhead expense is only 2½ percent.

It
cost two and one half percent for the central government to outsource administrative
services to the healthcare insurance industry. The healthcare insurance
industry, in turn, charges the government 18-40% to administer the programs.

Everyone
knows most everything government run is inefficient. President Obama is
enlarging the scope of government in all areas at a time when government is too
large and inefficient. The government’s income is $1 trillion dollars less than
its expenses per year since he has been President.

President
Obama thinks if he spends enough money he will spend his way out off the jam.

President
Obama believes one way to become more efficient is to gather more data. He can
then figure out which hospital systems and physicians are inefficient and
penalize them.

This
philosophy has two potential pitfalls. If the data is faulty the conclusions
are wrong. The second pitfall is that penalties do not encourage cooperation
and meaningful improvements. 

Decision-making in
healthcare can be painfully slow, as any physician will tell you
.
Hospital systems and
physicians are being spurred on in part because healthcare is beginning to deal
with a shift in reimbursement toward one that rewards quality and disincentives
inefficiency and waste.

One problem is that quality is not clearly
defined and is sometime false. The government must reexamine its premises.

Most hospitals and health systems have lots of
data that might improve outcomes and cut waste.

The
problem is getting that data, which is often unstructured, into a format that
allows clinicians to make decisions faster and in a more coordinated fashion.

All
of the innovation is happening without input from physicians. It is being done
to decrease the cost of the hospitals. One thought would be to get rid of a few
excess salaried, $750,000 a year hospital administrators and $2,000,0000 plus
healthcare insurance company administrators which would go a long way to reduce
the cost of healthcare coverage.

Instead
the government is looking to penalize physicians
. Physicians are the providers
that deliver medical care.

There
is software being developed that deals with real time processing of clinical
data. The software can communicate those data to networked physicians instantly
and help physicians deliver more timely care.

Many
hospital systems are trying to install these real time systems. Unfortunately,
many hospital administrators do not understand its power as a teaching tool to
increase the efficiency and effectiveness of medical care.

 The hospital systems’ only interest is in the
financial result and the question of whether the huge investment is worth the
capital expenditure.

Some
physician group practices, independent of hospital systems, are incorporating
these software systems into their electronic medical records. These groups recognize the potential
importance of having instantaneous predictive data.

Most
physicians do not have an EMR and only 7% of physicians have a fully
functioning EMR.

In
the monograph from “Pathways to Data Analytics” two things were very apparent. It
looks like the healthcare insurance industry controls the committee and its
plans is to continue to control the healthcare dollars and hope to control the
healthcare data.

Increasingly, a
data-driven approach to healthcare is necessary.

The complexity of clinical care requires it, says Glenn Crotty
Jr., MD, FACP, executive vice president and chief operating officer at CaMC.

 “We’re moving from an
individual practitioner cottage industry to a team-based process now . . .. [Medical
care] is beyond the capacity of any one individual to be expert enough to do
that. So we have to do it in a team.”

A team requires information. The changing dynamics of healthcare
spending and reimbursements also require data to navigate.

“Our analytics are not just for finance, which traditionally is
what hospitals invested in,” says St. Luke’s Chief Quality Officer Donna Sabol
, MSN, RN. “When you look at how [hospital] payment is changing [to] a value-based
equation, you have to have good analytics for finance and for quality.”

Absent from the report is the patient and his/her responsibility
to the therapeutic unit. Until some policy maker understands the role of
patients to the therapeutic unit they will get nowhere in improving the
healthcare system.

A glaring example is the money spent by hospital systems to
improve the discharge process to avoid re-hospitalization within the 30 days
post discharge.

Obamacare has instituted the rule November1,2012 that if a
patient is re-hospitalized within 30 days of the initial hospitalization the
hospital system will not get paid.

I can think of 5 ways hospital systems can get around this rule
without suffering the penalty. 

None-the-less the hospital systems are buying software to study
and automate the process to avoid re-hospitalization using its clinical data in
real time.

 The Seton Hospital System in Austin Texas
might have figured it partially out.

It started what it calls an extensivist
program. It is acting as an extension of its physicians care to help avoid re-hospitalization
and use the best data it can collect.

Its is helping clinicians identify patients who
would benefit most from extra attention following discharge. The program
started with congestive heart failure patient



"A
lot of it is about enabling decision-making," Ryan Leslie says

"It's taking the whole universe of
information we have and cutting out what's extraneous and giving clinicians the
information they need to make decisions."


Ryan Leslie is vice
president of analytics and health economics at Seton Healthcare system.  He is taking
unstructured clinical information and connecting that with billing or
administrative information and social demographic information.

He says,  "you start connecting all those things
together and you get a more complete picture of the patient as a person, rather
than as a recipient of a bill," he says. "That's been the exciting
thing recently. You realize that a patients' success or failure may not have to
do with the care plan details or the clinical attributes of the patient as much
as the social attributes
."

Physicians
outside the hospital work with a team of social workers, nurses, and others to
visit patient homes and figure out what's keeping a patient from effectively
following treatment protocols that will likely keep them out of the hospital.

The software
helps determine, based on a host of combined data, which patients are most
likely to be re-hospitalized within 30 days. Targeting the patients is like
looking into a crystal ball. The hospital system cannot afford to service all
the patients with congestive heart failure. The program is in its early stages.
If successful the plan is to expand it to diabetes and other chronic diseases.

This will
happen well beyond November 2012 and January 1,2014. This hospital system
finally realized that it can and must be an extension of its physicians’ care
and not a competitor for patient care.

Missing is the
patients responsibility and incentive in not being readmitted to the hospital.
This can only be accomplished when consumers not only have a desire to be
healthy they have a financial interest to stay healthy.

This can be
accomplished in a consumer driven healthcare system where the patients are responsible
for their health and own their healthcare dollars. The easiest way to get there
is using my ideal medical savings accounts.

 The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

Permalink:

Here Comes The Defective Judge (CMS)!

Stanley Feld M.D., FACP, MACE

President Obama’s goal is to have the government be the single party payer for the entire healthcare system.

There is no doubt in my mind that the government as the single party payer will not work for patients or physicians.

President Obama cannot control CMS’s misuse of it assignments because bureaucratic complexity. One area of abuse and misuse of the department’s power is its attempt to eliminate fraud and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid.

There is no question that some healthcare providers abuse the Medicare and Medicaid payment system.

No one ever asks the critical question. Should the payment system used in Medicare and Medicaid be changed to prevent fraud and abuse?

Never the less President Obama is expanding the old punitive system. He thinks he is going to stop abuse with his expansion.  

“ Stepping up their game against health care fraud, the Obama administration and major insurers announced Thursday they will share raw data to try to shut off billions of dollars in questionable payments.”

I don’t know how many times I have shown that claims data to determine quality of care or fraud and abuse is defective.

"Fraud is estimated by the administration to cost Medicare about $60 billion a year, and the Obama administration has beefed up the government's efforts to stop it, bringing in record settlements with drug companies for marketing violations as well as using new powers in the health care law to pursue low-level fraudsters with greater zeal."

 

This is a small amount compared to the $2.5 trillion dollar healthcare system cost when one considers the government’s investigative costs and the hardship these errors impose on many innocent physicians and patients investigated.

The hardships are enough to destroy physicians’ trust in the government and their desire to deal with the government.

It also serves to destroy the physician patient relationship.

Physician patient relationships are essential to the therapeutic success of a treatment regime.

Physicians have complained about this bureaucratic abuse to their congressmen. Congress has looked into this abuse. CMS’s approach has been to criminalize physicians using questionable data and decisions by unqualified judges.

Chairman Charlie Gonzalez of the House Small Business Committee outlines the problems brought to his attention several years ago. His hearings did not receive much attention.

Opening statement by Chairman Charlie Gonzalez

  

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SmKmLMPu-s&feature=relmfu

 

Dr. Karen Smith a former President of the North Carolina chapter the American Association of Family Practitioners describes her encounter with CMS’s subcontractor for investigating fraud and abuse.   CMS’s assignment is to discover Medicare and Medicaid underpayment or overpayment as well as fraud and abuse.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v4Sq7oDCgo&feature=player_embedded

 

 I believe it is important for anyone who is interested in what is happening to the healthcare system to view the several You Tubes I am including in this blog. 

Dr. Michael Schweitz, Vice President of The Coalition of State Rheumatology Organizations in West Palm Beach, FL discusses the defects in the RAC system and the need to change.

  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5K8iPqsmjY&feature=relmfu

Dr. Schweitz states that administrative costs in dealing with the government is overwhelming to physician practices. The stress imposed on physicians detracts from their ability to deliver quality medical care to their patients.

Most important is the government’s attitude toward the physicians and their practices. The physicians are guilty until they prove themselves innocent.  Government’s subcontractors use claims data to prove the physicians guilt

Another problem is the more the outsourced company collects from physicians, the larger the commission it collects from CMS.

Mr. Timothy B. Hill is Chief Financial Officer, Director of the Office of Financial Management, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. He answers questions from Chairman Charlie Gonzalez

  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBpXubSY8O8&feature=relmfu

 

 The questions continue to Mr. Hill. He says CMS recognizes its abuse of physicians. He hopes to improve.

Since Obamacare has expanded physicians’ complaints have increased.

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=uRX1M31T8LA

 

  

 

Can anyone believe this testimony given by Mr. Hill? I hope his message is not believed by congress. Mr. Hill does not document his department policy changes

 “ This week White House officials said a "trusted third party" would comb through data from Medicare, Medicaid and private health plans and turn questionable billing over to insurers or government investigators. That third party organization has yet to be selected.”

 

With the impending a thirty percent reduction in Medicare payments on January 1, 2013 physicians will not be able to afford care for Medicare and Medicaid patients.  

Mr. Joseph A. Schraad, MHA Chief Executive Officer Oklahoma Allergy and Asthma Clinic, in Oklahoma City, describes the challenges that the practice he manages face. Less and less providers are going to accept Medicare.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cINHOZmo_wA&feature=relmfu

 Dr. Forrest in his direct care payment model for patients describes the formula he uses to avoid the government’s interference with his practice of medicine. He talk is riveting.

  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUX4P7XfY8o

Other formulas can be used. The You Tubes presented here demonstrate that the Judge (CMS) is using the wrong formula. The CMS cannot control their outsourced venders who have inappropriate incentives.

The are driving physician away from accepting Medicare and Medicaid payments.  In the process patients lose

The way to solve fraud and abuse is to have patients police the healthcare system. Patients can uncover fraud and abuse if they own their healthcare dollar and have financial incentives to save unspent money in a retirement fund.

Education and financial incentives will make consumers productive consumers.

The way to approach physicians is not to assume they are criminals and subject them to the stress and expense to defend them in a defective evaluation system.

Physicians must be educated on how to improve coding efficiency and the government’s system of measurement must be made more accurate and less complex. ICD 10 is a big mistake. It makes coding complicated.

The best formula, in my opinion, is to empower and educate patients.

Government and employers must provide patients with financial incentives to become educated buyers of medical care services. Patients must be given the opportunity to own their healthcare dollars and be responsible for their own health and healthcare.

My ideal medical savings account provides patients with that opportunity.

 Physicians collect only 10% of the healthcare dollars spent.

The real question is who collects the remainder of the 2.5 trillion dollars spent?

America should not depend on increased bureaucracy and bureaucratic staff to administer medical care with increased and confusing rules.

Everyone knows this will only result in increased inefficiency and higher costs. 

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone. 

 If you like this blog please send it to a friend

 

 

Permalink:

Another Big Mistake!

 

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

On July 1, with great fanfare, CMS announced that 89 organizations have been chosen to serve the healthcare needs of some 1.2 million Medicare beneficiaries in CMS’ Accountable Care Organizations (ACO) program.

Many of the premier integrated health systems, such as Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, Geisinger Health System, and Intermountain Healthcare had rejected an invitation to participate in the program in June 2011.

Among the reasons for rejecting the government’s offer to be a participant were the complex, contradictory and burdensome rules, the risk in shared savings, and the need for participating patients to be included in oversight boards.

Leaders of all four organizations praised the ACO concept but criticized the proposed implementation.  Geisenger Health System said “

 “It seems to be very prescriptive and restrictive with a fair amount of administrative and regulatory oversight."

 

The recent CMS press release makes it sound as if the ACO program is off to a good start.

Totally false!

There are 35 million seniors and disabled persons presently on Medicare. The program will include 1.2 million Medicare patients.

  • 1.2 million Medicare enrollees represent less than 3.4% of patients on Medicare.
  • The number of organizations enrolled does not represent validation of the acceptance of the ACO process by the medical community.
  • It does not represent validation of the contention that routing Medicare patients through ACO’s will save money. 

The growth in the cost of care’s baseline, on which an ACO organization will be measured, is not defined. The participating ACO organization cannot possibly know what the downside risk is.

It looks like CMS waived the downside risk temporarily for 84 of the 89 ACO’s who signed up. The waiver will not last forever. When it ends it will be too late for these ACO’s to get out.

CMS delayed the original start date from January 1,2012 to July 1,2012. This was an ominous sign. As far as I can tell no one has any idea how many of the groups signed up are integrated care groups.

 SUMMARIES OF ACOS SELECTED FOR JULY 1, 2012 START DATE[1]

http://www.cms.gov/apps/media/press/factsheet.asp?Counter=4405&intNumPerPage=10&checkDate=&checkKey=&srchType=1&numDays=3500&srchOpt=0&srchData=&keywordType=All&chkNewsType=6&intPage=&showAll=&pYear=&year=&desc=&cboOrder=date

I have written several articles explaining why I believe ACO’s will be a gigantic waste of government money, which will add to America’s deficit.

 “The more I study ACOs the worse they look. Dr. Berwick’s goal is redistribution of wealth. This is exactly what ACOs are going to do. Patients, taxpayers and physicians are going to get the short end of the distribution.

Hospital systems are spending a ton of money trying to form ACOs. They are going to lose big. I have concentrated on the obvious defects and difficulties in forming ACOs in the past. Here are some more traps.”

 "Dr. Don Berwick and his associates have a naïve view of the ability of organizations to form and execute Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs). ACOs fit well into President Obama’s worldview of government controlling our healthcare system."

There are three major problems:

  1. The government is broke. It does not have the money to pay for a government takeover of the healthcare system.
  2. New systems need participant cooperation to succeed.
  3. Creating a fully integrated healthcare system is difficult to nearly impossible unless the system has salaried physicians and a fully transparent hospital/physician provider organization. This will not happen soon in the current hospital and physician cultural milieu.

“President Obama and Dr. Don Berwick have overestimated the abilities of the healthcare system to respond to their hubristic assumptions.

 “The ACO program is based on the hubristic assumption that the federal government can design the best organizational structure for the delivery of care, foster its development, and control its operation for the entire country."

Physicians and hospital system will not cooperate because: 

  • Physicians and hospitals have little experience or control in managing risk.
  • Physicians and hospital systems experience with HMO’s in the 1980’s proved their inability to manage risk.
  • It was a painful financial experience for both.
  • Most physicians and hospital systems are not very interested in assuming this risk again.

 The risk of ACOs has been sugar coated by the administration.

Patients are the only stakeholders who can control their healthcare risk. All health policy wonks ignore the role of the patients in controlling and managing their healthcare risk.

 Dr. Berwick thinks hospitals and physicians will be motivated to control patients’ healthcare risk with ACOs.

He is wrong. I predicted participation would be minimal.

Physicians take on enormous risk taking care of patients presently. The risk increases when patients do not follow physicians’ treatment recommendations.

 Physicians are in no mood to take on financial responsibility and malpractice risk for actions that might fail because of patients’ non-adherence. Patients have to be motivated with health and financial incentives to comply.

Those physicians and hospital systems participating in the ACO program will lose financially and professionally.

There are several other key points for the lack of success of the ACO program

  1. " Obamacare uses Medicare reimbursement as an incentive to create accountable care organizations (ACOs), which the federal government has decided are the way to deliver quality care at lower cost.
  2. Proposed regulations by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) are largely confusing, impenetrable, and inconsistent.
  3. They give CMS detailed control over ACOs and the providers who participate in them, including censorship of ACO communications with Medicare beneficiaries.
  4. Medicare beneficiaries are assigned to ACOs without their knowledge or consent.
  5. Membership, in reality, is a retrospective bookkeeping entry relevant only to financial dealings between CMS and the ACO. ACOs may even have to pay money back to Medicare if they do not meet CMS goals for savings.
  6. The incentives offered to ACOs are diffuse and speculative, entailing intrusive regulation of ACOs and providers.
  7.  ACOs as defined by Obamacare are fatally flawed and cannot be fixed by merely changing the proposed regulations."

 This is neither a Democrat nor Republican issue. It is an issue of developing a healthcare system that will work. The cost of developing this government controlled healthcare system that is doomed to fail is enormous.

The Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, Kiesinger Health System, and Intermountain Healthcare are probably the most integrated healthcare systems existing in America. They visualized the lack of potential for success in ACO’s present structure.  

Thirty-six organizations signed up for the Pioneer Demonstrations ACO 6 months ago. The list and details can be found on the CMS fact sheet. The details of the deal they made are not easily available.

innovations.cms.gov/Files/fact…/PioneerACO-General-Fact-Sheet.pd

 

 It is worth studying all of the organizations that were selected for the Pioneer ACO program. These organization must believe they are in a no lose situations. They will find out that they will lose and it will be too late to get out.

All of the organizations represent a very small percentage of practicing physicians.  These physicians take care of a very small portion of Medicare patients.

It will take several years and much money to decide the ACO’s will fail. The only healthcare system that will align all the stakeholders’ incentives is my Ideal Medical Savings Account.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone. 

 If you like this blog please send it to a friend