A big item of health news in recent weeks is the planned
establishment of some sort of health delivery operation by three major
corporations personified by their CEOs: Warren Buffett of Berkshire-Hathaway,
Jeff Bezos of Amazon, and Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan. We have no details about what
it will actually look like, but we are assured that it will be high-quality,
efficient, and cost-effective, utilizing the most modern methods of achieving
those goals, which our creaky, antiquated, and resistant-to-change health system
does not. It will also be non-profit, important given that none of these
companies are, but this is the most common model for health care in the US and
in itself says very little. As the first concrete step toward its creation, and
clue to what it may be,
they have appointed Dr. Atul Gawande as its CEO. Presumably he will be
instrumental in creating this new venture, and his views on quality and
efficiency may provide guidance on what might characterize it.
Dr. Gawande, a Harvard surgeon and senior writer for the New Yorker, has provided us a prolific
body of writing in that magazine and in several books, (including the
best-seller about issues occurring at the end of life, “Being Mortal”), to help
inform us of his views. He has a wide scope of interest in health care and a
demonstrated willingness to learn from other industries. Perhaps his most
famous article is “The
Cost Conundrum”, which appeared in June 2009 and highlighted the wide
variation on expenditures by Medicare for similar populations, focusing on the
highest cost region, McAllen, TX, and comparing it to a similar population in
El Paso, TX, where costs were much lower. Later, in January 2011 “The Hot
Spotters” highlighted the work of Dr. Jeff Brenner in Camden, NJ, and
others, to use modern geo-mapping techniques to identify the areas with the highest
levels of emergency (911) utilization (unshockingly, in Camden, the two highest
were a low-income senior citizens housing unit and a long-term care facility)
and try to develop methods for addressing their health needs before they became
emergencies. In “Big
Med”, August 2012, he discusses application of some of the principles that
work in restaurants such as the Cheesecake Factory to health care. The principles
include enough variety to meet everyone’s needs without expensive unnecessary
redundancy; he shows how this applies in orthopedic surgery and how quality is
improved and costs saved when every surgeon in a hospital doesn’t use his (or,
more rarely among orthopedists, her) favorite implant device and there is some
standardization (commented on in this blog on August 24, 2012, Quality
and price for everyone: Bigger may be better in some ways, but not all).
A very good review of Gawande’s work and probable priorities has been done by
the outstanding Dr. Don McCanne in his “Quote of the Day” on June 22, 2018 “Don’t
wait for Atul Gawande”, and I will not repeat it here.
Of course, the employees of Berkshire-Hathaway, JP Morgan,
and Amazon already have health insurance, so that this new scheme will not
reduce the rate of uninsurance. It is possible that it – whatever “it” turns
out to be – will allow enrollment from other employers, or possibly even
individuals who are currently insured by another mechanism, whether through
Medicare, the ACA-sponsored exchanges, or even Medicaid. This will depend in
part on what “it” is – mostly an insurance plan, mostly a care delivery system,
or a combination of both like many HMOs.
It is possible that this new operation may indeed succeed in
achieving, or at least significantly moving toward, the “Triple Aim” of higher
quality, greater patient satisfaction, and lower cost. Certainly the third of
these is a major focus of businesses that provide health insurance to their
workers, and we will grant these people the benefit of the doubt that they also
wish to achieve the first two. Some HMOs have had significant success in doing
so already, most notably Kaiser Permanente. Other HMOs that were once “consumer
cooperatives” (eliminate the middleman and pay less for the same care or the same
for more and better care) have almost all been bought by insurance companies,
and it is obvious that the “save money” (or really “make more money”) leg of
the #TripleAim is of far greater importance to their business model than
patient satisfaction or quality. The bar, as has been demonstrated ad infinitum, including in the work of
Dr. Gawande as well as other policy analysts from
academia, the foundation world, and journalism, is so low
that large improvements in quality can come from things that it is we already
know how to do. The major obstacle to this has always been how providers are
paid, and this is where the behemoth strength of this new triumvirate may have
significant impact.
Unfortunately, though, there is no suggestion that this new
operation would do anything to help those currently either frozen out of the
system (including poor people in states that have not expanded Medicaid,
undocumented people, and those who cannot afford insurance premiums even with
ACA support). The average salaries at JP Morgan and Berkshire-Hathaway are high
since so many of the employees are high-level finance types, raising the mean
and median. However, Amazon is a different story. Jeff Bezos may be the richest
person in the world, he did not get there by paying his employees a living
wage; the
median income for an Amazon employee is $28,446. While they may have health
insurance, it would not be surprising if many of Mr. Bezos’ employees qualify
for food stamps, and have difficulty making their copays; that median
salary is about the poverty level for a family of four, and if it is the
median, many workers make less.
It could be argued that is unfair of me to criticize a
program – especially one still in the planning stage -- for not achieving what
it does not set out to achieve. However, there is nothing wrong – and indeed it
is quite correct – to note that it is far from being a health care panacea. By not
setting out to ensure access for everyone, it will not solve the basic problem
in achieving the Triple Aim. I mean, it’s good to be focusing on quality, cost
and patient satisfaction but without a plan to assure that everyone has access
to care it can ring a little hollow.
As was observed by Schiff,
Bindman, and Brennan more than 20 years ago, and quoted by me before (Medical
errors: to err may be human, but we need systems to decrease them, August
10. 2012), denial of care – or lack of access to care for financial,
geographic or other reasons -- is the “gravest of all quality defects”.
1 comment:
Beautifully balanced and very cogent, Josh. Neither of these is easy. Well done!
Post a Comment