I had the chance to participate in a Hangout on Air with Kathi Browne, who is the founder/moderator of the Google+ Healthcare Talk community. If you’re on G+ and in the healthcare industry, that community is one you want to join – lots of discussion on topics from healthcare policy to social media to patient safety to care quality. It’s invitation-only – if you’d like to join, hit the G+ link above and ask Kathi to add you to the community.
Last night’s (Monday, Oct. 28, 2013) Hangout on Air was a conversation with Bill Guthrie, CEO of Patients with Power, a new web-based platform for shared decision-making for cancer patients and their oncology teams that’s in beta at UCSF’s lung cancer oncology unit and also as a survival-planning tool at Cornell-Weill/New York Presbyterian’s ob-gyn onco unit.
Decision-making for cancer patients – shared, or not – is a firehose. Patients with Power does what its name promises, it gives patients access to the information they need to make an informed decision, information that’s solidly based in evidence-based medicine since it’s based wholly on National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for cancer treatment. Bill has given me a demo of the tool, and it’s superb. He also did a walk-though last night. Give a watch/listen: //www.youtube.com/embed/FPTIjDwirDI
I had the great good fortune of being tagged as an ePatient Scholar for the 2013 edition of Stanford Medicine X. That allowed me to sit at the feet – literally, since the ePatients were the mosh-pit for the three day conference plenary stage – of some of the best and brightest minds in healthcare. And guess what? Many of those best/brightest were … PATIENTS.
(c) Lucien Engelen
MedicineX (a/k/a MedX and #medx) is the uber Patients Included medical conference. It grew from seeds planted at conferences like Health 2.0 and Patients 2.0, for which seeds-to-beautiful-flowers gardener credit goes to Dr. Larry Chu and his team from Stanford Anesthesiology AIM Lab, who seem to prestidigitate rabbits out of hats without breaking a sweat. Or the hats. Or the rabbits.
MedX – in my opinion, at least – trumps every other Patients Included event by not just including patients, but by putting them front and center throughout the program. In fact, I cannot think of a session that I attended that didn’t have someone who was there primarily as a customer of healthcare (commonly called “a patient”) on the platform, presenting or participating in a panel discussion.
My ePatient socks were knocked off from jump thanks to the opening keynote by Michael Seres and Marion O’Connor on “The New Engaged Patient,” which was the morning keynote on Friday. Michael uses his blog as his personal health record, up to and through a lifetime battle with Crohn’s disease that led to his becoming the 11th patient to ever receive a bowel transplant, and only the 6th to survive that transplant experience. Michael is hilarious, and Marion is exactly the sort of caring brainiac any patient would like bedside as s/he battled a life-threatening illness. Here’s the video of their session:
The rest of the day played out as a firehose of ePatient awesome, including the first presenter to bring me to tears: Sara Riggare, a brilliant woman who is, among many other things, an engineer and a Parkinson’s patient. During the panel discussion on “The Self-Tracking Patient,” and my (somewhat sobby) conversation with Sara afterward, was when I fully realized, even though I’d talked about it last year on one of my blogs, that I had been born an ePatient. Well, maybe not born, but them that brung me into the world also brought me to ePatient-cy. I felt my late father, whose Parkinson’s laid him low, and then to rest, over 10 years ago, standing by me as I listened to Sara talk about her own self-tracking and self-advocacy. My dad was a warrior – literally, a US Navy fighter pilot – and brought that warrior spirit to his battle with Parkinson’s. I’d like to think that Big Mike would be proud of the work I do today to bring sense, and sensibility, to the most human of all sciences: medicine.
The Friday sessions ended with a “What If Healthcare …” panel discussion, conveniently tagged for the Twitter-verse as #whatifhc(click that link for a Symplur transcript of the conversation as it unfolded live). This session is the only one that pressed my buttons in a not-good way, and here’s why: there were a group of white-dude brainiacs, and one not-a-white-dude, on that panel. Don’t get me wrong, I like white dudes. Hell, I’ve married two of ’em (NOT at the same time!). But I found it sort of anachronistic that, as the “dream big” panel on the first day of a Patients Included medical conference on the campus of a major medical school (Stanford Med), the participants on that panel were so very white-dude, with the notable exception of healthcare artist/activist Regina Holliday. Regina herself mentioned the very-not-diverse makeup of the panel during the session. I made the observation on Twitter, as I listened to the panel’s conversation, that healthcare in the US is a great wealth-transfer system … but as a health-transfer system?
Saturday opened with something for which I was utterly unprepared: hearing first-hand about the project that won the 2012 Intel ISEF Prize. Jack Andraka is the 16 year old kid from Baltimore who, at 13, decided that not having a reliable early-detection test for pancreatic cancer was a terrible thing. He resolved to create that test … and he did. It’s been patented in the US, and is in the process of being patented globally. Here’s the first-look video of his hilarious and inspiring call to action for open science:
Frankly, I count hearing that talk, and meeting Jack later that day at the MedX reception on the Dean’s Lawn, as the highest high point of my MedX experience. I told Jack that I couldn’t wait to see what he did next, but that even if he decided to rest on his uber-science-geek laurels with his mesothelin discovery, he’d given a gift to humanity unlike any other since Jonas Salk. Visit his website to keep track of this approachable, funny, huge-hearted young man who has the mind of a god.
The other big high of my MedX time was finally – FINALLY – being in the room with all three of the women who birthed #BCSM, one of the most powerful healthcare communities on Twitter. My ePatient journey may have been started by the voyage with my parents through their health issues, but it was forged into hardened steel by my own breast cancer experience. Connecting with Alicia Staley was one of the things that helped turn my book, Cancer for Christmas, into an Amazon bestseller in ’09. I spent much of the conference touching base with the #BCSM crew, who were in attendance in force at MedX. It was #BCSM Summer Camp!
The conference closed on Sunday with a keynote by Vinod Khosla, “2025: 20% Doctor Included?” Khosla’s viewpoint – which I share – is that technology will provide more reliable and efficient diagnostic tools, removing the mis-diagnosis risk that leads to most medical errors. He also stated that transformation of the healthcare system will not happen from within. Khosla backed up his positions with evidence, and I was nodding so hard in agreement I risked whiplash. It was the perfect close for the epic firehose of forward-thinking that was MedX 2013. Here’s the first-look video of Khosla’s talk:
What will I remember most about my MedX experience? I’ve listed some of it above, but even as I write this post I realize how much more mental food was served up during those three days. There were the conversations that happened over coffee, during lunch, with a frosty beverage in the Sheraton bar. I met people I’d known online for years, but had not had the opportunity to hug and thank for the impact they’d had on my life until MedX put us in the same room.
Amir Dan Rubin – the CEO of Stanford Hospital & Clinics, his master class on quality improvement will inform my hospital-med journo work for years to come
Dr. Marc Katz(I hadda go to Silicon Valley to meet a terrific doc who practices down the street from me – go figure)
What did I learn at MedX? I learned that there’s hope. Hope for healthcare, hope for humanity, and hope for every single person who winds up a patient (and hey, we’re all patients, right?). The key is that medicine is a team sport. It requires the full participation of everyone in every health-related transaction.
So pick up your ball, and let’s play together, shall we?
Last Friday, I put out a call for posts about healthcare costs and/or health insurance innovation for the HCSM community. Here’s the brain candy that flew over the MightyCaseyMedia transom:
First up: an examination of STD occurrence alongside STD testing costs in the New York metro area from ClearHealthCosts.com(@chcosts), written by Sherry Mazzocchi. This is a deep dive into the incidence of STDs across New York City, with snapshots of what consumers actually pay for STD testing at a number of facilities across the region. Runs from $0 (for members of a subscription medical practice) to $600 for women who visit a Westchester County practice. Like Uwe Reinhardt has said for years, healthcare pricing is chaos behind a veil of secrecy.
For patients looking to pierce that veil and direct-pay for their care, ClearHealthCosts’ founder Jeanne Pinder offers up this post – New ways of paying: Cutting out the middleman. Seems like everybody’s looking for a better way to hold down health costs. In a number of cases, that means patient and provider are getting together directly, without the middleman (the insurance company). You could start asking, “How much is that?” and acting on the answer.
With Oct. 1 and the dawn of the ACA’s new health insurance marketplaces, Jeanne Pinder shares What it means to you: Oct. 1 and buying health insurance. Maybe you avoid the topic of health insurance, but you can’t any longer. If you’re not covered by employer insurance, Medicare or Medicaid, you will need to know things about buying insurance (or choosing not to buy it). Her post offers some actionable advice on how to figure out what the marketplace means to you.
From one of my favorite places, Costs of Care (@CostsofCare), comes a post by David Marcovitz titled “A Routine Denial,” about how it feels to have an expensive test declined by your insurer after it’s been done. If you’ve ever been on the receiving end of one of these notices, you know that it feels anything but routine. After the appeals process. David discovered just how chaotic healthcare pricing is. A great read.
Like David, Brave Bosom founder Andrea Downing (@BraveBosom) discovered that she had a genetic predisposition to a disease. In her case, it was BRCA, the genetic mutation that increases risk for breast cancer. Andrea is a leader in the young “previvor” community, and offers up this post on what healthcare reform means for her, for her community, and for other people who have potential destructive dynamite in their DNA. Genetic testing and counseling is a terrific resource; worrying how it might impact your insurance coverage shouldn’t have to be a consideration when you’re making a decision about your health.
ePatient Dave deBronkart (@ePatientDave) is a world-famous (really) patient activist. He’s written two books, and spoken at conferences across the globe. His post “Ratty boxers: what it means to really, truly have no money” resonated powerfully for me, since all e-patient experts face the same challenge: patients aren’t yet seen as experts worthy of remuneration by the healthcare industry. Dave has helped move the needle on that – here’s hoping that his message spreads into the hearts and minds of organizations who are still expecting patients to pay for the privilege of speaking to audiences who need to know what we know: how to make healthcare more human-friendly.
Alan Brewington (@abrewi3010) blogs at PainTalks.com– he’s a guy with chronic arthritis from some rather epic sports injuries. He sent along a post on the pending health insurance exchanges from the front lines in a Red State: Idaho. Titled “Health Insurance Exchange, Idaho, Arthritis, and Me,” Alan’s post walks the reader through an exploration of the new health insurance exchange marketplace, figuring out what kind of coverage is available at what premium cost. As a chronic pain patient, Alan knows more about the ins and outs of health insurance than the average guy his age, and makes some good observations about what it will take for healthcare reform to work.
Closing our cavalcade of #HCSM awesome, here’s a post from Carolyn Thomas at MyHeartSisters.com(@HeartSisters) on how online communities help patients cope, and give them the power to move on. “Discover. Join. Leave.” is a great journey through the life cycle of online patient groups. Some come and stay, others arrive looking for specific help, all make a contribution when they can. Peer-to-peer healthcare is a web, just like … the web. Carolyn tells a great troll-taming story, too – another terrific read.
If you’d like to participate in the HealthWorksCollective #HCSM Review – click this link to look at the schedule, and find out how to get on the list. Thanks for reading, and I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments!
This story from PBS Newshour clearly shows how important it is to ask questions, and shop around, when it comes to prescription drug prices.
Think a generic drug guarantees a lower price? Not so much. Watch this story, and learn how the same generic drug can cost anywhere from $11 to $455. The best way to get the lowest price? The same way you shop for shoes, or appliances: research online, ask local retailers, and make an informed decision.
It was recently revealed that an Excel error contributed to the European fiscal crisis, and a continuing global economic recession/depression. Paul Krugman called the revelation the Excel Depression in the NY Times. Certainly lives are at stake when the success or failure of large economies are at risk, but not nearly as many lives as are at stake every day given the lack of transparency (and even, in some cases, plain truth) in bioscience research and medical outcomes reporting.
Ben Goldacre gave a barn-burning TED talk, “Battling Bad Science,” in 2011. He gave another one in 2012 in which he called the data manipulation in scientific research the “cancer at the core of evidence-based medicine.” His point? We cannot make a meaningful decision in the absence of ALL the data.
Paul Levy, the former CEO of Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital, recently blogged about the failure of the Journal of Pediatric Surgery to reveal, in a report on a surgery for sunken-chest deformity, a widely-reported death of a teenage boy after said surgery, even though that boy’s case is used as an example of avoidable medical error in safety bootcamps for medical interns and residents. Boggles the mind, doesn’t it?
Even if the data is fully reported, the PR geeks who write up the announcement of results might get that report 100% wrong. Witness the recent contretemps over a University of Chicago study on patient engagement, shared decision-making, and healthcare cost control. A full outline of that mess, by ePatient Dave deBronkart in Forbes, will give you 411 on that story. The Cliff’s Notes: it was a post-discharge survey, not a full study; it measured attitudes, not outcomes; and the press release was sent out on a holiday weekend, ensuring both pick up (slow news cycle) and lack of follow up.
Given the general public’s lack of understanding of science, the scarcity of journos who can interpret same for said general public, and the scale-thumbing going on in bioscience research, what’s to be done to reverse this disease-mongering and full-on prevarication (look it up) trend?
Stetho-Snopes
How about a Snopes.com for medicine? We could call it … Stetho-Snopes. There’s certainly enough interest in the subject on the part of people and organizations. The challenge is to take all the small villages of interest across the globe and give them a repository for what they find, and what they can debunk.
Ben Goldacre is walking his own talk with an effort called AllTrials, a petition that’s demanding open data from all sources of medical research. Organizations like the Robert Wood Johnson Foundationare working on making medicine and healthcare more transparent and accessible for patients. The Society for Participatory Medicine‘s membership is committed to the same mission: transparency and collaboration across the continuum of care.
How about we all band together and make RAW DATA NOW a reality in medicine? GIMME MY DaM DATA. Now.
I’m still recovering from the month of May. I was all up in the healthcare, pretty much 24/7, which differs not-much from my usual roll, other than that in the period of three weeks, I was in DC for eight of 21 days, May 14 through June 5, attending HM13 (the annual meeting of the Society of Hospital Medicine, which I covered for The Hospitalist magazinepodcasts) and Health Data Palooza IV as just-me on a Consumer Circle scholarship.
What I saw and heard at both conferences made me hopeful for the future of healthcare … sort of. As inspiring as both of them were, I found the SHM conference more of a hope engine for just-e-patient me than the rah-rah tech-fest that was #hdpalooza. Granted, HM13 was organized and run by the medical society that has a big upward swing on its membership, and on the income of said members, which means that there was a breadth and depth of content that wouldn’t be available at non-clinical conferences.
I got plenty of mental floss out of both of them. Here are the high (and low) lights:
Hands-on practicum at HM13 featuring portable ultrasound guided bedside procedures for the hospitalist. You have not lived until you’ve seen a hospitalist put a central line in a Costco chicken that’s tricked out with liquid-filled tubes serving as major blood vessels. Training that is both fun and practical transmits sticky knowledge. And I’m not taking the grape juice that was cast in the role of blood for this session.
Dr. Alberto Puig’s History of the Physical Exam HM13 breakout session offered laughter (imagine doing a pelvic exam on a standing patient fully garbed in Victorian bustle-wear), horror (doctors assessed health status for centuries by *tasting* patients’ urine; and let’s not forget those lovely leeches), and a whole lot of thought-provoking questions about what a physical exam means, and how important touch is to the practice of medicine.
Cognitive Diagnostic Error workshop, where a team of patient safety experts from UPenn demonstrated the risks of thinking too fast in clinical situations. Slower thinking is harder, but it will prevent mis-diagnosing and other medical errors.
Meeting Dr. Gordon Guyatt, the man who coined the phrase Evidence Based Medicine, and watching him shred study after study using funnel plots of the study’s data. Eye-opening doesn’t begin to describe that particular HM13 experience.
A cost transparency workshop! At a hospital medicine conference! Led by Dr. Chris Moriates from UCSF, this session showed the power of shared decision-making across the clinical team *and* included the patient/caregiver in the equation. We’re winning!
Best of the Best at Health Data Palooza? AthenaHealth CEO Jonathan Bush’s keynote, where he was by turns hilarious, pointed, inspiring, and infuriating – all good things, as far as I’m concerned. His best line? “Obama was right. There, I said it.” After which he went on to again call the feds on the carpet for lack of testicular fortitude when it comes to setting up a national health data system. He has a great post on The Health Care Blog about his time on the platform, and his message.
Biggest disappointment of #hdpalooza? Atul Gawande moderated a panel on the new payment models emerging from Obamacare. Given his writing on healthcare costs, I hoped for a vibrant discussion on how health IT systems are enabling better cost visibility and management, for both the system (providers/payers) and users (patients). Twas not to be. What the session amounted to was a single visual involving CME credits for clinical folks in the audience being at risk if any panelist wound up mouthing commercial messages, accompanied by a round-robin of words into microphones from a sausage party of dude-panelists. Even for an IT geek, this was a snooze-fest of epic proportions. Huge disappointment.
Channeling the late Richard Dawson in a game show session called Family Feud’n, where providers and payers battled over what patients said they wanted as value from the healthcare system … well, it was eye-catching. It was funny, in parts. Mostly, I wondered what the hell they were trying to accomplish. Healthcare providers and healthcare payers are forever set in opposition? Patients are just objects, the “product,” and don’t get a voice other than in surveys? I call #fail on that one …
Illuminating Disease at the Speed of Light session was a highlight, with researchers and data modelers teaming up to show how data visualization can accelerate progress in clinical studies of disease. I was riveted, and I’m not even a full-on big-data geek.
Worst part of both conferences? The running from pillar to post to attend the sessions I most wanted to see, followed by sitting in said session for up to two hours. Seriously, what is up with healthcare conferences that make us sit on our keesters when getting up and moving around would feel so darn good? Conference organizers should start figuring out how to do “walking sessions” that mirror the rise of walking meetings and standing/walking workstations.
Still glaringly missing from all of this rah-rah is the actual, real-world voice of the patient – HM13 can be (somewhat) forgiven for that, since it’s a medical society annual conference. I will note that, in all my interviews for HM13 podcasts, the question, “How can patients help?” was warmly welcomed by everyone asked, and answered with enthusiasm and insight. Figuring out how to break the walls down between clinicians and patients – “gimme my damn data,” two-way edition – using health IT systems as the wedge seems to be a place to start. But letting patients help there is utterly crucial.
Speaking of sitting too long … time for a bike ride to my polling place to vote in today’s off-year election primary in my state. I’m voting for a guy who’s worked on opening up health data. Win/win … ?
I had the great good fortune of being asked (by WEGO Health) to participate on a panel titled Social Media for Pharma: A Match Made in Heaven or Hell?at the ePharma Summit in New York (#epharma) earlier this week. When the opportunity presented itself, I asked to be registered for the whole event so I could do my fly-on-the-wall thing by attending some sessions and schmoozing in the exhibit hall.
What did I learn? I learned something I already knew: pharma, and healthcare in general, talks a good game at the corporate level about “engagement” when it comes to patients. However, their use of the word tends to run along engagement-as-shiny-object-syndrome lines; in other words, passive message consumption is the desired model, since two-way dialogues are problematic, with pharma afraid of FDA bitch-slaps in the form of warning letters and healthcare in general sweating bullets about the powerful bitch-slap known as the HIPAA violation, given the $1.5M fine potential.
I understand their aversion to drawing the gimlet eye, and the ire, of the feds when they’re considering how to communicate with their marketplace. Pharma is a conservative, slow-to-innovate business that’s focused on shareholder value and ROI for said investors, given that they can spend billions developing a new drug for market before they can sell the first pill of said wonder drug. At least, that’s what pharma balance sheets and annual reports tell us.
Pharma is anxious to open dialogues with its customers – the real customers, patients – but isn’t sure how to go about doing that without winding up in deep kimchee with federal regulators. That was the purpose of the panel I was on: to let pharma know what kind of conversation patients were looking for, and what we’d like to hear from the pharma industry. Our group members were:
We all said that we would welcome some real dialogue with pharma: not sales language, but human language. Stop telling us to “ask our doctors about” – which is useful, but only half of the conversation equation. Pharma should ask patients how and if they – pharma and its products – are actually helping. The snowflakes in the post title aren’t the snowflakes that flurried a bit in New York on Thursday, they’re from my exhortation from the podium (and everywhere else):
“If we’re all snowflakes, unique in our genomic makeup and completely different from any other human on the planet, where’s my snowflake medicine?”
I know that snowflake medicine is not only possible, it’s here: pharmacogenomics is a new science, but it’s in commercial use and has been for a few years. I’d like to know why it isn’t part of every single prescription decision, but I’m an impatient early adopter. I know that pharma is still operating on a population health model, but that is so 20th century, dudes. Real innovation is already happening, yet pharma’s business model is still in “find the blockbuster drug that works OK in 60-70% of the population with Disease X, and we’re in the money!” mode.
My takeaway from #epharma? Patients are still seen as exotic creatures by pharma, but I sense that they’re anxious to learn more about us beyond our diagnoses. My recommendation: Look for influencer patients in the health communities that use your products. Open a one-on-one dialogue with them, ask them how your products are perceived. Explore opening up some private-channel community conversations (NOT on social media!) that can involve your clinical team, doctors who prescribe your products, and the patients that take them. Listen and learn.
If you need help wrangling internet and social rules for pharma out of the FDA, tell us – patients – what you want to accomplish, and let us storm the castle. Embrace the snowflakes. Avoid the bitch-slaps. Help create better global health. Patients are the only real blockbuster drug left in the 21st century.
Last week’s post called medicine in the U.S. a monopoly. I took some heat for using that metaphor from some of my economist and journo colleagues, and realized that I needed to make a clarification: Medicine is a gameof Monopoly, not a true economic monopoly. My very-snark-infested point was, and always is, that the pricing model in healthcare in this country is about as fair as a crap game or, perhaps, a round of Monopoly.
More grist for my point arrived this week in the form of a TIME special feature, Bitter Pill: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us. In it, reporter Steven Brill walks the reader through the chaos behind a veil of secrecy in healthcare pricing, starting with an under-insured man’s treatment at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Texas, which involved waiting – while wracked with the chills and fever caused by his non-Hodkin’s lymphoma – in a crowded hospital reception area until the check for his treatment cleared. He wound up having to use a credit card to pay $7,500 toward his medical costs before they’d initiate his chemotherapy. By the way, MD Anderson is a non-profit hospital. A close review of that man’s hospital bills revealed a 400% markup on many of the cancer drugs in his chemo treatments.
Another example in the TIME feature is one involving a $21,000 false alarm – a woman was having chest pain, and was taken by ambulance to a local hospital. After testing, it was discovered that she was suffering from indigestion. The Medicare billing for the trip would have been around 80% less than what the woman – who didn’t have insurance – was billed for the hospital visit. However, since she was 64, and not eligible for Medicare, she was billed $21,000. Yikes.
image credit: TIME Magazine
At the root of the cost determinations in both of these cases is the hospital’s chargemaster list – the Great and Powerful Oz of that hospital’s billing structure. When pressed, hospital spokespeeps will say “no one pays those rates, they’re just a guideline” or “those lists have been around forever, we only use them as a reference” – but uninsured and under-insured people are asked to pay them. Hospital executive will also say that the pricing on the chargemaster list is justified by the fact that the hospital has to provide charity care to indigent patients. While it’s true that there are patients who can’t pay for the care they receive, the vast majority of patients are covered by either a private health plan, or Medicare, or Medicaid. The rates paid by those payers are negotiated with the hospitals. Why can’t an un- or underinsured person negotiate a fair cash price, too?
The TIME story is a great read – it’s long, but it’s worth every minute of the time it will take you to read it. One patient story that stood out for me: a union guy in his 30s, with severe back pain, was treated by having a spinal-nerve stimulation device implanted. An outpatient procedure, with the nickel-and-dime hospital chargemaster billing adding up to $87,000 – the device itself, which wholesales for $19,000, was billed to the patient at $49,237 – put the patient over his annual health insurance coverage limit of $60,000. He was on the hook for $47,000 of that bill. Again, yikes.
This trip down the medical billing rabbit hole pinged my radar in the same hour that a post by Brian Klepper on KevinMD.com did. It appears that the American Medical Association’s star-chamber price-setting committee, the RUC (about which I’ve ranted here before), has been given a pass by a federal appeals court in Georgia on having to hew to the same public-interest rules that govern other federal advisory groups. In other words, the AMA gets to continue to set healthcare prices by setting the dollar value assigned to each and every billing code in healthcare. Fox, meet henhouse. Again.
What was I saying about medicine not being a monopoly? Well, OK, it’s not a monopoly. But it’s sure a shootin’ a game of Monopoly, with hotels on every single street. And patients just have to keep paying up after every roll of the dice.
When you hear the word “monopoly,” does it fill you with a warm and fuzzy feeling? (Unless you’re Hasbro, you really should say no, unless you’re a cyborg.)
Healthcare is a monopoly. We can’t DIY cancer treatment, or surgically repair a broken hip for ourselves, so we have to go to the medical-industrial complex to regain our health if we wander into the weeds, health-wise. We also have deep difficulty accessing pricing information. I’ve talked about that here over the last few years. Maybe not a monopoly in the financial-reg sense of the word, but it sure is mighty like a game of Monopoly.
This “chaos behind a veil of secrecy” (all credit for that phrase belongs to healthcare economist Uwe Reinhart) has created the impression in healthcare customers that there’s no way to tell what something will cost before you buy it. You checks the box and takes yer chances. No Get Out of the Hospital Free cards. No pass-the-admissions-counter-collect-$200 option. That’s a rotten way to run a railroad (one of the original monopoly industries in US history), and an even worse way to run a hospital.
Dan Munro wrote about this, and the star-chamber cabal that actually sets the prices in healthcare, the RUC, on Forbes.com yesterday. I’ve talked about the RUC myself. And the search for price transparency, which seemed such an outlier activity just a couple of years ago, is now popping up in the Well blog on the New York Times site, as well as on Reuters. The Reuters piece has the addition bonus of quotes from my buddy Jeanne Pinder, founder of ClearHealthCosts.com. (Yesterday was a big day in medical price transparency.)
This is the central reason I registered the hashtag #howmuchisthat with Symplur, the healthcare hashtag registry. We all have to start demanding that prices be visible, and that the RUC stop cabal-ing around with our lives and our wallets. As more and more people are finding themselves with high-deductible health insurance, asking how much things cost before you make a healthcare decision will become the norm. If a healthcare provider can’t answer that question, s/he will find that s/he’s seeing the patient panel sinking fast, along with practice revenue.
Get with it, medicine. Remake your image, and your brand, to be clear as glass and user-friendly. Outcome metrics along with pricing would be really nice, too.
This week, NPR’s Marketplace aired a piece on what I have taken to calling the “black box of healthcare” – pricing. There is a committee, called the RUC, set up and run by the American Medical Association, that reports to CMS (the federal unit that runs Medicare and Medicaid) on relative value numbers for the thousands of medical procedures that wind up as billing codes in Medicare and your health insurer.
Those relative value numbers = PRICES. This isn’t considered price-fixing under anti-trust rules because the RUC reports to CMS, which then publishes the numbers on the Medicare reimbursement rate schedule. So the AMA isn’t publishing the prices, CMS is.
Fox, meet henhouse. Or, stated in another way: airplane, meet the black box that is making you crash and burn. The Marketplace page linked in the 1st graf has plenty of linkage to additional context for this issue. Read them, and weep.
How is it that an industry whose aggregate cost is now at close to 20% of US GDP gets to set its own prices, and then have them published by the federal government as The Official Price List?
It’s called effective lobbying, and it’s so effective that it’s essentially kept access to the pricing committee process a secret for decades. Which makes it pretty clear why so much of our GDP goes to healthcare, doesn’t it?
The sound bite in the story that I found the most hilarious was from Charlie Baker, the former CEO of the Harvard Pilgrim health plan in Massachusetts. His quote:
By having a process that for all intensive [sic] purposes isn’t a public process, and doesn’t appear to actually be accountable to much of anybody, I think that’s kind of un-American!
I find this hilarious because Harvard Pilgrim is a member of America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry group that advocates (translation: lobbies) for health insurers, who also have their hands on the levers of healthcare pricing via reimbursement rates (granted, based on CMS’s published rates, which are based on the RUC’s relative value numbers). Which means that the very-American health insurance industry is a co-conspirator in this price-setting (-fixing?) game.
Healthcare pricing is such a black box that if a patient attempts to find out what something will cost before s/he has a medical procedure, s/he will be met with a blank stare, “I don’t know”, “nobody knows how to figure that out”, or some other version of “what?” that gets you no answer.
Dave isn’t the only customer of the healthcare industry who’s looking for pricing, and answers to the variance in said pricing depending on who you ask. The LA Times had a piece in their May 27, 2012 business pages on how patients could negotiate cash prices at the hospital or in the doctor’s office that were far below insurance reimbursement rates IF they didn’t use their insurance.
As an industry, healthcare is deeply broken. Since the industry has been supported for decades by an economic model that hides pricing from its consumers – employer-based health insurance – the end users, patients, have no clear path to making informed choices based on quality and cost.
If you ran your business that way, you’d be out of business pretty quickly. It’s time to break the healthcare industry’s economic model – if ever there was a sector ripe for creative economic destruction, healthcare is that sector.
Best of the Best at Health Data Palooza? AthenaHealth CEO Jonathan Bush’s keynote, where he was by turns hilarious, pointed, inspiring, and infuriating – all good things, as far as I’m concerned. His best line? “Obama was right. There, I said it.” After which he went on to again call the feds on the carpet for lack of testicular fortitude when it comes to setting up a national health data system. He has a 
