TW: Atul Gawande reports on health care for New Yorker and has put together excellent stuff which we have highlighted before. He is out with a new piece focused on the cost containment measures in the proposed health care reform pending in Congress. The fundamental point is the bill attempts a plethora of approaches integrating cutting edge thinking on the topic. As I have said repeatedly, one person's health care cost is another's revenue. One person's frivolous test is another's reassuring procedure. Containing costs is complex at least the bill attempts to address the issue unlike those who merely sit back demagogue merrily along towards their next election.
From Atul Gawande at New Yorker as summarized by Ezra Klein:
"Pick up the Senate health-care bill -- yes, all 2,074 pages -- and leaf through it. Almost half of it is devoted to programs that would test various ways to curb costs and increase quality. The bill is a hodgepodge. And it should be.
The bill tests, for instance, a number of ways that federal insurers could pay for care. Medicare and Medicaid currently pay clinicians the same amount regardless of results. But there is a pilot program to increase payments for doctors who deliver high-quality care at lower cost, while reducing payments for those who deliver low-quality care at higher cost. There’s a program that would pay bonuses to hospitals that improve patient results after heart failure, pneumonia, and surgery. There’s a program that would impose financial penalties on institutions with high rates of infections transmitted by health-care workers. Still another would test a system of penalties and rewards scaled to the quality of home health and rehabilitation care.
Other experiments try moving medicine away from fee-for-service payment altogether. A bundled-payment provision would pay medical teams just one thirty-day fee for all the outpatient and inpatient services related to, say, an operation. This would give clinicians an incentive to work together to smooth care and reduce complications. One pilot would go even further, encouraging clinicians to band together into “Accountable Care Organizations” that take responsibility for all their patients’ needs, including prevention -- so that fewer patients need operations in the first place. These groups would be permitted to keep part of the savings they generate, as long as they meet quality and service thresholds.
...Which of these programs will work? We can’t know. That’s why the Congressional Budget Office doesn’t credit any of them with substantial savings. The package relies on taxes and short-term payment cuts to providers in order to pay for subsidies. But, in the end, it contains a test of almost every approach that leading health-care experts have suggested. (The only one missing is malpractice reform. This is where the Republicans could be helpful.) None of this is as satisfying as a master plan. But there can’t be a master plan."
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/12/14/091214fa_fact_gawande?currentPage=all#ixzz0ZlZtZebl
No comments:
Post a Comment