Roji Intel Blog

Theresa Hush 0
0
ACOsCost TransparencyMedical Decision-MakingRisk
September 23, 2020

ACOs, You Probably Think Cost Transparency Isn’t Your Problem. Think Again.

ACOs have largely sidestepped the cost transparency dispute raging between Medicare and medical providers, especially hospitals, due to CMS rules requiring providers to give consumers coverage-based cost estimates. If you're an ACO, you probably assume that cost transparency is not your problem. So you probably won't like to hear that your ACO should be helping your patients manage costs via cost transparency. Moreover, doing so will benefit you as much as your patients. Let's examine why this makes sense. Lack of Cost Transparency Disables Discussion of Value for Consumers Cost transparency really means giving advance price information to consumers so…
Read More
Theresa Hush 0
0
Consumers & PatientsFuture of Health CareMedical Decision-MakingValue-Based Health Care
January 15, 2020

Can Consumers Be the Answer to Health Care Cost Control?

In the intense ramp-up to accepting Value-Based Health Care payment models that include financial risk, providers have implemented an array of technologies and programs to improve cost performance. They are in a race against time. Capitation is re-emerging as a dominant payment type under Medicare Value-Based Primary Care Models and commercial contracts. Alternative Payment Models demand payback for excess costs. In the crunch, however, the most important health care goal is getting lost: how to reduce long-term costs while improving patient outcomes. The most effective solutions will require more than just technology. They will require provider-consumer partnering, facilitated by consumer-focused…
Read More
Theresa Hush 0
0
Consumers & PatientsFuture of Health CareMedical Decision-Making
November 21, 2019

How Aching Joints Can Teach Consumers to Question the Evidence

As explained in our last article, there’s more to managing personal health care costs than concentrating on insurance payments and uncovered costs. As health care consumers, we’d all benefit from learning how to determine whether the value of the services—as delivered by a given provider—is worth the cost, potential risk, and benefits. Here, again, are the four key questions: Request evidence for new or continued treatment; Ask about your providers' cost and quality performance and service standards; Question what doesn't seem right about your experience, diagnosis, and treatment; Request episode-based cost information. There's a good chance that some consumers will…
Read More
Theresa Hush 0
0
Consumers & PatientsFuture of Health CareMedical Decision-MakingValue-Based Health Care
October 2, 2019

How Consumers Can Choose Quality in Value-Based Health Care

In our last article on how Quality should be reflected in Value-Based Health Care, we looked at the problematic route of quality measurement and reporting. The intent to develop payment for quality has resulted in a complex measurement system that produced provider-specific performance scores across hundreds of measures, yet has failed to advance achievement of better health care outcomes. The system creates flexibility for providers by allowing choice of measures, which eliminates consumers’ ability to see differences among providers. The quality agenda needs to mature. In its developmental period, there was a need to achieve consensus on the standard of…
Read More
Robert McNutt, M.D. 0
2
Future of Health CareMedical Decision-MakingResearch
September 11, 2019

Fixing Clinical Science Requires a Moonshot

“We chose to go to the moon” President John Kennedy’s statement instigated a monumental marshaling of resources to achieve a remarkable goal. Those famous words also established a powerful metaphor for aiming high. We need an equally monumental shift in purpose and commitment of resources for how we conduct clinical science. Nothing less than our nation’s health is at stake. In my view, there are only three possible ways research efforts might proceed: First, the conduct of research might not change, but continue to rely on observational studies and non-generalizable randomized trials (RTs). If so, populations of subjects included in…
Read More
Robert McNutt, M.D. 0
0
Future of Health CareMedical Decision-MakingResearch
August 21, 2019

AI May Be the Future, But It’s Not (Yet) the Future of Clinical Research

Good medical practice depends on good clinical research. Without rigorous, replicable, reliable research findings, we cannot trust that our medical decisions are based on truth. To put it bluntly, flawed research leads to bad medicine. It’s essential that we get it right. In this series, I have argued for a more rigorous approach. The present model of clinical research is expensive, slow, studies insufficient populations of subjects—making generalizability difficult— and lacks power to examine important variations in clinical and personal characteristics of individuals. In my biased view, study design determines if research is being done. Without an appropriate design, we…
Read More
Theresa Hush 0
0
Future of Health CareMedical Decision-MakingPrimary Care PracticesValue-Based Health Care
June 26, 2019

Follow the Pathway to PCP Success In Medicare Direct Contracting

Primary care physicians were sitting on the sidelines as Medicare developed financial risk models in various generations of ACOs. At best, they could only hope to participate in Medicare Advantage and/or join a larger ACO. But potential for financial gain was elusive when the physicians’ success depended on the actions of others to achieve savings. Now Medicare is offering a carrot to large primary care practices with its new Direct Contracting (DC) models, luring them with the possibility of capturing higher and more predictable revenues as well as shared savings. CMS recently announced an initiative to test risk-based reimbursement models…
Read More
Robert McNutt, M.D. 0
1
Future of Health CareMedical Decision-MakingResearch
April 24, 2019

If Not Now, It’s Too Late: More Clinical Science Pitfalls and a Path to Improvement

Let’s review three major vulnerabilities with how randomized trials (RTs) are conducted, as discussed so far in this series. Critically appraising a research study involves determining the “internal and external” validity. Internal validity deals with the conduct of the study, per se. External validity deals with whether the study’s findings can be generalized to others in the population. Here’s what can go wrong: Populations being studied in RTs are too often convenience samples of patients/subjects rather than random or systematic samples of subjects. This diminishes our ability to externalize findings from the RT to the population at large. This is…
Read More
Robert McNutt, M.D. 0
0
Future of Health CareMedical Decision-MakingResearch
April 3, 2019

If Not Now, It’s Too Late: Simple Randomization Can Lead to False Inferences 
About Treatment Decisions

Medical decisions are best made on the basis of clinical science. Accurate research, shared between physician and patient, enables the patient to make an informed choice about risks and outcomes of treatment options. That’s how it should work, in theory. But in practice, even with the best shared medical decision-making, far too much clinical research employs faulty methodologies that limit the relevance of findings. This must change. In a recent blog post, I suggested that clinical science can improve by choosing more representative groups of people for study. Many clinical studies use convenience samples of patients rather than samples chosen…
Read More
Theresa Hush 0
0
Future of Health CareMedical Decision-MakingPopulation HealthValue-Based Health CareWomen and Health Care
March 28, 2019

Women with Autoimmune Diseases Fight Uphill Battle on Every Health Care Front

Our articles on women’s health care issues have focused on areas that must change in order to provide better quality and outcomes, to lower costs, to advance treatment, and to treat women respectfully and equitably as patients and providers. We have demonstrated how women have been sidelined from getting the right health care because of two key systemic obstacles that must be addressed: Cultural bias that prevents accurate clinical assessment of symptoms and diagnosis, adoption or use of protocols relative to women’s biology, and effective health care therapies, and Inadequate basic science and clinical research that will illuminate sex-differentiated biology…
Read More