
Cartoon – You Need to Manage Me Better






Healthcare leaders are all on different pages when it comes to blockchain. Nonetheless, tech companies continue to invest their efforts in blockchain.
Here are seven top blockchain companies to know in 2019, according to digital media website Coindoo.
1. IBM
2. Intellectsoft Blockchain Lab
3. LeewayHertz
4. Innovecs
5. MLG Blockchain
6. Coinfabrik
7. Empirica Software
To read the complete report, click here.
Healthcare is traditionally one of the top issues voters say they want Congress to address. This year, the sentiment has intensified. From presidential town hall meetings to congressional hearings to recent public opinion polling, an overwhelming majority of Republican and Democratic voters want Congress to address rising healthcare costs.
But employers and their employees have more at stake than just the cost of utilizing a drug or service, the narrative that is driving today’s healthcare discussion in Congress.
Indeed, employers are at a crossroads in addressing the critical issue of healthcare costs. The fact of the matter is that most employers have no idea how their benefit programs affect employee health outcomes. While it sounds logical that employers understand the link between the benefits they purchase and their employees’ long-term health status, they don’t. Most employers manage their benefits program in separate silos with a single-minded focus only on short-term costs.
When employers focus only on unit costs and transactions in healthcare, employees are undertreated and employers overpay.
Instead of a short-term cost approach, designing healthcare benefits that align the interests of employees and employers around health, and focus on connecting employee health status, care options and outcomes will help employers attain the ultimate goal of a healthy, productive workforce that drives business value for the company.
Employers are recognizing the urgency of this choice but aren’t yet doing enough to address it. If employers don’t start doing a better job of purchasing benefits that help keep employees healthy and productively at work, in part through effective treatment of manageable diseases, our future global competitiveness will be greatly challenged.
For example, better use of medicines can improve health and overall quality of life, which can lead to improved productivity from lower disability and fewer missed days of work. A study found adults with multiple sclerosis that improved medication adherence by 10 percentage points decreased the likelihood of an inpatient or emergency room visit by 9% to 19% and days of work lost by 3% to 8%. Another study found that for workers with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, better medication adherence resulted in less time out of work and more than $3,100 in savings on average per worker annually.
Yet, time and again when it comes time to decide on benefits coverage, the choice offered to employers by payers centers on the cost of therapy and not the value it delivers.
What should employers do to define the best path ahead? We believe that when it’s time to negotiate benefits packages with payers, employers must take a more holistic approach to foster key components of healthy, productive workers by addressing the following guiding principles:
As price and upfront cost continue to dominate the headlines, a substantive policy conversation among all different healthcare stakeholders about what constitutes value is needed. Without such inclusive dialogue, the value narrative will continue to revolve solely around “whether to pay or not to pay” for a particular intervention. For employers at the crossroads who know that determining value isn’t a binary exercise, the correct path forward is focusing on a definition of value that includes broader outcomes and recognizes the heterogeneity of covered lives.
Our employees depend upon it.

This article was first published March 18, 2019, by MedPage Today.
By Joyce Frieden, news editor, MedPage Today
PHILADELPHIA — The consumer will be where it’s at for population health in 2019, David Nash, MD, MBA, said here Monday at a Population Health Colloquium sponsored by Thomas Jefferson University.
“Whatever business model empowers the consumer, wherever she is,” including at home, will spell success, according to Nash, who is dean of Jefferson’s School of Population Health. “That’s where population health must go.”
Nash noted that back in 1990, Kodak, Sears, and General Electric were the most important companies in the Dow Jones Industrial Average; all those companies have disappeared or almost disappeared today.
“If we ignore the consumer, it will be at our peril,” Nash said, citing home healthcare, telehealth, and the use of wearables among the trends to watch in the coming year.
Nash, who is a columnist for MedPage Today, also cited these other trends to watch:
Lawton Burns, PhD, MBA, director of the Wharton Center of Health Management and Economics at the University of Pennsylvania here, urged the audience to look critically at some of these possible trends.
“You need to look for evidence for everything you hear,” said Burns, who coauthored an article with his colleague Mark Pauly, PhD, about the need to question some of the commonly accepted principles of the healthcare business.
Some of the ideas that merit more critical thinking, said Burns and Pauly, are as follows:
“I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with those 10 things, but we ought to seriously consider” whether they’re real trends, Burns said. As for moving “from volume to value” in healthcare reimbursement, that idea “is more aspiration than reality” at this point, he said. “This is a slow-moving train.”
Burns also questioned the motives behind some recent healthcare consolidations. In reality, “most providers are positioning themselves to dominate local markets and stick it to the payers — let’s be honest,” he said. “You have to think when you hear about providers doing a merger, you have to think what’s the public rationale and what’s the private rationale? The private one is [often] more sinister than you realize.”
https://www.healthleadersmedia.com/innovation/survey-says-population-health-initiatives-are-stalling

While healthcare executives agree that population health is essential, most organizations are dragging their feet when it comes to embracing these new models of care, according to The State of Population Health Fourth Annual Numerof Survey Report.
The report, produced by global healthcare consultancy Numerof & Associates in partnership with David B. Nash, MD, MBA, founding dean of the Jefferson College of Population Health at Jefferson in Philadelphia, is based on surveys and interviews conducted with more than 500 C-Suite healthcare executives between August and October 2018.
While 94% of respondents agree that population health is the future, and 99% predict that they will have revenue in upside gain/downside risk models in the next two years, the majority of respondents in risk-based agreements report that 10% or less of revenue came through such contracts. Compared to earlier surveys conducted by Numerof, this measure remains flat and fell significantly short of the projections by previous respondents regarding how much revenue would be at risk in 2018.
A Numerof executive posits that the absence of external pressure may be partially responsible for the stall in population health initiatives, but warns that that outside forces may change the game.
“Healthcare delivery organizations may breathe a sigh of relief as policymakers ease the pressure for change, but their comfort should be short-lived, as a slew of nontraditional competitors like Amazon, JPMorgan, Berkshire Hathaway, Apple, Google and others are on the prowl,” said Michael Abrams, managing partner of Numerof & Associates in the news release. “A $3 trillion industry with a deeply dissatisfied customer base is attracting a wave of innovation from entities that aren’t beholden to the old ways of doing business.”
The report also provides other details:
“Healthcare is an industry in transition, but the resistance to necessary change is deeply entrenched,” said Numerof President Rita Numerof, PhD in the release. “Rather than embracing new models that they perceive as risky and difficult to manage, providers are trying to muddle their way through as long as possible.”
Numerof’s fourth annual State of Population Health survey report summarizes online responses gathered between August to October 2018 from more than 500 executives in urban, suburban, and rural locations across the United States. Open-ended interviews with select executives provided deeper insights. Participants include physician group executives and vice presidents, as well as individuals working in U.S. provider organizations including healthcare systems, hospitals, and academic medical centers. Respondents represent a wide range of delivery organizations, including standalone facilities, small systems, and IDNs; for-profit, not-for-profit and government institutions; and academic and community facilities.

Four hospitals in Oklahoma and Kansas, all owned by affiliates of EmpowerHMS, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on March 17.
Three of the four hospitals that filed for bankruptcy are in Oklahoma. According to the bankruptcy petitions for Fairfax (Okla.) Community Hospital, Drumright (Okla.) Regional Hospital and Haskell County Community Hospital in Stigler, each hospital entered bankruptcy with less than $50,000 in assets and at least $1 million in liabilities. Drumright Regional has upward of $10 million in estimated liabilities.
Oswego (Kan.) Community Hospital, which abruptly closed Feb. 14, also entered bankruptcy on March 17. It is the third hospital in Kansas owned by Kansas City, Mo.-based EmpowerHMS that has filed for bankruptcy in recent weeks. Hillsboro (Kan.) Community Hospital and Horton (Kan.) Community Hospital entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy earlier this month.
Two other hospitals owned by EmpowerHMS — Lauderdale Community Hospital in Ripley, Tenn., and Washington County Hospital in Plymouth, N.C. — have entered bankruptcy since late February.

The former president and CEO of Our Lady of The Lake Foundation, the fundraising arm that supports Baton Rouge, La.-based Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center, stole more than $810,000 of donations, according to an independent auditor’s report cited by The Advocate.
John Paul Funes headed the foundation for more than 10 years and led several multimillion-dollar fundraising campaigns for the hospital. He was fired in November after a third-party investigation revealed “a pattern of forgery and embezzlement of funds.”
The hospital hired Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu to review documentation that led to Mr. Funes’ firing.
“We’ve identified approximately $810,000 lost due to fraudulent activity committed by Mr. Funes,” Baton Rouge-based Franciscan Missionaries of Our Lady Health System, which owns Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center, told The Advocate. “Over several years, he orchestrated a series of fraudulent transactions that involved the purchase and distribution of gift cards, charter flights and payments to individuals, including forged documents, invoices and signatures. He misled hundreds of people in and outside of our organization.”
Over the next 30 days, the Franciscan Missionaries will replace the $810,00 in lost funds. The organization plans to seek restitution from Mr. Funes.