3 Disruptive Solutions For U.S. Healthcare: CareMore, Forward, Health City

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertpearl/2017/11/14/disruptive-solutions-healthcare/#31b4ef452364

Image result for healthcity

American healthcare needs a hero. Among other wealthy countries, it ranks dead last in clinical outcomes yet costs more than $3 trillion a year. By comparison, Europe spends $1.8 trillion annually on healthcare for a population nearly twice the size.

This three-part series, which previously explored the limited impact of primary care innovators and the struggles of U.S. hospitals, now concludes with the search for a hero – a disruptive cure for what ails the U.S. healthcare system.

Highlighted here are three possible directions the industry could turn and three trailblazing companies hoping to guide the way.

CareMore: In The Direction Of High-Touch Patient Care

Today’s healthcare is extremely people dependent. From receptionists, billing clerks and housekeepers to nurses, technicians and physicians, people account for more than 40% of all healthcare expenditures.

Therefore, one might assume lowering the cost of medical care means slashing headcount. Not at CareMore. The company spends twice as much on staffing as the typical healthcare organization – part of an approach that has proven remarkably successful.

Founded in 1993 as a medical group, CareMore was acquired by Anthem in 2011 and rapidly expanded its services across eight states. The company’s president and CEO Sachin H. Jain believes the best way to lower healthcare spending is to invest in the health of patients.

To do that, Jain hires large numbers of nurse practitioners, social workers, physician assistants and pharmacists. Located in care centers, these multidisciplinary teams help seal the cracks of America’s fragmented care delivery system.

In a recent Forbes editorial, Jain explained his hire-more philosophy: “Given the false choice between ensuring that I have the right processes and technology in place or the right people … I would choose the latter every day of the week.”

Indeed, people are central to CareMore’s strategy. But to understand why the company may prove disruptive, let’s dive deeper into its model, one that prioritizes disease management, limited specialty referral and reduced hospitalization:

  1. CareMore focuses on caring for the relatively sick, particularly low-income seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage. This government-run program differs from traditional Medicare in that doctors receive a lump-sum prepayment for the expected cost of care, rather than receiving “fee-for-service” payments for each visit, test or procedure. Further, Medicare Advantage offers financial incentives to providers that keep patients healthier and avoid expensive hospital care. This is how CareMore is able to invest in a larger staff.
  2. The company invites the community doctors with whom it contracts to refer patients to CareMore care centers at no added expense. This controlled care-management process is a win-win for overburdened primary care physicians and for CareMore, whose nurse practitioners get to direct specialty referrals within their narrow network of providers.
  3. Today, 20% of elderly patients consume 80% of Medicare resources. That’s why CareMore hires “extensivists” to oversee complex patient cases both inside the hospital and on an outpatient basis. And because extensivists are trusted by their patients, they’re able to manage specialty referral, hospitalization and admissions to skilled nursing facilities in the most efficient ways.
  4. CareMore’s multi-disciplinary teams offer individualized programs for patients living with complex (and expensive) medical problems such as chronic lung disease, diabetes, heart failure and kidney dysfunction. And because chronic diseases are often associated with high levels of stress and depression, CareMore provides extensive mental and behavioral health services.
  5. The distinct power of CareMore derives from its synergistic approach, an end-to-end care model that not only maximizes quality outcomes and avoids complications from chronic disease, but also effectively controls specialty referrals and inpatient utilization.

This last point may be the most important. In some ways, CareMore’s model resembles other cutting-edge primary care programs that serve patients with chronic illnesses. But by using nurse practitioners and extensivists to personally manage referrals within CareMore’s cost-effective specialty network, the company goes a step beyond.

As a result, CareMore achieves 20% fewer hospital admissions, 23% fewer hospital days per patient and a 4% shorter inpatient stay compared to traditional Medicare beneficiaries.

The biggest question for CareMore is whether it will hit a ceiling. Its people-dependent approach could prove too difficult to replicate on a nationwide scale. As it tries to expand to new markets, CareMore may also encounter resistance from patients and the broader medical community given the narrowness of its specialty network.

Forward: In The Direction Of High-Tech Patient Care   

Adrian Aoun, who created Forward in 2016, takes a decidedly different approach to solving healthcare’s biggest problems. With a background in artificial intelligence (AI), Aoun previously created Sidewalk Labs, an urban innovation project for Google and, before that, a news-aggregation startup that Google purchased for more than $30 million.

So, rather than hiring more people, Aoun uses sophisticated technology to reduce healthcare’s massive headcount and costs. He thinks computerized systems can diagnose and treat humans more accurately and affordably. And because human employees are more expensive and less-reliable than computers, you won’t find many of them performing traditional office roles at Forward’s San Francisco location, nor at the one set to open in Los Angeles. Instead, here’s what you will see:

  1. An iPad, not a receptionist, checks you in. From there, you step up to a sophisticated, space-aged body scanner and place your left hand inside the reader. In less than a minute, the machine records your pulse, oxygenation, height, weight and body temperature. The data is immediately input into your medical record and compared to past measurements.
  2. Inside the exam room, a technician uses “near infrared” technology to draw your blood before running tests at Forward’s fully automated in-house laboratory system. Your blood count, chemistries and genetic analyses for key markers are made available in less than half an hour and graphed against prior results.
  3. When a physician enters the room, there’s no large computer to sit behind and, therefore, no barrier between you, the doctor and the problem at hand. Your medical information appears on a large wall monitor that’s powered by a combination of AI and predictive analytics, with easy-to-follow graphics and voice-recognition commands. And since Forward’s members pay a $149 monthly fee with no copays or deductibles, data entry is designed to support care delivery, not billing and coding.
  4. Then there’s the AI system itself. Unlike commonly used algorithmic care that requires manual revisions, Forward’s technology learns as it goes. By analyzing a multitude of patient problems and treatments, the system ascertains which solutions are most effective. And with patients staying connected through a variety of wearable devices and computer applications, nurse practitioners and physicians know when a patient is likely to have trouble, even when that person is sitting at home.
  5. Finally, every health measurement taken at Forward is uploaded to the patient’s smart phone, making it easy for individuals to obtain data on their laboratory and clinical results.

As a primary care model, Forward’s approach is interesting but unlikely to disrupt the $3 trillion healthcare industry. The company’s uniqueness is in its technology, which is designed to scale up. Through high-tech devices and AI programming, Forward’s model could expand into high-end specialties. Already, the company is introducing automated eye refraction and digitally enabled melanoma screening at little or no extra cost.

Ask most doctors, and they’ll tell you Forward is not the future of medicine. Then again, technology aversion is the very thing that undid industry titans like Kodak, Borders and Yellow Cab.

Ultimately, Forward’s disruptive ability depends on how far and how quickly the company can broaden its scope beyond primary care. For example, will Aoun seek to hire a select group of specialists to consult with patients via video? Imagine the benefit of having top cardiologists and oncologists checking in on that giant wall monitor or via a patient’s smartphone. More importantly, can Forward convince insurance companies to carve out dollars from premiums to pay for the patient care delivered and for the hospital or specialty care avoided? If not, Forward’s going rate of $149 per month may restrict its footprint to the nation’s most affluent areas.

Health City: In The Direction Of Off-Shore Patient Care

Take a one-hour plane ride from Miami to the Grand Cayman Islands and feast your eyes on the palm-tree-lined entryway of healthcare’s third potential disruption. Health City is a sophisticated, modern hospital, offering affordable cardiology, pediatric, orthopedic and oncology services with clinical results that rival the best in the United States. Adjacent to the hospital, you’ll see the future site of a five-star hotel. Dr. Devi Shetty hopes to fill it with hundreds of Americans each night, thus making his healthcare tourism plans a reality.

Shetty, an India-born and American-trained surgeon, sees the future of healthcare differently than the leaders of CareMore and Forward. He believes 50% of the costs swallowed up by traditional care providers can be eliminated through discipline and operational excellence.

Shetty’s approach, like the other two, is complex. It includes:

  1. Highly efficient operating rooms. Health City completes more than twice as many surgeries per day as the average U.S. hospital. And rather than using the ORs five days a week, they’re scheduled for six. Instead of an eight-hour block, they run for 12. To accomplish this, Health City matches supply to demand to an exacting degree, quite unlike American facilities with their inadequate volume, inconsistent staffing and wasted capacity.
  2. Hyper-specialization. Higher patient volume per physician drives higher clinical quality at lower costs. That is, the more surgeons focus on a limited number of procedures, the better their performance and results. And by limiting number of procedures per physician, the more likely Health City is to achieve operational efficiency and innovate surgical techniques.
  3. Technology. IT needs to support clinicians, not vice-versa. At Health City, nurses and physicians carry their mobile devices everywhere, entering data on touch-screen interfaces to improve patient care, not to keep track of billing codes. The system is locally designed to analyze and provide immediate hospital data. As a result, physicians and administrators can see reports today on how to improve patient care tomorrow.
  4. Little to no delays. Walk into the administrative area of Health City and the first thing you’ll notice is a large computer screen reporting how long it takes physicians to respond to an elevation in a patient’s heart rate or higher than usual post-operative bleeding. In U.S. hospitals, delays in addressing patient problems often run an hour or longer on nights and weekends. Inside Health City, the average delay is eight minutes, with an aim of reducing it to six.
  5. A powerful mission. Health City is committed to “delivering world-class healthcare that is accessible and affordable for all.” It’s a core value built into the hospital’s culture, believed by all and evident in its outcomes.

Health City’s biggest challenge is getting patients to travel to the Cayman Islands for care. The objective data affirms the hospital’s clinical excellence and lower costs, but Americans distrust the medical care provided in other parts of the world. With most of its patient population hailing from the Caribbean and South America, Health City’s best hope is to contract with large, self-funded U.S. companies that want to cut their medical costs in half, particularly those organizations willing to offer employees incentives to combine their medical care with a tropical island vacation.

Will Healthcare Disruption Happen? How?

American healthcare is inefficient, ineffective and expensive. In other words, it’s ripe for disruption, which could happen a number of ways. It may be through highly personal care that effectively manages utilization and helps sick patients get healthier. Perhaps high-tech systems will replace expensive humans and create far better outcomes for patients. Or maybe an operationally efficient, off-shore solution will disrupt America’s bloated delivery system, just as it did the manufacturing and IT sectors.

CareMore, Forward and Health City represent three possible approaches to healthcare disruption, but it’s far too early to declare a hero among them. Combined, these companies care for a fraction of 1% of American patients. Should that number grow, it will likely come at the expense of the doctors and hospitals who benefit from today’s broken system. Unless healthcare providers in the U.S. are willing to embrace new solutions and care delivery models soon, they risk being disrupted. The cautionary lesson taught by other industries is that once disruption begins, it’s already too late for the old model to save itself.

 

Why Major Hospitals Are Losing Money By The Millions

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertpearl/2017/11/07/hospitals-losing-millions/#67f501c67b50

Related image

 

A strange thing happened last year in some the nation’s most established hospitals and health systems. Hundreds of millions of dollars in income suddenly disappeared.

This article, part two of a series that began with a look at primary care disruption, examines the economic struggles of inpatient facilities, the even harsher realities in front of them, and why hospitals are likely to aggravate, not address, healthcare’s rising cost issues.

According to the Harvard Business Review, several big-name hospitals reported significant declines and, in some cases, net losses to their FY 2016 operating margins. Among them, Partners HealthCare, New England’s largest hospital network, lost $108 million; the Cleveland Clinic witnessed a 71% decline in operating income; and MD Anderson, the nation’s largest cancer center, dropped $266 million.

How did some of the biggest brands in care delivery lose this much money? The problem isn’t declining revenue. Since 2009, hospitals have accounted for half of the $240 billion spending increase among private U.S. insurers. It’s not that increased competition is driving price wars, either. On the contrary, 1,412 hospitals have merged since 1998, primarily to increase their clout with insurers and raise prices. Nor is it a consequence of people needing less medical care. The prevalence of chronic illness continues to escalate, accounting for 75% of U.S. healthcare costs, according to the CDC.

Part Of The Problem Is Rooted In The Past

From the late 19th century to the early 20th, hospitals were places the sick went to die. For practically everyone else, healthcare was delivered by house call. With the introduction of general anesthesia and the discovery of powerful antibiotics, medical care began moving from people’s homes to inpatient facilities. And by the 1950s, some 6,000 hospitals had sprouted throughout the country. For all that expansion, hospital costs remained relatively low. By the time Medicare rolled out in 1965, healthcare consumed just 5% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Today, that number is 18%.

Hospitals have contributed to the cost hike in recent decades by: (1) purchasing redundant, expensive medical equipment and generating excess demand, (2) hiring highly paid specialists to perform ever-more complex procedures with diminishing value, rather than right-sizing their work forces, and (3) tolerating massive inefficiencies in care delivery (see “the weekend effect”).

How Hospital CEOs See It

Most hospital leaders acknowledge the need to course correct, but very few have been able to deliver care that’s significantly more efficient or cost-effective than before. Instead, hospitals in most communities have focused on reducing and eliminating competition. As a result, a recent study found that 90% of large U.S. cities were “highly concentrated for hospitals,” allowing those that remain to increase their market power and prices.

Historically, such consolidation (and price escalation) has enabled hospitals to offset higher expenses. As of late, however, this strategy is proving difficult. Here’s how some leaders explain their recent financial struggles:

“Our expenses continue to rise, while constraints by government and payers are keeping our revenues flat.”

Brigham Health president Dr. Betsy Nabel offered this explanation in a letter to employees this May, adding that the hospital will “need to work differently in order to sustain our mission for the future.”

A founding member of Partners HealthCare in Boston, Brigham & Women’s Hospital (BWH) is the second-largest research hospital in the nation, with over $640 million in funding. Its storied history dates back more than a century. But after a difficult FY 2016, BWH offered retirement buyouts to 1,600 employees, nearly 10% of its workforce.

Three factors contributed to the need for layoffs: (1) reduced reimbursements from payers, including the Massachusetts government, which limits annual growth in healthcare spending to 3.6%, a number that will drop to 3.1% next year, (2) high capital costs, both for new buildings and for the hospital’s electronic health record (EHR) system, and (3) high labor expenses among its largely unionized workforce.

“The patients are older, they’re sicker … and it’s more expensive to look after them.”

That, along with higher labor and drug costs, explained the Cleveland Clinic’s economic headwinds, according to outgoing CEO Dr. Toby Cosgrove. And though he did not specifically reference Medicare, years of flat reimbursement levels have resulted in the program paying only 90% of hospital costs for the “older,” “sicker” and “more expensive” patients.

Of note, these operating losses occurred despite the Clinic’s increase in year-over-year revenue. Operating income is on the upswing in 2017, but it remains to be seen whether the health system’s new CEO can continue to make the same assurances to employees as his predecessor that, “We have no plans for workforce reduction.”

“Salaries and wages and … and increased consulting expenses primarily related to the Epic EHR project.”

Leaders at MD Anderson, the largest of three comprehensive cancer centers in the United States, blamed these three factors for the institution’s operational losses. In a statement, executives attributed a 77% drop in adjusted income last August to “a decrease in patient revenues as a result of the implementation of the new Epic Electronic Health Record system.”

Following a reduction of nearly 1,000 jobs (5% of its workforce) in January 2017, and the resignation of MD Anderson’s president this March, a glimmer of hope emerged. The institution’s operating margins were in the black in the first quarter of 2017, according to the Houston Chronicle.

Making Sense Of Hospital Struggles

The challenges confronting these hospital giants mirror the difficulties nearly all community hospitals face. Relatively flat Medicare payments are constraining revenues. The payer mix is shifting to lower-priced patients, including those on Medicaid. Many once-profitable services are moving to outpatient venues, including physician-owned “surgicenters” and diagnostic facilities. And as one of the most unionized industries, hospitals continue to increase wages while drug companies continue raising prices – at three times the rate of healthcare inflation.

Though these factors should inspire hospital leaders to exercise caution when investing, many are spending millions in capital to expand their buildings and infrastructure with hopes of attracting more business from competitors. And despite a $44,000 federal nudge to install EHRs, hospitals are finding it difficult to justify the investment. Digital records are proven to improve patient outcomes, but they also slow down doctors and nurses. According to the annual Deloitte “Survey of US Physicians,” 7 out of 10 physicians report that EHRs reduce productivity, thereby raising costs.

Harsh Realities Ahead For Hospitals

Although nearly every hospital talks about becoming leaner and more efficient, few are fulfilling that vision. Given the opportunity to start over, our nation would build fewer hospitals, eliminate the redundancy of high-priced machines, and consolidate operating volume to achieve superior quality and lower costs.

Instead, hospitals are pursuing strategies of market concentration. As part of that approach, they’re purchasing physician practices at record rates, hoping to ensure continued referral volume, regardless of the cost.

Today, commercial payers bear the financial brunt of hospital inefficiencies and high costs but, at some point, large purchasers will say “no more.” These insurers may soon get help from the nation’s largest purchaser, the federal government. Last month, President Donald Trump issued an executive order with language suggesting the administration and federal agencies may seek to limit provider consolidation, lower barriers to entry and prevent “abuses of market power.”

With pressure mounting, hospital administrators find themselves wedged deeper between a rock and a hard place. They know doctors, nurses, and staff will fight the changes required to boost efficiency, especially those that involve increasing productivity or lowering headcount. But at the same time, their bargaining power is diminishing as health-plan consolidation continues. The four largest insurance companies now own 83% of the national market.

What’s more, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced last week a $1.6 billion cut to certain Medicare Part B drug payments along with reduced reimbursements for off-campus hospital outpatient departments in 2018. CMS said these moves will “provide a more level playing field for competition between hospitals and physician practices by promoting greater payment alignment.”

The American healthcare system is stuck with investments that made sense decades ago but that now result in hundreds of billions of dollars wasted each year. Hospitals are a prime example. That’s why we shouldn’t count on hospital administrators to solve America’s cost challenges.

Change will need to come from outside the traditional healthcare system. The final part of this series explores three potential solutions and highlights the innovative companies leading the effort.

 

Rising Health Insurance Costs Frighten Some Early Retirees

https://khn.org/news/rising-health-insurance-costs-frighten-some-early-retirees/?utm_campaign=KHN%3A%20Topic-based&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=58529177&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-85eIov6h_xyFiUgaAQ4fPQfmFKIGc3Hy-dk3J1iXBI7lQ6d8lPFgPXXyeWrMceH2mGmhwxT0ZSLJVK3aeIMHcE7YGtbg&_hsmi=58529177

Don and Debra Clark of Springfield, Mo., are glad they have health insurance. Don is 56 and Debra is 58. The Clarks say they know the risk of an unexpected illness or medical event is rising as they age and they must have coverage.

Don is retired and Debra works part time a couple of days a week. As a result, along with about 20 million other Americans, they buy health insurance in the individual market — the one significantly altered by the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

But the Clarks are not happy at all with what they pay for their coverage — $1,400 a month for a plan with a $4,500 deductible. Nor are they looking forward to the ACA’s fifth open enrollment period, which runs from Wednesday through Dec. 15 in most states. Many insurers are raising premiums by double digits, in part because of the Trump administration’s decision to stop payments to insurers to cover the discounts they are required to give to some low-income customers to cover out-of-pocket costs.

“This has become a nightmare,” said Don Clark. “We are now spending about 30 percent of our income on health insurance and health care. We did not plan for that.”

Karen Steininger, 62, of Altoona, Iowa, said her ACA coverage not only gave her peace of mind but also helped her and her husband, who is now on Medicare, stay in business the past few years. But they too are concerned about rising costs and the effect of the president’s actions.

The Steiningers are self-employed owners of a pottery studio. Their income varies year to year. They now pay $245 a month for Karen’s subsidized coverage, which, like the Clarks’, has a $4,500 deductible. Without the government subsidy, the premium would be about $700 a month.

“What if we make more money and get less of a subsidy or just if the premiums increase a lot?” Karen Steininger asked. “That would be a burden. We’ll have to cut back on something or switch to cheaper coverage.”

The experiences of the Clarks and the Steiningers point to an emerging shortfall in the ACA’s promise of easier access to affordable health insurance for early retirees and the self-employed. Rising premiums and deductibles, recent actions by the Trump administration, and unceasing political fights over the law threaten those benefits for millions of older Americans.

“These folks are rightly the most worried and confused right now,” said Kevin Lucia, a health insurance specialist and research professor at Georgetown University’s Health Policy Institute in Washington, D.C. “Decisions about which health plan is best for them is more complicated for 2018, and many people feel more uncertain about the future of the law itself.”

At highest risk are couples like the Clarks who get no government subsidy (which comes in the form of an advanced tax credit) when they buy insurance. That subsidy is available to people earning up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, or just under $65,000 for a couple. Their income is just above the amount that would have qualified them for a subsidy in 2017.

Premiums vary widely by state. Generally, a couple in their late 50s or early 60s with an annual income of $65,000 would pay from $1,200 to $3,000 a month for health insurance.

Premiums rose an average 22 percent nationwide in 2017 and are forecast to rise between 20 and 30 percent overall for 2018.

In an analysis released this week based on insurers’ rate submissions for 2018, the Kaiser Family Foundation found that individuals and families that don’t qualify for a subsidy but are choosing plans on the federal marketplace face premiums 17 to 35 percent higher next year, depending on the type of plan they choose. (Kaiser Health News is an editorially independent program of the foundation.)

A similar increase would be expected for people who also buy on the marketplaces run by some states or buy directly from a broker or insurance company.

The substantial premium increases two years in a row could lead fewer people to buy coverage.

“I’m really worried about this,” said Peter Lee, CEO of Covered California, the exchange entity in that state. “We could see a lot fewer people who don’t get subsidies enroll.” He said that California has taken steps to mitigate the impact for people who don’t get subsidies but that “consumers are very confused about what is happening and could just opt not to buy.”

There are already signs of that, according to an analysis for this article by the Commonwealth Fund. The percentage of 50- to 64-year-olds who were uninsured ticked up from 8 percent in 2015 to 10 percent in the first half of 2017. In 2013, the figure was 14 percent.

Indeed, the ACA has been a boon to people in this age group whether they get a subsidy or not. It barred insurers from excluding people with preexisting conditions — which occur more commonly in older people. And the law restricted insurers from charging 55- to 64-year-olds more than three times that of younger people, instead of five times more, as was common.

The law also provided much better access to health insurance for early retirees and the self-employed — reducing so-called “job lock” and offering coverage amid a precipitous decline in employer-sponsored retiree coverage that began in the late 1990s.

Only 1 in 4 companies with 200 or more workers offered any kind of coverage to early (pre-65) retirees in 2017 compared with 66 percent of firms in 1988, reported the Kaiser Family Foundation. And the vast majority of small firms never did offer such coverage.

Overall, before the ACA became law, 1 in 4 55- to 64-year-olds buying coverage on their own either couldn’t get it at all because of a preexisting condition or couldn’t afford it, according to AARP.

“The aging but pre-Medicare population was our major reason to support the ACA then and it still is now,” said David Certner, director of legislative policy at AARP. “This group benefited enormously from the law, and we think society and the economy benefited, too.”

Just how many 55- to 64-years-olds have been liberated from job lock by the ACA has yet to be fully assessed. But recent data show that 18 percent of people ages 55 to 64 who were still working in 2015 got coverage through the ACA marketplaces, up from 11.6 percent in 2013, according to an analysis for this article by the Employee Benefit Research Institute.

Also, a report released in January 2017 by the outgoing Obama administration found that 1 in 5 ACA marketplace enrollees of any age was a small-business owner or self-employed person.

A bipartisan effort is underway in Congress to provide dedicated funds to woo enrollees to healthcare.gov and help state agencies explain changes in the law for 2018 triggered by the Trump administration. But the fate of the proposed legislation is uncertain.

The Clarks said they’ll look carefully at options to keep their premiums affordable in 2018.

Said Don Clark, “If we get to a point where we have a $10,000 deductible and pay 40 percent or more of our income for health insurance, I’m not sure what we’ll do. We can’t afford that.”

 

 

A hospital without patients

https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2017/11/08/virtual-hospital-mercy-st-louis-000573

Nurse Veronica Jones speaks with patient Richard Alfermann, who suffers from Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, during a video call on Thursday, Nov. 2, 2017, at the Mercy Virtual Care Center in Chesterfield, Mo. Jones says that she and other nurses who work with homebound patients like Alfermann feel like they have “50 grandparents.”

 

Located off a superhighway exit in suburban St. Louis, nestled among locust, elm and sweetgum trees, the Mercy Virtual Care Center has a lot in common with other hospitals. It has nurses and doctors and a cafeteria, and the staff spend their days looking after the very sick―checking their vital signs, recording notes, responding to orders and alarms, doing examinations and chatting with them.

There’s one thing Mercy Virtual doesn’t have: beds.

Instead, doctors and nurses sit at carrels in front of monitors that include camera-eye views of the patients and their rooms, graphs of their blood chemicals and images of their lungs and limbs, and lists of problems that computer programs tell them to look out for. The nurses wear scrubs, but the scrubs are very, very clean. The patients are elsewhere.

Mercy Virtual is arguably the world’s most advanced example of something gaining momentum in the health care world: A virtual hospital, where specialists remotely care for patients at a distance. It’s the product of converging trends in health care, including hospital consolidation, advances in remote-monitoring technology and changes in the way medicine is paid for. The result is a strange mix of hospital and office: Instead of bright fluorescent lighting, beeping alarms and the smell of chlorine, Mercy Virtual Care has striped soft rugs, muted conversation and a fountain that spills out one drop a minute. The mess and the noise are on screens, visible in the hospital rooms the staffers peer into by video—in intensive care units far away, where patients are struggling for their lives, or in the bedrooms of homebound patients, whose often-tenuous existence they track with wireless devices.

The virtual care center started as an office in Mercy’s flagship St. Louis hospital in 2006, but got its own building and separate existence two years ago. It is built on many of the new ideas gaining traction in U.S. health care, such as using virtual communication to keep chronically ill patients at home as much as possible, and avoiding expensive hospitalizations that expose patients to more stress, infections and other dangers.

But perhaps the most important factor driving Mercy Virtual isn’t technology or new thinking but new payment systems. In the near future, the hospital’s administrators believe, instead of earning fees for each treatment administered, insurers and the government will pay Mercy Virtual to keep patients well. A visit to the hushed carrels and blinking monitors is a glimpse into a future in which hospital systems are paid more when their patients are healthy, not sick.

Even now, Mercy Virtual is in the black, because of existing Medicare payment reforms that have already converted some of the agency’s payments into lump sums for treating specific illnesses. Mercy can get its patients out of the hospital much faster than average, so it pockets the money it doesn’t need for longer stays, says Mercy Virtual President Randy Moore.

The hospital is well placed, he adds, for the full transition to a payment system based on efficiency and preserving wellness. “Our idea is to deliver better patient care and outcomes at lower cost, so we can say to an insurer, ‘You expect to spend $100 million on this population this year. We can do it for $98 million with fewer hospitalizations, fewer deaths and everyone’s happy,’” says Moore. “It’s a very strong future business model.”

One weird thing about thinking this way is that it radically reimagines traditional notions of medical care—not just how it’s delivered, but when. Most hospitals wait for a sick person to walk through the doors or come into the ER. Mercy Virtual reaches out to patients before they’re even aware of symptoms. It uses technology to sense changes in hospitalized patients so subtle that bedside nurses often haven’t picked up on them. When the computer notes irregularities, nurses can turn a series of knobs that allow them to “camera in” on the patient; they can get close enough to check the label on an IV bag, or to observe a patient struggling for breath or whose skin is turning gray.

There are those who say that even an intensive care unit could, in principle, be brought to a patient’s home. But for now, the future looks like this: Hospitals will keep doing things like deliveries, appendectomies and sewing up the victims of shootings and car wrecks. They’ll also have to care for people with diseases like diabetes, heart failure and cancer when they take bad turns. But in the future, the mission of the hospital will be to keep patients from coming through their doors in the first place.

Racing the Symptoms

On a recent Monday morning, nurse Veronica Jones touched a button on a screen in front of her to make a video call with Richard Alfermann, a retired 75-year-old banker living on a wooded acre outside Washington, Missouri, 50 miles west of the center. A lifelong smoker until 10 years ago, Alfermann suffers from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or COPD. He has trouble breathing and even slight exertion can floor him. The most minor illness, in the past, was enough to force him into the hospital.

Seated on a couch in his home, Alfermann happily greets Jones, with whom he has spoken through video at least twice a week since entering the virtual care program in August 2016. The previous year, he was hospitalized three times. Since then, Alfermann has managed to stay in his home.

One paradox of care at home is this: Monitoring patients from afar with regularity can create more intimacy between patient and his caregivers than a sporadic, once-every-three-months visit in person. Jones and the other nurses on the virtual ward say they feel like “we have 50 grandparents now,” she says. In addition to the touchless warmth, regular interactions enable more individualized care. For example, many COPD patients have such high pulse rates on a good day that an unsuspecting doctor might immediately send them to an ICU. A tele-doctor in regular contact, however, can distinguish a true crisis from a baseline reading that might seem alarming but is normal for that patient.

In Alfermann’s case, if he shows signs of failing health, his physician―Carter Fenton, an emergency medicine doctor with 450 patients under his care—can call in home health care nurses, who can examine Alfermann more closely, take X-rays and EKGs and blood samples if necessary. In a sense, Mercy has given Alfermann his own hospital, a home hospital.

And that’s the main purpose of the “engagement at home” program—to keep very sick patients out of the hospital, where their care runs up enormous bills and is laced with dangers to the patient, ranging from nasty bacterial infections to misplaced drug orders to the disorientation of constant alarms, tests and injections. “A telemedicine visit is never going to be as good as having a doctor and his or her team at your bedside,” says Moore. “But 99 percent of the time we can’t make that happen. With virtual we can at least see any patient just like that―rather than tomorrow or next week. And that can be a life or death thing.”

One major aspect of the hospital of the future, it seems, is “less hospital, more future,” says Robin Cook, a former ophthalmologist and the best-selling author of medical thrillers that feature things like roboticized hospitals and killer apps that actually kill their patients. People will continue to go to hospitals—or, increasingly, outpatient surgical centers―to get operations, but their stays will be shorter. “It’s going to be progressively more procedure-oriented, with a lot less parking people to monitor them,” says Cook.

As Alfermann, his nose fitted with a cannula bringing him 100 percent oxygen, pops up on the monitor in front of her, Jones is examining his vital signs, which include blood pressure, pulse, temperature and blood oxygen readings that feed wirelessly into the system from devices that Alfermann attaches to himself at home.

Most medical interventions take place when a patient presents himself at a doctor’s office or an emergency room. Because “frequent flyers” hate going to the hospital—often a traumatic place for the old and infirm–they’re often in denial about any symptoms they may have, which, ironically, raises the risk that things will get to a critical point if no medical staff are watching.

“A lot of times they’ll say, ‘I feel fine,’ but I can see on the monitor that they are struggling to breathe,” says Fenton. “I remind them that this is how things got started the last time they were hospitalized. There’s a trust factor at first. Sometimes it takes a trip to the ER to vindicate us.”

Today, the concern is Alfermann’s pulse. It’s been above 100 beats per minute twice the last three mornings, from its usual level around 85. Pulse is “a big clue that he may not know what’s happening but something may be about to happen,” Fenton says. He and Jones worry that with cooler weather and drier air, Alfermann might be developing a cold that could exacerbate his COPD.

“Any shortness of breath or changes in your cough?” Jones asks. “Any fever or chills?”

“I don’t think so,” responds Alfermann, a fan of bowling, fishing, and the St. Louis Cardinals. “Yeah. Nothing better, nothing worse. Same old shit.”

“If anything changes with that you know you got to call me right way.”

Jones and Fenton monitor Alfermann carefully over the next several days to make sure there’s no incipient problem. But by Wednesday his pulse is back to normal. Until the next time. “I don’t feel super, but I’m OK,” he tells Fenton. “I haven’t felt good in so long I don’t know what good is.”

Reassured for the moment, Fenton knows there’s always an escape valve. “We always tell the patients, if you feel like you’re getting worse, you need to just go to the hospital,” he said.

Virtual ICU
On the other end of the second floor at Mercy Virtual Care, which is a maze of desks and computer screens, nurses and doctors have their fingers deep in the business of colleagues at hospitals across the country, from North Carolina to Oklahoma. They run a series of programs —TeleICU, TeleStroke, TeleSepsis and TeleHospitalist — all aimed at keeping hospitalized patients from growing sicker and at getting them home faster.

In part, the virtual ICU is dealing with a problem that technology created. All the beeping monitors in the patient’s hospital room crank out massive amounts of information, presented in too cumbersome a way for nurses and doctors on site—at least in typically understaffed hospitals―to deal with quickly. So Mercy Virtual provides nurses and doctors who can focus on monitoring and digesting these data streams, looking for signs of trouble. That way the nurses and doctors on site can pay more attention to the patients and less to the machines.

Electronic health records, which most hospitals started using over the past decade, “inundated us with data,” says Chris Veremakis, who runs Mercy’s TeleICU program. “The EHR has become a thing of its own, and you find people spending so much time in front of the EHR instead of spending time with the patient.”

A layer of backstopping colleagues, watching the data roll in in real time, can improve the quality of treatment by making sure good care standards are being met and catching signs that a patient is going downhill, Veremakis says: “We let the nurses on the floor do their regular work and not be pulled in a million different directions.”

One of the intense professionals doing this is Tris Wegener, who was an ICU nurse for 22 years before a snowmobiling accident wrecked her arm and led her to virtual nursing. Now she spends most of her days at Mercy seated in front of a bank of computer screens. She’s waiting for the appearance of a little red flower icon, which means that a computer program, after taking in data from the monitors in the patient’s room, is warning of a danger of sepsis, an immune response to a bacterial bloodstream infection that is the No. 1 hospital killer.

Sepsis can be hard to spot, manifesting itself in irregular symptoms. It’s on the increase among chronically ill patients who are living longer than before―about 1.5 million people get sepsis in the U.S. every year, and 1 in 6 die. When one of the red sepsis flowers pops up, Wegener makes a series of inquiries to rule out false positives. If the patient meets all the criteria—typically very low blood pressure, high fever, infection and high levels of lactic acid—she calls the nurse or doctor on duty. The hospital might be in High Point, North Carolina, Joplin, Missouri, or a dozen other places.

“I get the data as soon as it enters the system,” she says. “The nurse on duty might have three other patients. Is she aware of the problem? Sometimes, sometimes not. She might have another patient who’s coding in the emergency room. They don’t have time to check out this patient whose X-ray looks clear, but we know that tomorrow, if this isn’t taken care of, he’s going to code with pneumonia.”

It’s not unusual for the entire staff of a small ICU to rush into a patient’s room when a patient crashes. When that happens and Mercy is watching, its remote nurses can keep an eye on the other patients while those at the scene take care of the most critical case.

Working on a single shift not long ago, Wegener and two other virtual nurses had to sort through 136 sepsis alerts from hospitals around the country. Each one takes as long as 40 minutes to resolve. “It keeps your mind going,” she said.

“The job isn’t physically demanding but mentally, oh gosh,” says Lindsey Langley, whose expertise is in diagnosing and ordering treatment for stroke—a condition in which speedy diagnosis and treatment can be the difference between a minor tic and death, or a grave, lifelong disability. “You go home every day exhausted. You are tapped out.”

Most of Mercy’s telehealth and remote monitoring covers patients and hospitals inside the small Catholic hospital system, which has facilities in Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Kansas. But it also partnered with hospital systems at the University of North Carolina and Penn State. Part of the attraction is the backup Mercy provides to hospitals that serve uninsured or low income patients and can’t afford to staff up to levels that might be desirable.

“Mercy runs 24/7 in the background collecting analytics on our patient population,” said Dale Williams, chief medical officer at 351-bed High Point Regional hospital in North Carolina, which is part of the UNC system. As they gather vital signs, EKG data and so on, the Mercy staff can alert brick-and-mortar staff to any significant changes. If there isn’t a nurse or doctor in the room, they intervene.

Of course, a nurse in St. Louis can’t fill an IV fluid bag in North Carolina, but she can use a camera in the room to see that an IV bag is almost empty—then call and instruct a nurse on the floor to refill it. The telemedicine cameras are powerful enough to detect a patient’s skin color; microphones can pick up coughs and gasps and groans.

Making that order from far-off St. Louis can be a delicate matter until the virtual nurses and doctors establish good working relationships with their partners in the flesh-and-blood world. Unsurprisingly, when Mercy starts its virtual relationships with these hospitals, the professionals on site often aren’t exactly enthused to be getting instructions from afar.

“People just think that they can put the technology in place and get amazing results,” said Moore, who estimated that Mercy had spent $300 million to create the virtual care center. But acculturation is key to the process. At most ICUs and other hospital services, physicians and nurses already think they are operating at top capability. It takes work to convince them that their services would be better with help from outside.

“We’ll spend time with them and say, ‘This isn’t Big Brother looking over your shoulders: We’re partners,’” he said. “But doctors don’t necessarily want other doctors writing their orders, and if they won’t accept it, it doesn’t work. If a nurse ignores our team because she’s too busy and not used to TeleICU, nothing happens.”

Sometimes the cultural shifts required may be a bit too much to work. Tampa General Hospital piloted a TeleICU relationship with Mercy Virtual for six months, but ended the agreement Nov. 15. The hospital gave no explanation for the decision.

Longer term partners, however, seem to have converted to the concept. “A decade ago I would have said, ‘I don’t know that that can work,’” said Williams, who has been working with Mercy Virtual for about two years. “I’ve been convinced. It would be ideal to have a doctor in each unit 24/7, but even then they can’t be looking at the analytics the way these people do. They have critical care-trained nurses and doctors looking at this stuff all the time. They can camera in and count the pores on someone’s nose.”

Williams’ hospital has two critical care doctors who take care of the 28-bed intensive care unit from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. each day, with “Mercy running in the background,” he said. After 6 p.m., nurses on the ward continue to do their thing, but Mercy is in charge.

“This allows our guys to go home on backup call,” he said. If needed, the doctor can always drive back to the hospital, but most nights Mercy’s intensivists take care of problems. “This allows us the best of both worlds. We have constant analytics and if something is changing that’s not seen by nursing staff, they’re right there monitoring it in St. Louis.”

The relationship has improved outcomes at High Point, Williams said. Doctors who used to get burned out and quit after a year or two tend to leave less often. And the hospital’s care has improved year after year—fewer hospital infections, fewer patient days on ventilators, fewer readmissions and better patient survival, he said.

For now, Mercy and its partners have one foot in the old payment system and the other in the new world, where best outcomes and money align. But there are still administrators at Mercy hospitals who see fewer admissions and days in the hospital and “aren’t particularly happy about it,” Veremakis said. “There is an awkwardness in this time. But enough people with vision recognize this is the right way to go.”

Mercy Virtual’s ICU nurses, most of whom had years of experience before coming here, are sometimes a bit nostalgic for the bedside, with its immediacy and adrenaline. “You’re used to being in charge. Here you’re part of a team,” said Wegener. “If you think something is not being done you have to be polite.

“And there’s no way I can put a price on being able to put my hand on a patient and say, ‘My name is Tris.’”

BREAKING: Trump undercuts ACA with new plan options

http://www.healthcaredive.com/news/trump-healthcare-executive-order/507148/

Image result for pre existing conditions

Dive Brief:

  • President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday that rolls back a number of Affordable Care Act (ACA) provisions that set minimum requirements for health plans.
  • The order will allow small businesses and groups of people to band together and buy insurance as an association. The association health plans (AHP) available to them do not have to meet the requirements of the ACA, such as protection for people with pre-existing conditions and essential health benefits.
  • In addition, the order expands the use of short-term plans that also have looser requirements and allows plans to be sold across state lines.

Dive Insight:

Broadly, the executive order loosens the requirements health plans must meet and shifts regulation away from federal levels. This could lower out-of-pocket costs for people who don’t use much care, but would likely result in major cost increases for people with pre-existing conditions.

The biggest concern with offering these plans is that it would lead payers to cherry pick young, healthy people who are less expensive for payers. But separating them from people who will need services creates an unbalanced risk pool. That can quickly lead to prohibitive out-of-pocket costs for people who have a pre-existing condition or who unexpectedly need high-cost care.

There are still several steps to be taken before the order could have a real impact. HHS and the Department of Labor have been instructed to write new regulations which will go through the regular notice and comment process. The specifics of those regulations will be important to how the order ultimately plays out. Also, the order will almost certainly see a legal challenge. Still, it signals that Trump’s White House is ready to find ways of undercutting the ACA despite the high-profile legislative failures earlier this year.

It’s far from the first sign, though. HHS has drastically cut back efforts to promote this year’s open enrollment period, which begins Nov. 1. The ACA’s overall advertising budget was slashed by 90%, community groups that receive federal funding to help people enroll have been devastated by cuts and HHS recently barred regional directors from participating in enrollment events.

Short-term plans are inexpensive for people who are healthy, but they can exclude people with pre-existing conditions. They have previously been allowed for a limited stretch, such as three months, but extending that time and allowing these plans to count toward the individual mandate will mean an unstable risk pool.

Allowing plans to be sold across state lines is a staple of conservative health policy, but there is little reason to believe it would actually lower costs. There are also many unanswered questions about how these plans would be relegated.

 

Relevance is King, and “The Top of the Funnel” is Most Relevant to The Most People

http://thinkrevivehealth.com/2017/09/relevance-is-king-and-the-top-of-the-funnel-is-most-relevant-to-the-most-people/

 

CVS’ recent announcement that the company is expanding its reach in chronic care management is the latest sign that the market has never been more competitive or complicated. (Are you asking yourself, “which market?”) CVS isn’t just protecting its PBM business and driving sales for its retail business. The company has plans to provide one-on-one support and coaching — in a store, via phone, or video — to people who have diabetes, asthma, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, or high cholesterol, and depression.

This, of course, follows in the footsteps of other companies encroaching on traditional provider-territory, like Optum. OptumCare, the care delivery arm of the company, has 22,000 physicians in 30 markets and 200 surgery centers in 33 states. The combination of the two presents a formidable continuum that could provide consumers with most of the outpatient services they’ll ever need. In other words, the health system brand defined by superior service lines will continue to be less and less relevant as the “top of the funnel” becomes more competitive and more important.

Despite the fierce competition, many health systems continue to focus a large majority of marketing dollars on down-funnel service line care, such as chronic disease treatments and surgeries. There’s logic to that strategy: market and differentiate the services that are most profitable and keep you in business. The problem is that logic doesn’t work in a digital age when consumers have more choices and less patience. Their healthcare mindshare is occupied by a host of companies — like CVS Health and OptumCare — that are more relevant to their daily life than heart surgery or cancer care.

HEALTH SYSTEMS MUST ESTABLISH (AND MAINTAIN) CONTROL OVER THE TOP OF THE FUNNEL

Therein lies the problem for health systems. When Joe Public interacts with your brand, relevance is king. And as we all know, specialty care isn’t relevant to the vast majority of people most of the time. When the competitive field wasn’t as crowded and consumers weren’t showered with more than 5,000 ads every day, it was easier to make an impression that might not be relevant in the moment but could be recalled later when it mattered. That day has passed. The emphasis must shift from awareness and impressions to real engagement.

Health systems — just like any other brands — must be relevant and provide value as often as possible to stay engaged with consumers. Think about your continuum of services as a funnel (Figure 1). Primary care, urgent care, ER, and health & wellness programs sit at the top as these are the services most often used, and represent the most common entry point into your system.

They are also more subject to cost and convenience scrutiny. To maximize the path to specialty and surgical care in the middle of the funnel, health systems can’t just rely on people who go through the side of the funnel – those who did their research to determine which hospital had the best cardiovascular outcomes in the region. For most health systems, the vast majority of their down-funnel, inpatient service line volume — more than 75% — comes from prior top of the funnel activity, not from out of the blue. Health systems need to get as many people in the top of the funnel to build brand, build engagement, and feed all service lines.

Why? Because this is the best way to engage consumers and build brand loyalty. Brand loyalty develops as consumers repeatedly engage with a service over time, and they become repeat customers if they are satisfied. A good experience at the top of the funnel can lead to more profitable business in the middle of the funnel. In fact, our research and work with hundreds of health systems across the country reveals that most people who receive specialty care at a health system had at least one prior experience. And where does most engagement with the healthcare system occur? At the top of the funnel.

Back to CVS. Health systems run the risk of being expensive specialty factories if they cede control of the top of the funnel to competitors — especially competitors who are not other hospitals. The strongest relevance is at the top of the funnel, which is where prescriptions and chronic care management live along with a host of other more frequently used services. CVS Health, Optum, Walgreens, Amazon, and even Google present formidable, well-resourced companies vying for the top of the funnel in some capacity.

What’s your strategy?

41% of healthcare spending attributed to 12% of Americans, study finds

http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/41-of-healthcare-spending-attributed-to-12-of-americans-study-finds.html

Image result for chronic care management

U.S. adults with five or more chronic conditions spend 14 times more on health services on average than those with no chronic conditions, according to a new RAND Health report prepared for the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease.

For the study, researchers analyzed the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. MEPS is a nationally representative sample of the noninstitutionalized U.S. adult population.

The study revealed 60 percent of U.S. adults had at least one chronic condition in 2014, the most recent year data is available. Forty-two percent of U.S. adults had more than one chronic condition, according to the study.

The study showed people with more chronic conditions require more healthcare services. For example, the study revealed people with five or more chronic conditions average 20 physician visits per year, while those with three or four chronic conditions average 12 physician visits annually.

The study also showed spending on healthcare services rises with the number of chronic conditions a person has. U.S. adults with one or two chronic conditions make up 31 percent of the population and 23 percent of total healthcare spending. Those with five or more chronic conditions make up 12 percent of the population but account for 41 percent of total healthcare spending, according to the study.

For the study, researchers defined healthcare spending as the amount spent on all inpatient and outpatient care across all payers, including out-of-pocket payments.

Geisinger takes ‘radical’ approach to improve population health

http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/population-health/geisinger-launches-new-population-health-initiative

Geisinger Health System faciliity

Geisinger Health System will unveil a new “radical” population health initiative this week that aims to transform the health of an entire community.

“When it comes to the social determinants of health, we know there are many more causes impacting the health of a population than access to quality medical care,” said Geisinger CEO David Feinberg, M.D., in an announcement. “We want to transform healthcare at its core by focusing on preventive care, behavioral health and economic growth.”

The Danville, Pennsylvania-based system’s new program, called Springboard Health, will kick off in Scranton, Pennsylvania, and targets both patients’ chronic conditions and the community’s overall socioeconomic health, Geisinger said.

The organization will partner with several local stakeholders to implement the program, which features broad goals. The program’s website says it will test several approaches to tackle large-scale socioeconomic issues like hunger and housing insecurity. Potential projects that make it through testing will also be cost-effective, sustainable and designed so that they can be replicated in other regions, according to the website.

“We are going to introduce innovative programs and foster robust community collaborations and back it all up with data to make sure Scranton is the healthiest place to be in the country,” Feinberg said in the announcement. “Once we successfully implement Springboard Healthy Scranton, we’ll take the program on the road to communities with similar socioeconomic health challenges.”

The program’s first project (PDF), titled Fresh Food Pharmacy, aims to provide more healthy eating options to people in the Scranton area. Chronic conditions like diabetes are a significant driver of healthcare costs, research has shown, so the program will identify patients at risk for the disease and enroll them in the project.

The project will ensure that participants have access to at least 10 healthy meals per week and will connect them with local farmers and farmers’ markets to provide them with fresh options they may have had no access to otherwise. Geisinger is already eyeing other Pennsylvania communities for the project.

 

Where Are All the New Diabetes Drugs?

http://www.realclearhealth.com/2017/02/20/where_are_all_the_new_diabetes_drugs_275278.html?utm_source=RealClearHealth+Morning+Scan&utm_campaign=43886a5bc1-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_02_20&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b4baf6b587-43886a5bc1-84752421

Image result for Where Are All the New Diabetes Drugs?

As oncologists race forward with new treatments verging on science fiction and biotech companies press on with drugs for once-hopeless rare disorders, one of the world’s most pervasive diseases looks like it’s been left behind.

There are few new drugs on the horizon for diabetes, which affects about 29 million Americans. Most of the treatments in late-stage development are simply improved versions of what’s out there — taken weekly versus daily, or orally instead of by injection.

So has pharma run out of ideas in diabetes?

Aetna, UnitedHealth show increasing appetite for value-based care contracts

http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/aetna-unitedhealth-show-increasing-appetite-value-based-care-contracts?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWmpKaE5ETXhZVGc0TkdJNSIsInQiOiJjWXBGUGRYOWwySVVDRnRsdjhpOTJEK09yNSt1dzcyN1d0TmNucCtzN1A4cWlVcGl2NmM3M1wvR0lYQjRUa3ZQdzd2b2g4ZnFQWFRlYVhBMFwvY3I2VFlJaEVkdXhlODhNSGk4VUpVempaVUloZVBmRjRtekZXQ1ZGYVdjNFRJdkZRIn0%3D

Aetna has long held a goal to reach 75 to 80 percent of its medical spend in value-based relationships by 2020.

The biggest health insurers are moving quickly towards to value-based care arrangements, their recent earnings reports show.

While Aetna has long-held a goal to reach 75 to 80 percent of its medical spend in value-based relationships by 2020, Aetna’s medical spend is now 45 percent tied to value, CEO Mark Bertolini said during last week’s fourth quarter earnings call.

“One way we measure our success is by how well we are able to keep our members out of the hospital and in their homes and communities,” Bertolini said. “For example, in 2016, we reduced total acute admissions by approximately 4 percent, and we deployed predictive modeling to target members at the greatest risk of readmission.”

Aetna has achieved a 27 percent reduction in readmission rates using multidisciplinary care teams that engage facilities to develop effective discharge plans, he said.

“Collectively, these clinical programs have driven a best-in-class Stars readmission rate among national competitors,” he said.

Aetna sees more opportunities for reducing utilization over the long-term in readmission rates, and in a reduction in inpatient days. Unit price is still the driver in value-based purchasing, Bertolini said.

“I think value-based contracting is going to continue to be encouraged by even the current administration as a way of getting a handle on healthcare costs,” he said. “We have a healthy pipeline of opportunities. They will not all be joint ventures. I think there are other models emerging.”

UnitedHealthcare is increasingly helping states manage care for their complex, vulnerable and most costly populations, as well as assisting employers with programs to support the needs of retirees and employees with chronic conditions, according to CEO Stephen Hemsley in the insurer’s earnings report.