Health care in the 21st Century

Our primary agenda for the 21st Century is the reinvention of America. We must reinvent democracy, capitalism, entrepreneurism, and community. Indeed, we must recreate all of our major social institutions. This includes health care. A design for a new society requires a new design for health care. In fact, health care enjoys a special privilege in this regard. It is the gateway to total societal redesign. Health is the common denominator in any society. If you loose your health you cannot work, you cannot play, you cannot study; and, if you lose it sufficiently, you cannot even pray. Health and well-being create the foundation for all other constructive human endeavors. Therefore, the design of healthy communities is the necessary first step in the redesign of total human habitats. This massive redesign effort will take a century. However, it will be launched in the next few years.     

Building a vertical provider system

There is probably no geographic area in the United States in which the health care environment is more turbulent than that of Southern California. Long before President Clinton's proposals began serious national debate on health care reform, a massive provider-driven realignment of the system was occurring in that region of the country. Multispecialty medical groups have generally led the way and have acquired ever larger managed care populations through merger and acquisition of other groups and practices. Hospitals, hampered by large fixed capital bases, have struggled to reinvent themselves as cost-effective and primary care-friendly environments in order to be attractive to managed care physicians. Almost ignored in this reconfiguration has been the university teaching hospital. This article discusses one attempt to reconcile contractually an integrated, capitated, and managed care-oriented health care system with an academic medical center in a strategic alliance.     

The digital transformation of health care

The arrival of the Internet offers the opportunity to fundamentally reinvent medicine and health care delivery. The "e-health" era is nothing less than the digital transformation of the practice of medicine, as well as the business side of the health industry. Health care is only now arriving in the "Information Economy." The Internet is the next frontier of health care. Health care consumers are flooding into cyberspace, and an Internet-based industry of health information providers is springing up to serve them. Internet technology may rank with antibiotics, genetics, and computers as among the most important changes for medical care delivery. Utilizing e-health strategies will expand exponentially in the next five years, as America's health care executives shift to applying IS/IT (information systems/information technology) to the fundamental business and clinical processes of the health care enterprise. Internet-savvy physician executives will provide a bridge between medicine and management in the adoption of e-health technology.     

Physician strives to create lean,clean health care machine. Studies of manufacturing processes may one day help make your practice more efficient

Elisabeth Hager, MD, MMM, CPE, is teaming up with scientists and industrialists to teach physicians how to apply principles of lean, total-quality manufacturing to their practices. She believes innovation and efficiencies can help doctors resurrect their profession's image and their control over it--and perhaps even reinvent American health care.     

Reinventing my medical career

The author found himself in a surprising situation in the Fall of 1998. For the first time in his life, he was looking for a job. Kent Bottles, MD, shares his experience of reinventing himself from academic chairman in an integrated delivery system to health care consultant. He stresses that physician executives need to package their experiences in terms of transferable skills that are easily understood by potential employers. He also emphasizes that acquaintances are more important than friends in obtaining employment; one needs to network with acquaintances and rely on the sympathy of relative strangers. A lot of hard work, networking, and "selling" his reinvented self resulted in a CEO hiring him. With all the changes brought on by the global economy and the uncertainties of the health care marketplace, other physician executives may be faced with the need to reinvent themselves.     

Medicare and Medicaid: the first successful effort to increase access to health care

The passage of Lyndon Johnson's health care legacy, Medicare and Medicaid, in 1965 represents the last time that health reform legislation expanding access to care was successfully proposed and implemented in the United States. Access, of course, represents only half the pie in health reform, the other part being the organization of the health care system. There has never been any major legislation passed through both houses of Congress and signed by a President that changed the organization and delivery of health services. It seems certain that President Clinton will propose legislation dealing with both access to and organization of our health care system. Though it may not have seemed so at the time, President Johnson had it easy compared to the challenges confronting President Clinton.     

A new perspective on quality

The U.S. health care sector consumes nearly 13 percent of our nation's gross national product, $800 billion annually. Our nation allocates the highest amount per capita to health care in the world. Yet many measures of health care outcomes from these expenditures are inferior to other developed nations. The American health care system costs too much, excludes too many, fails too often, contains much excessive and inappropriate care, and knows too little about the effectiveness of the things it does. The purpose of this article is to discuss current payers' perspectives on the potential for quality improvement in the U.S. health care system.     

Fast forward: a blueprint for the future from the Institute of Medicine

A newly released report from the Institute of Medicine outlines an ambitious program for changing the direction of U.S. health care. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century recommends switching health system priorities from predominantly acute care treatment to focusing on chronic medical conditions. The report also recognizes 15 conditions that it says should take priority for funding and support from all health care agencies. Evidence-based medicine must be fostered and the entire fabric of medical care must become more patient-centered. The IOM report proposes six aims for our 21st Century health care system. The system we should strive for needs to be: (1) safe; (2) effective; (3) patient-centered; (4) timely; (5) efficient; and (6) equitable. This article looks at some of the IOM recommendations and analyzes their strengths and weaknesses. Ultimately, the report advocates an environmental restructuring of health care in the United States.     

Applied health services research: responding to the changing health care environment

Health care in America is changing rapidly. The forces that are reforming our health care system are both numerous and compelling. Americans are requesting access to more affordable health care. At the same time, many Americans want to build upon what is considered the best and most technologically advanced health care system in the world. Especially during economically troubled times, innovative and well-formulated solutions to respond to these fundamental challenges are needed to improve the quality and accessibility of health care. It is essential that policy markers base their health care decisions on sound medical research that specifically examines which aspects of medical care improve patient outcomes.     

The ethics of health care system reform

The United States is now engaged in a momentous national debate about health care. How can we provide the best care possible while simultaneously containing cost (to promote the general economic integrity of society) and somehow maintain a semblance of a free health care marketplace. This is not just a political question; it is also a question of ethics. It is an ethical consideration because the current debate is not just about designing or promoting health care systems that can best address our concerns for costs, quality, and accessibility. It appears that at least some participants in the debate would not stop at arguing their beliefs as valid; they would make their beliefs law. Some urge the creation of the right to health care as a matter of law. There are significant differences between beliefs and rights, however, and they need to be considered carefully in the ongoing debate over the future of this country's health care delivery and financing system.     

Community rating--an approach that works

How our current system works and what changes need to be made are the subjects of intense scrutiny by policy makers today. One of the primary areas of concern with our present health care system is its accessibility to the average American, in terms of both price and ability to obtain insurance. With an estimated 37 million Americans without health care insurance, and countless others severely underinsured, this issue will lie at the core of any health care reform that results from the current debate. One possible approach to the uninsured problem that might alleviate the situation is community rating.     

Medical resource allocation: rationing and ethical considerations--Part I

The United States' system of high-quality but expensive and poorly distributed medical care is in trouble. Dramatic advances in medical knowledge and procedures, combined with soaring demands created by growing public awareness, the cost of private hospital and medical insurance, and Medicare and Medicaid, are burdening the medical care delivery systems. The costs of medical care have reached levels that can no longer be sustained. Government officials, insurance planners, labor leaders responsible for union health care benefits, and ordinary citizens are questioning whether it is acceptable to limit health care based on economic considerations. If health care is deemed a social good, the method of allocation must be addressed. Unless society decides that other priorities of the infrastructure are to be subjugated to health service delivery, difficult decisions will be forced upon us, consciously or by default. The discussion in this two-part article explores the ethical considerations of the more formalized approaches to resource allocation that presently exist in our society.     

The health care system has an eating disorder

The health care system crisis has been proclaimed and analyzed so much by economists, policy analysts, politicians, business executives, and journalists that the key statistics and phrases are becoming as familiar as the lyrics of a popular song-14 percent of the GNP goes to health care, 37 million Americans lack health insurance, too many specialists and not enough primary care physicians, etc. What I have not found is a comprehensive assessment of how the health care system got so sick. The different social science specialists focus on their respective symptoms or organs, but do not propose therapies to treat the entire organism. Ilya Prigogine's Theory of Dissipative Structures (now old hat since he won the Nobel Prize in 1977) demonstrated that self-organizing systems, be they health care systems or individual patients, respond in similar ways to the demands of illness and growth. Therefore, a clinical correlation for the health care system may have more than poetic appeal. I would like to offer the following clinical analogy for what ails our health care system.     

Searching for a new paradigm in health care delivery

The cartoon character Pogo, uttering his now famous line, "We have met the enemy and it is us," might well have been referring to the dilemmas that we face today in American health care. A major source of our current difficulties in solving these admittedly complex problems lies in our way of thinking about, or conceptualizing, health care and health care delivery. We are caught in an old paradigm that is simply not adequate for dealing with the health care delivery problems of the '90s, not to mention those of the 21st Century.     

Leadership for the next millennium: the physician executive

We continue to muddle through using tourniquets and bandaids on a health care system that is in dire straits. And the future is even less promising. There will be millions without basic health care, let alone basic health care coverage. Rural and inner-city hospitals will close, with progressive public apathy, as we focus on the marvels of expensive technologies that serve only the few. Costs will continue to rise at double digit rates, and our nation's employers will fall further behind in the global marketplace. Preventive care will be uncommonly provided and only more rarely reimbursed, while a couple more children die of measles in Mississippi. It's not a pretty picture, and it simply doesn't have to come to pass. "What we really need is leadership," the public cries. That leadership can and should come from medicine through physician executives.     

Managed care in the pediatric subspecialty of neonatology. The challenges, impact, and consequences

As our health care system moves toward a more managed competition model, the delivery of pediatric and pediatric specialists' services, especially the intensive and procedural services of neonatology, will be impacted. Pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists cannot avoid being buffeted from the powerful market forces that are now driving revolutionary changes in our health care system; they, like nonpediatric physicians, are often concerned and bewildered about the new realities of the day.     

U.S. health care in conflict--Part I. The challenges of balancing cost,quality and access

Grappling with a technology explosion, an aging population and a growing number of uninsured, our health care system faces an uncertain and troubling future. Examine the critical issues influencing health care policy development and think about ways to address the dilemma of balancing cost, quality and access.     

The American health system: a contentious environment in the 21st Century

In the 21st Century, the American public and its elected officials will be unable to reach any overall consensus on our nation's health policies and priorities. With greater demands for health services and fewer fiscal resources, a more contentious environment in the health industry will ensue. As the American health system in the next 100 years continues to behave with an amalgam of competitive and regulatory approaches, it will be difficult to ensure that all Americans will receive universal access, equity, comprehensive benefits, and a high quality of care. For these reasons, the health system is predicted later on to swing away from market-driven to more state-oriented regulatory strategies as the United States attempts to blend such concepts as pluralism, regionalization of resources, and enforcing cost containment.     

The role of the coordinator of care

Regardless of the specific outcome of the current health reform debate in Washington, it is likely that major changes to the health care system are in the offering. These changes, many of which are already in place or imminent in some locations, will have a major impact on the evolving relationships between physicians and hospitals. Most expect that these changes will accelerate the development of integrated health care delivery systems that will compete in the marketplace for a mixture of public and private health insurance dollars. In this system of "managed competition," health care dollars will flow to those systems that can ensure the best clinical outcomes while using the least economic resources. In this scenario, competing collaborative health networks that can manage the continuum of care will be central to the health care delivery system. The economic and political ties between physicians and hospitals will become more closely linked as government and private payers of health care services foster the development of these integrated, value-based health care delivery systems.     

Total quality management: care dealers vs. car dealers

Let's turn our "flawed system into the Toyota City of world health care," proposes Fortune magazine. I shudder at the thought. Deming-Juran-type TQM procedures can help to ensure that cars and their drivers do not die on the road. Skillfully adapted for health care, these same procedures can help keep patients from dying on the operating table. These procedures can also respond to Fortune's indictment that the "U.S. medical system is as wasteful and managerially backward as Detroit before Henry Ford." However, people are not cars, and care dealers are not car dealers.