Embed
Email

In Common Cause for Quality

Document Sample

Shared by: cuiliqing
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
11/1/2011
language:
English
pages:
34
In Common Cause for Quality





Alice G. Gosfield

VHA Southwest Physician/Trustee/CEO Conference

April 29, 2006







c.2006, Alice G. Gosfield

“The things that unite us…are more

important than the things that divide us.”

−John Gardner, 1970, Founding “Common

Cause”

Overview



 The sources of pressure for

collaboration between hospitals and

physicians around quality

 What is a business case for each?

 Debunking the legal mythologies

 How physicians can help hospitals

 How hospitals can help physicians

Sources of Pressure



 The rise of the quality zeitgeist

 IOM, purchasers, NQF, IHI, Congress



 The industry of infrastructure support



 Transparency, data, performance

measurement

 Patient safety and efficiency

 Pay for performance

 The 100,000 Lives Campaign and tort

A Business Case for Quality

 Does the investing entity realize a

financial return in a reasonable time

frame, whether actual profit, reduced

losses or avoided costs?



 Does the entity believe there is a

positive indirect effect on organizational

function and sustainability that will

accrue within a reasonable time?

−Leatherman et al.

A Better Concept



 Is the intervention consistent with

strategic goals, understandable, not too

capital intensive relatively speaking,

with positive impacts across

stakeholders, and able to produce

sustainable, acceptable margins, near

term and long-term?

−Gosfield and Reinertsen

Why the Physician’s Business Case

for Quality Is Critical to the Hospital

 Physician centrality

 Plenary legal authority



 Portal to the system



 Their critical and fundamental role in the

hospital (AMA Monograph)

 Expertise (Reinertsen’s Axioms)

 Explain, predict and change patient

futures: the healing relationship

The Tensions

 Hospital success turns on physician

engagement

 Physicians have their own business problems –

reimbursement decreases, malpractice

expense increases

 Together they create their own quagmires:

economic credentialing, conflict of interest

policies, investment in competing enterprises,

derailed CPOE initiatives

 “The law won’t let us” be more positive

More Tensions



 Invasion of the body parts snatchers

 Recruiting economic competitors

 “I don’t see those kinds of people”

 “He’s got heads for the beds and knives

for hire”

 “It’s not my job to worry about this”

 “We are about market share and bottom

line”

How the Medical Staff Plays Today



 Self-governed, autonomized and

excluded from real power

 Individualized credentialing

 Barely true review for privileges: only

for serial maimers

 Avoidance of NPDB reports: “there but

for the grace of God go I”

 Difficult to get a quorum at medical staff

meetings

Can this marriage be saved?

The Legal Myths: Stark



 “Everything that benefits physicians

financially is prohibited by Stark”

 No intent necessary; referrals are

everything; all hospital services are

implicated

 “Fair market value is a number”

 The new definitions for hourly payments

The Legal Myths: Anti-kickback,

Antitrust

 No intent is necessary

 Requires bad intent



 The safety zones are so narrow

 There is safety in management services, personal

services, bona fide employment, IT safe harbors

 Anything not in a safe harbor is illegal

 Safe harbors are not the only legitimate

relationships

 Antitrust prevents collaboration

 Not so, stay tuned for clinical integration

New Quality Initiatives That Will

Require Physician Engagement

 CPOE

 “Lean” manufacturing

 Flow

 ICU beds; OR scheduling; getting patients out of

ED to floors; getting patients from one department

to another

 Redeployment of personnel

 Hackensack, red lights, rapid response teams



 100,000 Lives Campaign Six Planks

 Pay for performance and reporting

What Makes Physicians Different?

 Responsibility for individuals

 Accountability for life and death

 Legal captain of the ship

 Collegiality and “groupiness”

 Evidence based, scientific decision-

making

 Outcomes and quality improvement

feedback (the dynamism of medicine)

 Due process as the scientific method

Principles of Engagement for All

 Involve physicians at the earliest stages

of initiatives that will affect them

 Identify the real leaders: not always the

one with the crown and scepter

 Build trust: Do what you say, say what

you do consistently over time

 Communicate openly, frequently,

candidly

 Be willing to be held accountable for

participation

Principles for Physician Leadership

 Pay attention to process, not structure

 Do something real and meaningful:

take a risk

 Don’t let one loud negative voice stop

you

 Work across boundaries: you need

administrators, and they need you

 Collaborate with other stakeholders

(e.g., nurses) in common cause

Physicians Helping Hospitals



 Time is money

 Pay for some things: FMV under Stark

 Doing the work on the quality initiatives

 Medical staff service may be on the list

 Gainsharing: who is helping whom?

 On-call coverage

 Avoiding LaHue-type messes

Hospitals Helping Physicians

(Friends With Benefits)

 Give them time

 Standing order sets



 Templatized documentation



 Empowering nurses on the units



 Standardize processes



 Offer staffing services

 NPs, PAs, CNSs

Help Them Clinically Integrate

 Not exactly a “safety zone”

 Production of data is part of the point

 It is not the only reason to clinically integrate

 The five principles of UFT-A (www.uft-a.com)

 Standardize, simplify, make clinically

relevant, engage the patients, fix

accountability at the locus of control

 Clinicians learning from each other and

improving is also part of the point

What and How?

 Otherwise competing physicians can bargain

collectively for FFS (and other forms) IF

 They use protocols and/or CPGs to standardize

delivery of care

 They engage in internal review and profiling of

participating physicians

 They invest in infrastructure with money and time



 They take action against poor performers



 They provide data to payors



 The fee bargain is ancillary to the reason to come

together

The Hospital’s Potential Role



 Identify CPGs

 Facilitate access to hospital

infrastructure for monitoring

 Help with profiling

 Help construct rates

 Multi-provider network formation

More



 Compliance training exception under

Stark

 Information technology support

 Physician recruitment for quality

PROMETHEUS PAYMENT





Provider Payment Reform for

Outcomes, Margins, Evidence,

Transparency, Hassle-Reduction,

Excellence, Understandability and

Sustainability

c.2006, Alice G. Gosfield

Purposes



 Get beyond P4P, which is not

sustainable as a payment reform model

 Deal with the toxicities of FFS and

capitation

 Reduce administrative burden on

physicians

 Pay to deliver the right combination of

services according to science

Basic Concepts



 Amount of payment is derived from

assessment of projected resources to

deliver care in a good CPG

 Negotiated base payment takes into

account severity and complexity of

patient’s condition

 Bulk of it is paid prospectively

More

 Evidence-based case rate (ECR)

encompasses all providers treating a

patient for that condition and is

allocated among them in accordance

with that portion of the CPG they

negotiate to deliver

 Comprehensive scorecard measures

process, outcomes, patient experience

of care, relative efficiency (not in an

IDS)

Potential Benefits

 Clinically relevant

 Sustainable as a business model

 Offers certainty in payment amount

 Expects negotiation between providers and

plans

 Should reduce admin burden (no E & M

bullets, no prior auths, no concurrent review,

no postpayment claims audits, maybe no

formularies)

 Designed to permit “easy” implementation by

plans

 The hospital can help physicians

prepare to do this

 They can bid together if they want

without anyone holding the other guy’s

money unless they want

Conclusion



 Quality is a strategic mission and a

measure of success for the enterprise

and its executives

 It is the essence of what hospitals and

physicians have in common

 It provides leverage for significant new

ways of collaborating to meet the

business needs of both parties

 “The only progress we make in health

care is the progress we make in

medicine. In the daily chaos that is the

U.S. health care system, there are but

three elements that matter: patients,

caregivers and medical technologies.

Everything else is noise.”

−J. D. Kleinke

Resources

Gosfield, “In Common Cause for Quality,” HEALTH

LAW HANDBOOK (2006 ed.)

http://www.gosfield.com/PDF/commoncausequalityDr

aft.pdf

Gosfield and Reinertsen, “The 100,000 Lives

Campaign: Crystallizing Standards of Care for

Hospitals,” Health Affairs (Nov/Dec 2005) access

through http://www.gosfield.com/publications.htm

Gosfield, “Performance and Efficiency Measurement:

Implications for Provider Positioning,” AGG Notes,

(Sept.2005) http://www.gosfield.com/notes/index.html

Gosfield and Reinertsen, “CPGs: Think Core Concept,”

Health Affairs, (May/June 2005)

http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/extract/24/

3/885-a

More Resources

Gosfield, “Contracting for Provider Quality: Then, Now

and P4P,” HEALTH LAW HANDBOOK, 2004 Edition,

http://www.gosfield.com/PDF/ch3PDF.pdf

Leibenluft and Weir, “Clinical Integration: Assessing

The Antitrust Issues,” HEALTH LAW HANDBOOK,

2004 edition, http://gosfield.com/PDF/ch1/PDF.pdf

FTC MedSouth Staff Opinion on Clinical Integration,

http://www.ftc.gov/bc/adops/medsouth.htm

Reinertsen, “Zen and The Art of Physician Autonomy

Maintenance,” Ann. Int. Med. 138: 992-995 (June 17,

2003) http://www.reinertsengroup.com/PDF/zen.PDF

More Resources

Gosfield, “The Doctor-Patient Relationship as The

Business Case for Quality,” J. of Health Law (2004)

http://www.gosfield.com/PDF/DrPatientRelationship.pdf

Gosfield and Reinertsen, “Paying Physicians for High

Quality Care,” NEJM (Jan 22, 2004), www.uft-

a.com/publications

Gosfield and Reinertsen, “Doing Well by Doing Good:

Improving the Business Case for Quality,” (March,

2003) www.uft-a.com

Gosfield, “Quality and Clinical Culture: The Critical Role

of Physicians in Accountable Health Care

Organizations” (1998) http://www.ama-

assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/21/quality_culture.pdf



Related docs
Other docs by cuiliqing
7 Recipes from Joe A.
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
Re-installingXPMode
Views: 3  |  Downloads: 0
telefonica_en
Views: 4  |  Downloads: 0
3220 Chap 6 demos
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
chap history.docx
Views: 3  |  Downloads: 0
Subcontractor Bid Form - The Fountains
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
English
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
DESIGNER'S SCHEDULE USE
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
Security Service Providers
Views: 45  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!