Podcast appearances and mentions of wayne jenkins

In this episode of Relentless Health Value, host Stacey Richter sits down with Peter Hayes to discuss the major forces driving change in the healthcare industry. Hayes outlines three critical factors: changing public opinion, heightened transparency, and new regulations such as the Consolidated Appropriations Act.  He emphasizes the unprecedented convergence of these elements, creating a pivotal moment for healthcare transformation. The discussion delves into the erosion of trust within the healthcare system and the growing public unrest over high costs and inefficiencies.  Hayes also highlights the role of state-level initiatives as experimental laboratories for potential national solutions. The episode concludes with a call to focus on root causes and collaborative approaches to restore trust and improve healthcare affordability and quality. === LINKS ===

There have been two episodes lately that have sent me down a rabbit hole that I wanted to bring to your attention. Now, disclaimer: I know you people; you're busy. You listen on average to, like, 26 minutes of any given episode. So, yeah … look at me being self-aware. I say all this to say welcome to this inbetweenisode, otherwise known as The Rabbit Hole. But it's like a 20-something-minute rabbit hole, not a day-and-a-half retreat; so just be kind if you email me and tell me I forgot something or failed to dredge into a nuance or a background point. It might be that I just could not manage to pack it in. For a full transcript of this episode, click here. If you enjoy this podcast, be sure to subscribe to the free weekly newsletter to be a member of the Relentless Tribe. This rabbit hole really, really matters for anybody creating benefit design. It really matters for anybody trying to optimize the health that can be derived from said benefit design. It also probably matters for a whole lot of operational decisions involving patients or members, nothing for nothing. But it really matters for anybody trying not to, by accident, as an unintended consequence, hammer plan members or patients with some really blunt-force cost containment measures that do a lot of harm in the process of containing costs or, flip side, accidentally cost a whole lot but don't actually improve member health. Nina Lathia, RPh, MSc, PhD, kind of summed up this whole point or gave an adjacent thought really eloquently in episode 426. She said there's better or worse ways to do things and doing the worst kinds of cost containment may not actually contain costs. You squeeze a balloon, and that works great for some, like pharmacy vendors who don't really have any skin in the game. (See me using the “skin in the game” term for other people besides plan members? That's some really good foreshadowing right there, by the way.) So, squeezing the balloon works for some when they don't have skin in the game, in the place where the air goes when you squeeze the balloon—like a pharmacy vendor who makes it super unaffordable for patients to get meds so the patient doesn't take their meds and winds up in the ICU, or the patient's formerly controlled with meds condition that is now newly uncontrolled and requires all kinds of medical interventions to get said condition back under control. Like, these are the reasons and the why behind why some cost containment efforts don't actually contain costs at the plan level. But not at the vendor level. You see what I mean? Most pharmacy vendors don't get penalized if medical costs wind up going up. And I'm picking on pharmacy vendors a little bit here, but it's true for a lot of siloed entities. But, you know, balloon squeezing can also work, actually, at the plan level if where the air goes, it's to a place where the member or the patient has to pay themselves. Like, if there's a huge, I don't know, max out of pocket or deductible, does it really matter to a very mercenary plan that's running on a very short time horizon? Do they really care, that plan, if the patient's formerly controlled condition gets uncontrolled? Maybe not, I guess, as long as it doesn't cost more than the max out of pocket that the patient is on the hook for, for any given plan year. So, yeah … again, there are better or worse ways to do things; and a lot of questions kind of add up to, What kind of plan do we want to be? What are our values, and does the plan align with them? But that's not the rabbit hole I wanted to go down today—the aligning with our values rabbit hole—so let us move on. The Relentless Health Value episode that kicked off the rabbit hole for me on multiple levels was the show with Bill Sarraille (EP459) about co-pay maximizers and accumulators. And don't get me wrong, that is a complicated topic with lots of pros, lots of cons; and I am not weighing in on the inherent lawfulness or value of any of this. I am also not weighing in on the fact that there are forthright and well-run maximizers and really not good ones, which cause patients financial, for sure, and possibly clinical harm. But not talking about that right now at all. Go back and listen to the show with Bill Sarraille if you are interested. Where my “down the rabbit hole” spiral started was when I started noticing the very, very common main plan pushback that was given right out of the gate so often when talking about the problems that any given plan sponsor has with these pharma co-pay programs—that if these pharmacopeia card dollars count toward the plan deductibles, then the patient's deductible gets met and the plan member will then often overuse healthcare and cost the plan excessive dollars from that point forward. So again, if you ask any given plan sponsor what I was gonna say their main issue but a main issue that they have with these pharma co-pay programs, that's gonna be it—that if these pharma dollars count toward the plan deductible, then the patient's deductible is met and from that point henceforth, the patient goes nuts and overuses healthcare services and it costs the plan a lot of money. The second episode causing this rabbit hole to open up is the one coming up actually with Scott Conard, MD. So, check back in a couple of weeks for that one. But in the show with Dr. Conard, we get into the impact of high-deductible health plans or just big out of pockets, however they transpire in the benefit design. Both of these scenarios, by the way, the maximizer meets the deductible scenario and the very, very high-deductible plan scenario are to blame, in other words, for this rabbit hole of an inbetweenisode. So, let's do this thing. Let's talk about the moral hazard of insurance to start us off. In the context of health insurance, if you haven't heard that term moral hazard before, it's an economics term; and it is used to capture the idea that insurance coverage, by lowering the cost of care to the individual, because their plan is paying for part of said care, by lowering the cost of care to the individual, it increases healthcare use. So, you could see why this may be related to having a deductible fully paid or not. Pre-deductible, the plan is not paying for a part of said care or paying a much smaller part. And after the deductible is paid for, then the plan is paying for a much larger percentage of care. So, moral hazard kicks in bigger after the deductible is fully paid, when the plan is paying for a bigger percentage or a bigger part of the care. So, before I proceed, let me just offer again a disclaimer to the many economists who listen to this show that this is a short inbetweenisode; so I am 100% glossing over some of the points that, for sure, have a lot of nuance. For anyone who wants a thick pack of pages for background reading, I have included some links below. Because you see, a few weeks ago, my Sunday did not go as planned. And instead of running errands, I wound up reading eight papers on moral hazard. So, my lack of groceries is your gain. You're welcome. I am happy to send you these links if you really want to dig in hard on this. Okay … so, moral hazard is the concept that individuals have incentives to offer their behavior when their risk or cost is borne by others. That's the why with deductibles, actually. We gotta give patients skin in the game because once a member has their deductible paid, it's like member gone wild and they will get all manner of excessive care. Again, I hear that a lot from plan sponsors—a lot, in all kinds of contexts but almost always, again, whenever the conversation has anything to do with manufacturer co-pay card programs and a lot when it has to do with just, you know, high-deductible plans and what happens when the patient meets their deductible. Once a patient or family has a fully paid deductible, their medical trend is like a spike, I hear over and over again. And again, this is the reason why many insist—and again, no judgment here, maybe they're right, I'm just rehashing the conversation—but this is why many insist the moral hazard of letting people have their deductible paid for them by Pharma or whatever is the reason why some believe it is imperative to have maximizers or accumulators where pharma dollars can absolutely not apply to patient deductibles. Because then we have sick patients who now have their deductibles reached, who have very few financial disincentives to go seek whatever care they want. Right. Moral hazard has entered the building. I've beaten this point to death, so let's move on. One time, I asked a plan sponsor, What exactly is it that these plan members are going wild spending plan money on once their deductible gets paid off? And he said, well, you know, they go get their suspicious-looking moles checked. Did you hear that silence just now? Yeah, that was my reaction. I don't know. I would consider getting suspicious moles checked kind of high-value care. There are posters all over the place saying if you have a suspicious-looking mole, it might be melanoma. Cancer. So, you should get ahead of that before you have a metastasized cancer. I'm no doctor, but yeah, this feels like high-value care. So, let's just, in arguendo, say it is high-value care and follow this thread for a sec. Once members reach their deductible, let's say they run around and get high-value care, care they actually need but haven't gotten before because they couldn't afford it earlier or were putting it off until they saved up enough, right? Like, this is the other side of the moral hazard coin. If patients delay or abandon care—and, by the way, there was a survey (it's in the Wayne Jenkins, MD, show from a while ago [EP358])—but 46% of patients with commercial insurance these days have delayed or abandoned care due to cost. But if they delay or abandon care that is high value and medically actually necessary and they put it off or abandon that high-value care because they cannot afford said care, then yeah, we have, again, the opposite of the moral hazard problem. We have members paying a whole lot for insurance that they cannot afford to use, they're functionally uninsured, and it's not gonna end healthfully if they need high-value care and they're not getting it. It's not. Functionally uninsured patients who have chronic conditions that really should be managed will, as per evidence, wind up with health problems if those chronic conditions are not managed. I read another study about this just recently. This is why members with chronic diseases on high-deductible health plans tend to have worse health, by the way. Now, I need to say, same rules do not always apply for healthy patients who, at least at this point, don't need regular healthcare. But do keep in mind, as it comes up in the Dr. Scott Conard show, 30% of patients who think they're healthy, they feel fine—actually they are not fine and will become sick and costly in the coming years. So, yeah … tune back in for that discussion if you are interested, but you get the gist of this whole thing, right? So, that's scenario 1 as to what patients may choose to buy once they're in the moral hazard zone and have met their deductible. They go get high-value care. So, let's move on from the high-value care case study where patients reach their deductible and get high-value care or they haven't met their deductible and fail to get care they actually need. I want to circle over to the other moral hazard potential situation: patients who meet their deductible. And in this scenario, they again embark on a health system jamboree; but they don't get a whole lot of high-value care in this scenario. They run around getting all manner of all kinds of stuff that is well outside of any evidence-based pathway. Like, weird example, I went to a doctor recently asking a question about something that everyone ultimately agreed was nothing. At which point, the doctor asked if I wanted an MRI. I was like, “What?” We and everyone else just agreed this was a big nothing burger. Why would I want an MRI? Is there something else that we didn't discuss to indicate that I need imaging? Like, why are we going there? And the doc said, “Oh, well, everyone in New York City has an anxiety problem. So, I thought you might just want to get an MRI.” Yeah, low-value stuff like that is now not financially prohibitive. So, someone who had met their deductible, in a similar situation to my example, might have shrugged and said, “Sure, I do have some anxiety. Let's go get that MRI.” Or if they hadn't met their deductible, then the whole skin-in-the-game, market-driven approach may work, I guess, to prevent them from getting low-value care that was clearly excessive and pretty wasteful. So, summing up these two scenarios, the implications of the moral hazard issue are, if it's expensive, people don't do it. If it's free or cheap, they will overutilize. And the issue with both of these patient choices is, patients are not good at discerning low-value care from high-value care. And because patients are not good at discerning high-value from low-value care, moral hazard is not mitigated with any sort of binary kind of vote for moral hazard or against moral hazard types of brute-force, broad-stroke tactics. Like, say I'm a moral hazard full-on believer. I assume all or most of the care a patient will go for is low value, right? Because if I try to prevent moral hazard from happening, then by default, what I'm effectively saying is, whatever they choose to buy on the basis of moral hazard is low value. So, I make basically everything I can pretty unaffordable so as not to invoke any moral hazard. But right, the problem with that is that some of the care is actually high value. And it's also expensive for the patient, so they don't get it. And patients are harmed, and balloons might get squeezed. Or the opposite, against moral hazard, right? Like, I'm against the concept of moral hazard. I don't believe in it, so I don't set up absolutely anything to combat it. Maybe because I assume all care that a patient might want to get is actually high value and totally worth it. That's gonna be a problem for the opposite reason. Plans can waste a lot of money this way. Random example, in 2014, the Commonwealth of Virginia reported spending $586 million on unnecessary costs from low-value care. I mean, they say something like a third of all care is waste and unnecessary, so … yeah. Plan sponsors can waste a lot of money on low-value care, and a bunch of that may happen when patients have less skin in the game because they reach their deductible, as one example, and the care is not financially prohibitive and moral hazard is realized. So, yeah … as I said, a couple of weeks ago, I did not spend my Sunday as planned. I spent my Sunday reading papers about moral hazard in insurance and how financial incentives impact patient decision making. And I'm gonna repeat the grand takeaway because this is a podcast and you might be multitasking. So, once again, here's the sum of it all: If it's expensive, people tend not to do it. If it's free or cheap, they will overutilize. And the issue with both of these patient choices is, patients are simply quite bad at distinguishing high-value care from low-value care. Once their deductibles are met, most patients will—due to moral hazard—they will, in fact, go on a spending spree; and part of what they will get done will be really, really important and necessary stuff, like getting their unusual moles looked at or their heart pain checked out or going for that follow-up visit or lab work that their doctor told them they need to come in for. And the other part of what they will do will be things that are outside the best-practice, evidence-based pathway guidelines by the length of the Appalachian Trail—you know, doing what appears to be a tour of specialty medicine physicians for unclear reasons but which lead to a cascade of testing and who knows what else. Why do they do this, these members? Do they do this on purpose? No. There is study after study that shows, again, members/patients do not, most of the time, have the chops to figure out if some medical service is high-value or low-value care. And no kidding. Most members and patients have no clinical training. They're not doctors. They're not nurses. They're not physician assistants. They're humans whose uncle died of cancer, and now they have a pain in their foot and they're convinced it's a tumor. Right? Like, do we blame them when they finally go see a doctor because they crushed their budget that particular year paying thousands and thousands of dollars out of pocket for whatever earlier in the year, and now they've made it to their deductible—do we blame them for taking the very rational step of getting the most out of those thousands of dollars of sunk costs? At that point, it's a “let me get my money's worth” situation because they can't afford to do this again next year. I mean, we hire employees because they're smart and rational, and this is really actually a pretty smart and rational thing to do. It's not somebody trying to commit fraud. Okay, sure … some people are. There's always bad apples. But the vast majority are just trying to live their life and not spend all of their vacation money next year on medical services like they did this year. I'm saying all this because it's actionable, by the way. And I'm getting to that, but indulge me for like 60 more seconds because I want to acknowledge you, listeners of this show, are probably nodding along to this whole thing this whole time and thinking all of this is pretty obvious. Well, yeah … maybe. Except here's the reason I decided to do an inbetweenisode about this rabbit hole instead of doing my normal thing, which is just ranting about it over dinner for three days straight—and God bless my husband for sitting through it—is the bottom line. But the reason we are here together today is the number of emails and posts and et cetera that cross my desk where it doesn't seem like these dots have been connected on all of this or at least connected in magic marker. Like fat, indelible magic marker, which is what I think is necessary for these dots to be connected with the ones between moral hazard and patients not being able to discern high- and low-value care. There are so many ways and places these dots will show up. Like, here's another moral hazard issue with those maximizers or accumulators, which apparently are on my mind right now—the not good ones I'm talking about now, where patients find themselves on the hook for hundreds or thousands of dollars midyear if they want to pick up the meds that they've been prescribed. If you need more details on how that might happen to understand what I'm saying fully, listen to the show again a couple of weeks ago with Bill Sarraille (EP459). But even if you're a little confused, it doesn't matter because the question is this: Do we justify having programs that make drugs really expensive for patients? Do we put in place one of these pretty darn punitive types of accumulators or maximizers, right? Like, there's different kinds, and I'm talking about the punitive ones of accumulators or maximizers. Do we justify putting one of those into place and figure that if a patient really wants the med, they'll pay a whole lot of money for it? Because if they're willing to pay a whole lot of money for it, then, right? It must be high-value care, so they'll figure out how to pay for it. Keep in mind, as I said earlier, if it's expensive, people don't do it. If it's free or cheap, they will overutilize. And the issue with both of these patient choices is, patients are not good at discerning low-value care or meds from high-value care or meds. So, look, Pharma can be up to all kinds of crap, and list prices are really expensive. No arguments here. That isn't the point. The point is, What is the actual problem that we're trying to solve for, for our plan and our patients and our members? And if that problem is making sure that the right patients get the right high-value meds or care, then not letting members get co-pay assistance such that all drugs—the good ones and the too-expensive ones and the ones that we don't really want our members to take for whatever reason—if we make all of them way too expensive with a maximizer or accumulator designed to make all the drugs really expensive … dots connected. We wind up with the all-in to prevent moral hazard issue we just talked about, where patients could easily be harmed and the plan can easily get into a balloon squeezing situation. All I'm saying is that there's a big-picture view of moral hazard here that we need to be looking at and over-indexing into binary, moral hazard black and white, where we attribute malice to members, some of whom, some of the time, may actually be trying to get high-value care, or the flip side, the plan's paying too much for low-value care and causing financial difficulties and not understanding the root cause. Going black and white or over-indexing to prevent outlier kind of stuff is probably not gonna end well. Not seeking a middle way can easily result in a solution that is possibly worse than the problem. So, look, moral hazard is actually a thing. There are lots of implications to patients not being able to distinguish high-value and low-value care. But if we know this, then, philosophically at least, how do we conceptualize a solve? What should we be doing? If we're not doing black and white, what does the gray in the middle look like? Alright, we don't want to be a solution looking around for a problem. So, let's think about the problems that we want to solve for. I would start with, What's the goal? The goal of plan sponsors providing insurance most of the time is attract and retain talent. Also, I was at the HBCH (Houston Business Coalition on Health) Conference at the beginning of December 2024. And there was a poll question. There was a bunch of employers in the audience, and the poll question asked the audience, “What's your biggest plan goal this year?” Main answer by a mile: Cut costs. Okay … so, we want to attract and retain, and we want to control costs. Obviously, you can go about achieving these three things a bunch of different ways, and they will all be tradeoffs. As Luke Prettol reminded me of the other day, there are no solutions, only tradeoffs. And so, with that, right now, I want to introduce the second concept that I have been ruminating over in my rabbit hole lately, that I've kind of been hinting at for this whole time. But here's a word we've been waiting for to solve all of our problems in a good kind of way, not the bad black-and-white ways that are so often either financially a problem or deploying brute force and harming patients in the name of solving something else: Pareto optimality. Pareto optimality is the state where resources are allocated as efficiently as possible so that improving one criterion will not worsen other criteria. It's essential to consider this, that Pareto optimality is the ideal we should at least be striving for when attempting to overcome any challenge but, in particular, the moral hazard issue, when we know that patients do not know what care is high value and what care is low value. Because if we don't try to at least Pareto optimize (if that's a word), if we try to fix the moral hazard problem and wind up with a new problem or new problems that might be worse than the old problem, that's not optimal. We have improved one criterion and worsened another. So, fixing the members going wild after they meet their deductible by slamming the lid on the fingers of members trying to get high-value care as well as low-value care, well … not sure about this, but I'd assume if not the attract but at least the retain criterion might be compromised by member dissatisfaction. But also, as I've said nine times, we might not actually cut costs. We might be doing a squeeze of the balloon. Especially that could be true when, as we all probably know or suspect, what's driving costs at the plan level is rising hospital prices. There's a show coming up on rising hospital prices as a primary driver of rising plan costs, and it's pretty hard to argue with. So, it's financially pretty advantageous to keep patients from needing to go to the hospital. So, yeah … I'd strongly suggest not squeezing balloons when hospitalizations are where the air goes. I'm not gonna belabor this. My only suggestion is, do the Pareto optimality math. A lot of you already are, I'm sure, and do a great job. But just for any given policy plan change, or decision, keep in mind moral hazard and then really go through the whole cascade of likely impact on other factors based on likely member/patient behavior. It's so easy to get sucked into kind of these philosophical, “those are my enemies” kinds of conversations that are actually philosophically sort of interesting, but they aren't the goal. I mean, there's always unintended consequences; but not all unintended consequences should come as some kind of, like, wild-ass surprise. They were pretty predictable, actually. Let me also mention that when considering Pareto optimal solutions, advanced primary care starts to get really compelling. It's because having a PCP team with data and a relationship to the patient helps patients stay on the high-value care bus. And that can minimize the bad that comes from lowering the barrier to care and inviting in a little bit of moral hazard. Just saying. Okay, so this has been going on a little bit longer than I had originally intended, but I do want to remind you of the so-called theory of second best. It's probably really appropriate here, and one of the reasons why I'm mentioning this and not finishing the show right now is that, in a very synchronistic moment, I was writing up my outline for this inbetweenisode and—how random is this?—Steve Schutzer, MD, wrote an email that included something about the theory of second best. Great minds and all of that. Anyway, the theory of second best is really aligned with Pareto optimality. It's just that sometimes you gotta be really practical. You gotta be a little scrappy. If you cannot achieve the best option, either because you just can't or because the best option for one thing results in too many negative consequences elsewhere, then don't do the best option. Forget it. Do the second best (ie, the theory of second best). There is nothing wrong with that. Don't be a hero. Okay, so in summary, moral hazard is actually a thing and so is the opposite; and it's even more of an impactful thing because most people cannot distinguish high-value from low-value care. And if they meet their deductible that they have paid a lot of money to reach, of course, they are going to want to try to get through their checklist of medical appointments that they have been putting off. This is not a surprise. And it's not all bad, as long as the care that they are trying to go get is high value; and that matters if we're trying to cut costs. Because to cut costs for real and not in a squeezing of the balloon way, we need to direct or limit somehow what gets done to high-value care. And we got to do that without accidentally causing other problems, meaning think through Pareto optimality and possibly consider the theory of second best. I hope this has been helpful at some level. It's helped me. I feel better having vented. Also mentioned in this episode are Nina Lathia, RPh, MSc, PhD; Bill Sarraille; Scott Conard, MD; Wayne Jenkins, MD; Houston Business Coalition on Health (HBCH); Luke Prettol; and Steve Schutzer, MD. Additional studies mentioned: Moral Hazard in Health Insurance: What We Know and How We Know It Do People Choose Wisely After Satisfying Health Plan Deductibles? Evidence From the Use of Low-Value Health Care Services Healthcare and the Moral Hazard Problem Distinguishing Moral Hazard From Access for High-Cost Healthcare Under Insurance   For more information, go to aventriahealth.com.   Each week on Relentless Health Value, Stacey uses her voice and thought leadership to provide insights for healthcare industry decision makers trying to do the right thing. Each show features expert guests who break down the twists and tricks in the medical field to help improve outcomes and lower costs across the care continuum. Relentless Health Value is a top 100 podcast on iTunes in the medicine category and reaches tens of thousands of engaged listeners across the healthcare industry. In addition to hosting Relentless Health Value, Stacey is co-president of QC-Health, a benefit corporation finding cost-effective ways to improve the health of Americans. She is also co-president of Aventria Health Group, a consultancy working with clients who endeavor to form collaborations with payers, providers, Pharma, employer organizations, or patient advocacy groups.   04:05 Where did Stacey's rabbit hole spiral start? 05:40 What is the moral hazard of insurance? 09:31 EP358 with Wayne Jenkins, MD. 12:49 Why isn't moral hazard mitigated in insurance? 18:16 EP459 with Bill Sarraille. 20:51 “How do we conceptualize a solve?” 22:24 Why should we be striving for Pareto optimality? 25:20 What is the theory of second best?   For more information, go to aventriahealth.com.   Our host, Stacey Richter, discusses considerations for #plansponsors and others. #healthcare #podcast #changemanagement #healthcareleadership #healthcaretransformation #healthcareinnovation   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Chris Crawford, Dr Rushika Fernandopulle, Bill Sarraille, Stacey Richter (INBW41), Andreas Mang (Encore! EP419), Dr Komal Bajaj, Cynthia Fisher, Stacey Richter (INBW40), Mark Cuban and Ferrin Williams (Encore! EP418), Rob Andrews (Encore! EP415)  

Jamie & Leigh were joined by Wayne Jenkins from Bidgee Blues and Roots Club to talk about Groovin' In The Playhouse, a massive concert to help the club raise a few dollars for its operation.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Following a series of questionable arrests, plainclothes detective Wayne Jenkins finds himself relegated to the desk duty. But when Baltimore is roiled by protests following the death of Freddie Gray at the hands of police, Jenkins seizes an opportunity to get back in the action - and bring more crooked cops into his orbit.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

For a full transcript of this episode, click here. Here's a quote from Ann M. Richardson, MBA. She wrote it on LinkedIn, and I love it: Quiet the noise that doesn't add value. Surround yourself with intelligent and respectful people who can deliver endless opportunities. Celebrate brilliance and new beginnings. Together, we've got this. Thanks for this beautifully stated call to action (I wish I would have written it myself) because it is also precisely the goal of Relentless Health Value and my hope for the Relentless Health Value Tribe—those of you who have connected with each other by way of this podcast vis-à-vis LinkedIn, or maybe you've met each other at an online or live event. For sure, subscribe to the weekly email to get notified of such goings-on. Now, this aspirational vision doesn't mean putting the onus on just any given individual to fix the systemic failings that get talked about on the podcast, but we can start somewhere. We can sit with ourselves; we can ask ourselves some big questions. We can decide the legacies we want to leave and what we want our life's work to add up to. That is what this show should, I hope, help you accomplish. And, yeah … together, we've got this. In this healthcare podcast, I am speaking with Peter Hayes; and we talk about five realities of 2024 for hospital chains, integrated delivery networks, health systems. Now, to make one thing very clear, as I have said many times on many Relentless Health Value shows: Not all hospital chains or hospitals are the same. There are large, consolidated, extremely rich, extremely politically and economically powerful organizations who are called health systems. And then there are rural or urban institutions that are barely scraping by and serving huge vulnerable patient populations. And despite the many aforementioned names for hospital chains and their associated outpatient facilities and owned physician groups and urgent care centers, all these names for these big care delivery entities are flabbergastingly meaningless because they do not separate the consolidated rich ones from the very desperately not rich ones. Today on the show, we're talking about the first kind of health systems: the big rich consolidated ones which are taking over every geography where there's money to be made. These are the ones where you read about their bad behavior in the New York Times or hear about them in YouTube videos like this one. Peter Hayes talks about the five things that these behemoth entities may really need to start thinking hard about, even in the face of their fierce and often-unrelenting market power and the political hold that they have over many local communities and all the regulatory capture that goes along with that. So, here's Peter's list in a nutshell—the five things to get real about: 1. Health systems need to get real about the CAA (Consolidated Appropriations Act) and its implications that plan sponsors only pay “fair and reasonable” prices for medical services. Now, before I dig in on this, jargon alert: When we say plan sponsors, that means entities such as self-insured employers—sponsors of health plans, if you will (the purchasers, the ones who are actually paying the bills). Peter explains the quick version of what the Consolidated Appropriations Act is in the show that follows, so do listen. But for more info on this really, really meaningful bit of legislation that is the law as of 2021, go back and listen to the episodes with Chris Deacon (EP342 and EP408) or check out the myriad of LinkedIn posts from Jeff Hogan. Also, others like Darren Fogarty, Justin Leader, Jamie Greenleaf, and others have some great words of wisdom that you will be able to find that really explain what the point is of the CAA, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, and its sprawling implications. 2. To survive on reduced commercial reimbursements, health systems need to get real about becoming ruthlessly aggressive in driving administrative and technology efficiencies. 3. They need to get real about pivoting from fee-for-service reimbursement to episode-based care based on taking real downside risks for good clinical outcomes. They need to pivot from a mindset of maximizing patient revenue to maximizing patient health. They need to move from a sick care reimbursement model to a healthcare reimbursement model based on health. 4. They need to get real about being completely transparent and accountable in reporting how they are using the value of their tax-exempt status. Similarly, they need to account for and report how they're using the estimated $55 billion in net margins that they're realizing off the 340B drug program. 5. They need to get real about quality and patient safety. We still have about 46% of our hospitals that have a C or lower Leapfrog rating. And, by the way, the chance of having a fatality on an avoidable error is 90% higher at a C or lower-rated Leapfrog entity versus a Leapfrog entity that has an A or a B. Now, some of you—and by some of you, I mean practically everybody listening—are thinking of reasons why any one of these “get real about” things is arguable or how one of the above is not holding up in some market. I think Peter would tell you the same thing that I would: You're not wrong. But trying to predict a zeitgeist or the next pet rock never works well because it's always a confluence of right time/right place where the whole is way more than the sum of its parts. Think about Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point. It's about how small changes can have enormous effects if the context is right. So, now contemplate these five things that Peter brings up. All these forces are pushing in the same direction. Put it all into a stew where 48% of Americans have delayed or forgone care due to cost. Listen to the show with Wayne Jenkins, MD (EP358) for more on that. Or, you have the article John Tozzi just wrote in Bloomberg. Here's a quote: “In one California community, teachers have to pay an extra $10,000 a year to upgrade to insurance that covers the local hospitals. Teachers who can't afford it … give birth outside the county.” Meanwhile, insurers are making record profits, along with hospital CEOs and C-suites. At the same time, you know who I think is the third-biggest group with medical debt in this country? Yeah, it's people who work in hospitals—nurses, others. There's this frothing lack of trust for hospitals and what goes on there: 30% of physicians do not trust the leadership of their health system. And no wonder. There are examples of healthcare executives sitting up there in their palatial offices acting more like mobsters than the nuns they took over the hospital from. So, to orient your context, you are here. Peter Hayes is the newly retired former president and CEO at the Healthcare Purchaser Alliance of Maine. He is a national presence in healthcare strategy, innovation, and a keynote speaker. For more on the wild-ass problems with hospital pricing, check out this list of shows. But, spoiler alert, some of these are hair-raising. Encore! EP249: The War on Financial Toxicity in North Carolina as a Case Study Everybody Should Be Keeping Their Eye On, With Dale Folwell, North Carolina State Treasurer EP395: Consolidated Hospital Systems and Cunning Anticompetitive Contracts, With Brennan Bilberry EP390: What Legislators Need to Know About Hospital Prices, With Gloria Sachdev, PharmD, and Chris Skisak, PhD EP389: The Clapback When Hospitals Cannot Constrain Their Own Prices, With Mike Thompson EP346: How Did Health Systems Get Addicted to the Inflated Prices They Charge Employers and Some Patients? 2021 Update, With Peter Hayes, President and CEO of the Healthcare Purchaser Alliance of Maine EP394: Spoiler Alert: It Is Counterintuitive Which Hospitals Offer the Most Charity Care, With Vikas Saini, MD, and Judith Garber, MPP Also mentioned in this episode are Ann M. Richardson, MBA; Chris Deacon; Jeffrey Hogan; Darren Fogarty; Justin Leader; Jamie Greenleaf, AIF, CBFA, C(k)P; Wayne Jenkins, MD; John Tozzi; NASHP (National Academy for State Health Policy); Gloria Sachdev, PharmD; Chris Skisak, PhD; Leon Wisniewski; Cora Opsahl; Rik Renard; John Rodis, MD; Rob Andrews; Al Lewis; Eric Bricker, MD; Vikas Saini, MD; Judith Garber, MPP; Lown Institute; RAND Corporation; Dale Folwell; Brennan Bilberry; and Mike Thompson. You can learn more by following Peter on LinkedIn.   Peter Hayes recently retired as the president and CEO of the Healthcare Purchaser Alliance of Maine and formerly a principal of Healthcare Solutions and director of associate health and wellness at Hannaford Supermarkets. He has been recognized as a thought leader in innovative, strategic benefit design for the past 25+ years. He has received numerous national awards in recognition of his commitment to working collaboratively with healthcare providers and vendors in delivering health benefits that are focused on value (high-quality efficient care). He has been successful in this arena by focusing on innovative solutions for patient advocacy, chronic disease management, and health promotion programs. Peter has also been involved in healthcare reform leadership roles on both the national and regional levels with organizations like Center for Health Innovation, Care Focused Purchasing, and Leapfrog. He's also co-founder of the Maine Health Management Coalition and has been appointed by two different Maine Governors to serve on Health Care Reform Commissions to recommend public policies to improve the access and affordability of healthcare for Maine citizens.   08:04 Why do hospitals need to get real about the implications of the Consolidated Appropriations Act? 10:09 What is considered fair pricing for hospitals? 13:00 EP390 with Gloria Sachdev, PharmD, and Chris Skisak, PhD. 15:59 The medical transparency tool, Billy. 16:34 How does lowering prices become more challenging with consolidated hospital systems? 18:07 What is one of the solutions available to combatting this now? 19:31 Why do hospital systems need to get real about administrative and technology efficiencies? 22:27 EP373 with Cora Opsahl. 26:51 Why do hospitals need to get real about pivoting from fee-for-service reimbursement to episode-based care? 30:16 EP415 with Rob Andrews. 30:53 Why do hospitals need to get real about the 340B program and their tax-exempt status? 35:38 EP394 with Vikas Saini, MD, and Judith Garber, MPP. 38:19 What are the ethical and moral issues that are coming to a head with healthcare costs? 39:03 Why do hospitals need to reexamine their care quality and patient safety? 40:05 “We just need to make sure that the health industry is as accountable as some of our other industries.” 42:53 Why does Peter think it's going to take regulation to move the dial?   You can learn more by following Peter on LinkedIn.   @pefhayes discusses #hospitalsystems and what their executives need to do on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #healthcareleadership #healthcaretransformation #healthcareinnovation   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Joey Dizenhouse, Benjamin Jolley, Emily Kagan Trenchard (Encore! EP392), Cora Opsahl (Encore! EP372), Jodilyn Owen, Ge Bai, Andreas Mang, Karen Root (Encore! EP381), Mark Cuban and Ferrin Williams, Dan Mendelson (Encore! EP385)

For a full transcript of this episode, click here. Why did I decide to encore this episode where Cora Opsahl from 32BJ spends 29 minutes talking about the importance of getting your data if you are an employer or a union health fund? Let me quote Jeff Hogan with some light edits here. Jeff wrote about the “outsized role” that employer data and intentional analytics can and will play. This is emerging and a must-have. The show with Andreas Mang (EP419) from three weeks ago, the show with Dan Mendelson (EP385), the one with Mark Cuban and Ferrin Williams (EP418) … everything that has been talked about in all of these shows and more is gonna be hard to do without having the data so you know what's going on. But I will let Cora Opsahl explain far more succinctly than I can here. One more note before we dive in here: After you listen to this show, you might want to go back and listen to episode 373 with Cora—and that one is entitled “How to Kick a Big Hospital Out of Your Network”—because this is one of the things that 32BJ did when it got its data. 32BJ realized that if it kicked out the really expensive hospital from their network, it would (and did!) save $35 million. Kicking this one hospital out of its network enabled the union to get its biggest wage hike in however many years, and also the employers employing union members got a premium holiday and did not have to pay into the health fund for a few months. Imagine if they didn't have this data and realized the millions and millions of dollars being siphoned out of the plan by this one hospital charging way too much. It's just crazy how many employers or unions wind up becoming imprudent fiduciaries because they just don't have the data to know better. But I'll tell you who is realizing it: class action attorneys. In this healthcare podcast, I am speaking with Cora Opsahl, who directs the 32BJ Health Fund. Important to know about Cora's background is this: In previous roles, she's worked deep in the inner workings of the healthcare industry. So, she came to 32BJ armed with a BS meter that is finely tuned, which is, unfortunately, an essential skill for anyone trying to help the patients and members relying on them to successfully navigate the healthcare industry. This conversation gets into everything that the 32BJ Health Fund does with their data. They have lots of data. They demand it. So, besides kicking out overly expensive health systems from their network, here's other things that 32BJ is currently doing with their data and which other employers and unions may get a few ideas from. If you have the data, you (like 32BJ) can use it to: Make smart benefit decisions that are validated, not just guesses. Before you decide to do something (add a wellness program etc), be able to model it accurately for how much it will actually cost you—which, spoiler alert, is most of the time not what the vendor will estimate. You have way more data than the vendor does, so you can certainly use it to great effect in this way. Make sure that the right members are being communicated with so that benefit designs are successful. As Ashleigh Gunter said in episode 368, success when changing benefit designs has a lot more to do with communication than many realize. Create dashboards for leadership that may show trend lines, for example, which could be very helpful to ensure that the fund doesn't run out of money etc … little things like that. Figure out how much the fund is spending on various procedures and where. There's all this talk right now about the crazy variability of prices for the same exact service in the same local market. At one hospital, a colonoscopy could literally cost $10,000; and in another hospital—same quality, same basically everything—that same colonoscopy will be $2000 or $3000. I mean, there's a 500% delta or something in some of these cases. Ensure that if a vendor said they were going to do something, that they are actually doing it. This is especially meaningful for point solutions because of the whole squeezing the balloon thing. I can save money in a silo, and you won't realize that those dollars are getting transferred elsewhere unless you are doing your own math. This is a big deal if you start thinking about how pharmacy benefits are typically siloed from medical benefits. So, if I'm a pharmacy benefit manager, I can talk about how much I'm saving by denying patients drugs without consideration of the medical downstream implications of that. Ensure you're not paying a bill and writing a check for more than the bill was for, which is weirdly common. There's a whole show with Dawn Cornelis (EP285) about this. 32BJ has an engineering team that is creating an app to help members navigate to great doctors with fair prices. All of these things roll into basically three categories: 1.    Cutting wasteful spending and finding fraud 2.    Making smart benefit decisions 3.    Being able to see trends and forecast the future, which is really helpful for financial solvency etc As Cora Opsahl says, “I think we [all can] recognize [that] you [cannot] make smart … decisions and be a fiduciary of [a] fund without having [data].” This whole conversation has been really a big bright spot for me and will provide hope, I think, for any employer/union who is seeking ways to protect their members and patients, the ones on their plans and therefore under their aegis and whom they have a fiduciary responsibility to look out for. 32BJ represents about 200,000 members. They are mostly in residential and commercial real estate—so, for example, your doormen, your maintenance workers, your security, your cleaners, amongst others. Members are in about 11 states, but a lot of them are in the New York City metro area. These union members who are in the fund work for over 5000 different employers. The 32BJ Health Fund has zero-dollar premiums. Wowza on that point—that's a huge benefit. Also mentioned in this episode are Jeff Hogan; Andreas Mang; Dan Mendelson; Mark Cuban; Ferrin Williams, PharmD, MBA; Ashleigh Gunter; Dawn Cornelis; and Wayne Jenkins, MD. You can learn more at 32bjhealthfundinsights.org.   Cora Opsahl is the director of the 32BJ Health Fund, a self-funded plan that provides affordable, comprehensive, and innovative health coverage to 200,000 union members and their families. As director of the Health Fund, Cora has implemented multiple benefit changes that saved more than $35 million: removing NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital System and physicians from the network, transitioning to a new pharmacy vendor and pharmacy group purchasing coalition, and establishing an expanded Centers of Excellence program administered by Mount Sinai Solutions. Currently, she is leading a comprehensive medical RFP. Prior to joining the 32BJ Health Fund, Cora spent 12 years at Express Scripts, a pharmacy benefit manager, where she held a variety of roles, including with Medicare Part D, strategy and acquisitions, operations, and account management. She holds an MBA from Saint Louis University.   06:53 How much data does 32BJ Health Fund have, where do they get it, and how do they use it? 08:52 How did 32BJ Health Fund successfully demand their data from 100% of their vendors? 09:42 “We feel it's really important that we own this information ourselves.” 10:05 “It always concerns me—if a vendor doesn't want to give you the information, what are they hiding?” 10:32 “It's not just getting the data; it's then using the data.” 13:41 “Without data, you're really just taking a guess; and guesses are never gonna get you where you need to go.” 15:19 EP285 with Dawn Cornelis. 15:40 Is the cost of creating a data analytics team worth the cost savings of those data discoveries? 19:03 “The use of data has really built our knowledge.” 20:52 “It's really important to us that as we make benefit decisions, we're doing it smartly.” 25:27 EP358 with Wayne Jenkins, MD. 25:38 How is 32BJ Health Fund making their data knowledge actionable? 28:11 “If we can figure out how to make telehealth accessible … there may be an opportunity for telehealth … to upset some of these … monopoly systems or low-choice options.” 30:22 “It's really easy to think that we can solve this problem through benefit design … but in the end … it's the price.”   You can learn more at 32bjhealthfundinsights.org. Cora Opsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcareleadership #healthcaretransformation #healthcareinnovation Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Jodilyn Owen, Ge Bai, Andreas Mang, Karen Root (Encore! EP381), Mark Cuban and Ferrin Williams, Dan Mendelson (Encore! EP385), Josh Berlin, Dr Adam Brown, Rob Andrews, Justina Lehman

There are two big reasons why I decided to encore this show with Dan Mendelson from Morgan Health at this exact moment in time. 1. It's a great show (one of our most popular shows in the last year, actually) with lots of keen insights for self-insured employers—and by self-insured employers, I mean HR folks, of course, but also CEOs and CFOs. That was foreshadowing for my second reason. 2. It's gonna be an employer CEO/CFO triple play here on Relentless Health Value. Next week on the pod, my guest is Mark Cuban, along with Ferrin Williams from Scripta. And Mark Cuban, spoiler alert, has his own message for CEOs and CFOs of self-insured employers. Then the week after that, we hear from Andreas Mang from Blackstone who shares, among other things, what happens when some company gets bought by Blackstone and that CEO shows up for a meeting with Andreas and that CEO happens to know nothing about their vast, inefficient, and wildly wasteful healthcare spend. And with that, here is your encore. For a physician practice to transform itself from an FFS (fee-for-service) machine cranking out volume but not necessarily health or care, the office has to have a high enough percentage of their patients in value-based arrangements to make it actually feasible to transform. It is only when they hit a tipping point of enough patients in risk-based contracts that they can afford to be accountable for their results. At that point, yeah, everybody wins—doctors, patients, actually the entire community wins because when a local practice transforms, all of their patients tend to benefit at some level from the new processes and procedures and standardizations and pop health systems that get put in place. So, let's move forward with this with all haste, shall we? Why aren't we? What's the problem here? Well, there are lots of problems, don't get me wrong. But a big one is self-insured employers on the whole are not offering any sort of accountable care arrangements to the providers in their community. This is 150 million patient lives we're talking about here—a huge chunk of many providers' patient panels. Self-insured employers have a really big opportunity to level up the care in their whole community due to the spillover effect when a provider practice transforms itself because it has enough patients to do so. But these employers are stuck. They are paralyzed. They are doing the same thing this year that they've done last year, and therefore their whole community is equally stuck in a smorgasbord of suboptimal FFS goings-on. So, offering accountable care contracts is one thing (a very big consequential thing) that is also one of the five things self-insured employers can do to improve employee health that I talk about in this healthcare podcast with Dan Mendelson. Dan Mendelson, my guest today, also wrote a Forbes article listing out these five things. Here are all five things that Dan mentions in one handy list: 1. Expand availability of accountable care models to improve the care experience, quality, and affordability at a local level. For a deep dive on this, listen to the show with Dave Chase (EP374). 2. Invest in the data access needed to assess health outcomes. For a deep dive on this, listen to the show with Cora Opsahl (EP372). 3. Align employees' health benefits with pop health outcomes. For a deep dive on this, listen to the show with Mark Fendrick, MD (Encore! EP308). 4. Prioritize care models that can meet employees wherever they are. For a deep dive on the DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) aspect of this, listen to the show with Monica Lypson, MD, MHPE (EP322). 5. Make care navigation a central part of the benefits package and experience. My guest today, Dan Mendelson, is CEO of Morgan Health at JPMorgan Chase. He previously founded Avalere Health. Before that, Dan served as associate director for health at the Office of Management and Budget. Besides exploring the why and the what for each of the five things employers should do right now, I also wanted to find out from Dan what's going on at Morgan Health and how they are looking to help self-insured employers who want to do these five things actually do them.   You can learn more at the Morgan Health Web site.     Dan Mendelson is the chief executive officer of Morgan Health at JPMorgan Chase & Co. He oversees a business unit at JPMorgan Chase focused on accelerating the delivery of new care models that improve the quality, equity, and affordability of employer-sponsored healthcare. Mendelson was previously founder and CEO of Avalere Health, a healthcare advisory company based in Washington, DC. He also served as operating partner at Welsh Carson, a private equity firm. Before founding Avalere, Mendelson served as associate director for health at the Office of Management and Budget in the Clinton White House. Mendelson currently serves on the boards of Vera Whole Health and Champions Oncology (CSBR). He is also an adjunct professor at the Georgetown University McDonough School of Business. He previously served on the boards of Coventry Healthcare, HMS Holdings, Pharmerica, Partners in Primary Care, Centrexion, and Audacious Inquiry. Mendelson holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Oberlin College and a Master of Public Policy (MPP) from the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.   05:01 Why did Dan direct his article about health benefits at CEOs? 06:03 What does an accountable care model mean to a self-insured employer? 07:58 “This alignment of value will never work … if the 150 million Americans … getting their health insurance through their employer are not also aligned in the same way.” 11:28 “We're offering them a higher level of service.” 11:40 “Everything that we do is intended to be scalable and not just for us.” 12:09 “We have an obligation to do better for our employees.” 14:52 “Employers need to understand, the only way to get outstanding care is locally.” 17:28 Encore! EP206 with Ashok Subramanian and EP358 with Wayne Jenkins, MD. 18:18 Why is getting quantitative metric data important? 18:50 Encore! EP308 with Mark Fendrick, MD. 20:58 “This is a much broader vision of accountable care than … primary care.” 22:48 “Until everything is aligned, the employer is just not going to be providing an optimal product.” 23:39 “There are substantial issues with … health equity, and employers are paying for the care of 150 million Americans in this country.” 25:23 Is digital health access important for creating meaningful relationships between patients and providers? 29:50 What is the myth that employers need to tackle? 30:18 Why is care navigation important for employees? 31:44 EP334 with Sunita Desai, PhD.   You can learn more at the Morgan Health Web site.   @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Josh Berlin, Dr Adam Brown, Rob Andrews, Justina Lehman, Dr Will Shrank, Dr Carly Eckert (Encore! EP361), Dr Robert Pearl, Larry Bauer (Summer Shorts 8), Secretary Dr David Shulkin and Erin Mistry, Keith Passwater and JR Clark (Summer Shorts 7)  

Wayne Jenkins - skorumpowany policjant dowodzący specjalną grupą stróżów prawa, która trzęsła miastem. Instagram: https://instagram.com/konradshymansky/ Autor podcastu: Konrad Szymański Drugi lektor: Tadeusz Falana Opracowanie: Filip Brzeziński Źródła: https://ntpd.eu/dJnpY kontakt/współpraca: codypresents@gmail.com

On Episode 40, we delve into the story of Sergeant Wayne Jenkins and The Baltimore Gun Trace Task Force, one of the most corrupt police units possibly to ever have run the streets, before being put in charge of the task force, Jenkins regularly engaged in police brutality, the robbing of citizens, and running drugs on the side, and when he was put in charge of the unit, he and his colleagues continued the same behavior, but with more far reaching consequencesPLEASE give us a follow on our socials -Instagram and Twitter: @theblackhandpodSources:Background Music:Music: Dark Flashes by Shane Ivers - https://www.silvermansound.comIntro Music:Music: Void Glider by Shane Ivers - https://www.silvermansound.comIntro audio sources:Lufthansa clip belongs to The Fox Corporation“New York City is a warzone” clip belongs to CBS Broadcasting Inc.Joey Gallo and “Leave by violence” clip belongs to the American Broadcasting CompanySupport the show

I'm gonna run through the five reasons Lauren Vela talks about in this healthcare podcast for the “why” with the inertia in benefits departments of self-insured employers. But before I do, let me report that, in sum, they add up to … in many cases, benefits folks sit between a rock and a hard place. You really can't poke fingers at benefits teams who don't have the bandwidth, the resources, the expertise, or the organizational power to, in essence, run a small insurance company in-house and also do the rest of their jobs. This is especially true when benefits teams get no help or air cover from the CFO or CEO of their companies. So, the bosses are, in effect, telling benefits teams to manage the second-biggest company expense—this uncontrolled thing growing at multiples of the rates of inflation. They say, “Go get a handle on that but also don't make any noise, don't disrupt anything.” And meanwhile, I don't know, is the CFO under the impression that all he/she needs to do is pop by once or twice a year, issue some nastygrams about renewal rates to people who have no training in any of the financial and probably other skills required to manage this huge spend? And/or, on the other hand, the CHRO doesn't report to the CFO—so, same result, opposite problem. Here's the five pillars for the “why” with the inertia that I explore pretty deeply with Lauren Vela on the show today: 1. Transforming the healthcare industry is not actually in the job description of benefits professionals. 2. Outsourcing to consultants. Benefits departments a lot of times don't have the resources or adequate staffing to get deep into the complexities of healthcare, which means that lots gets outsourced to consultants. If you have listened to the episode with Paul Holmes (EP397) or AJ Loiacono (EP379), the problem here is that many traditional EBCs (employee benefit consultants) and brokers have a very vested interest to maintain the status quo. Currently, some are able to skim commissions of up to 30% of pharmacy spend, of employer healthcare spend, into their own pockets. These consultants have zero interest in upending absolutely anything. Employer inertia is paying for their vacation home, after all. 3. Nobody gets fired for hiring the same ASO (administrative services only) or TPA (third-party administrator) or PBM (pharmacy benefit manager) or whomever as their predecessor hired or they've been using for years. But they might get fired for doing something new that doesn't go so well. There might be no patience for even the shortest of learning curves or the smallest amount of disruption. There's also the aspect of a benefits team being capable of selling a transformational idea up the organizational ladder. Does the benefit department really know what the goals of the C-suite are? And if they aren't crystal clear on C-suite goals and aren't the best presenters in the world, it's gonna be a no-go on the new idea and then, yeah … inertia. 4. There's no obvious solution, no magic bullet, or easy answers. It might be hard to even figure out what to do that might have the positive impact a benefits team might be looking for. And then we get into the “is the juice worth the squeeze” discussions. 5. There is a status quo bias. Inertia is human nature. But at the same time, employers are wasting up to 30% or more of their healthcare benefits spend. That's a lot of money. These dollars are getting siphoned right off the top and going into someone's pockets in ways that do not help employees get better health. Dollars that could have been used to give tens of thousands of dollars in raises. Dollars wasted by the employer. But also, the employee gets ensnared in this financial lack of oversight because employees have deductibles and coinsurance. So, it's everybody sagging under the current model of some EBCs and payers and providers and PBM executives getting rich and hardworking Americans paying for it. So, let's cut to the chase. What are two solves? There's many more, but here's two. And Lauren Vela and I sort of ran out of time before we could adequately explore more, but these two will get anyone who wants to started: 1. C-suites. Yeah … you. Get involved. Provide adequate air cover for your benefits teams to move in new directions and also resource and staff your benefits teams with the kind of stuff and skills that they desperately need right now. Attracting and retaining employees has a whole new reality and opportunity, and a benefits team staffed for the market environment 10 years ago but not for the market today is a growing competitive and financial disadvantage. 2. There is a playbook for how to go about this. Listen to the show with Lee Lewis (EP244) for his, but step one of almost everybody's playbook is to find the right consultants working at the right consultant organizations. These right consultants and companies are the ones who are not taking indirect money under the table from an employer without that employer's knowledge. And if you're sitting right there thinking, “Oh no, that's not me,” unless you've very deliberately changed consultants so that it isn't, don't kill the messenger here. Again, listen to the shows with AJ Loiacono (EP379) or Paul Holmes (EP397). Ignorance is not bliss in this case like many others. Also, Eric Bricker, MD, just did a video on EBCs and broker types. So, do these solves mean spending more on a department that is already a cost center? Yeah, good question … wrong question, as the conversation with Lauren Vela today really gets into. The actual question is: Can you afford not to spend more on a department so that you aren't getting wildly taken advantage of in the current market environment. If you spend one dollar and save more than one dollar and also get employees better health, that does not seem to be a bad deal. As I've mentioned several times, today I am speaking with Lauren Vela. Lauren is a very experienced consultant working with coalitions, groups of employers, physician organizations, and also in the PBM space.   You can learn more about Lauren's work by connecting with her on LinkedIn.   Lauren Vela is a passionate advocate for a more rational and sustainable healthcare system and recognizes the influence had by employers and other commercial purchasers through their oversight of employer-sponsored insurance plans. As an independent consultant, she partners with entities that are committed to changing the ineffective status quo. Previously, Lauren was the director of health care transformation with Walmart, where she partnered with the Walmart Benefits team to identify solutions concerning low-value care, site of care, and vendor evaluation. Prior to her tenure at Walmart, Lauren led market strategy and member initiatives for the Purchaser Business Group on Health, where she cumulatively spent two decades working within various healthcare sectors, including health information technology, provider organizations, and pharmacy benefit management. Lauren also served, for seven years, as the executive director of the Silicon Valley Employers Forum, a trade association of high-tech employers collaborating on innovative delivery of both domestic and international benefits.   07:16 What does inertia actually mean in the healthcare benefit space? 08:02 “Fixing healthcare is not really the benefit manager's job.” 08:22 How could a benefit manager's job actually do the opposite of making healthcare better? 10:56 EP358 with Wayne Jenkins, MD. 11:56 “Americans are in pain.” 13:31 Why do benefits managers partner with consultants, and why is that bad? 14:17 “Benefit departments are cost centers; they're not revenue centers.” 15:30 “Every single company is in the healthcare business.” 16:40 EP397 with Paul Holmes. 18:12 Why relationships with consultants can make it very difficult for benefits departments to change. 22:46 Is the juice worth the squeeze? 23:12 “There's not one silver bullet that fixes healthcare.” 27:42 What is status quo bias? 28:56 Why employers may not be able to stay with their legacy vendors and also change for the better. 30:56 EP244 with Lee Lewis.   You can learn more about Lauren's work by connecting with her on LinkedIn.   @laurenvela1 discusses #benefitdepartments and #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #hcmkg #healthcarepricing #pricetransparency #healthcarefinance   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Dale Folwell (Encore! EP249), Eric Gallagher, Dr Suhas Gondi, Dr Rachel Reid, Dr Amy Scanlan, Peter J. Neumann, Stacey Richter (EP400), Dawn Cornelis (Encore! EP285), Stacey Richter (EP399), Dr Jacob Asher  

Thursday, May 25 on Urban Forum Northwest:*Congressman Robert Cortez (Bobby) Scott (D) VA-03 comments on the most pressing political issue of the year, paying the bills that the country has accumulated and does he think the USA will default on our obligation. *Raymond Miller, Chair, NAACP State Conference (Alaska, Oregon, Washington) Armed Services and Veteran Affairs Committee pays tribute to the Veterans who gave it all for the USA. *Reverend Dr. Wayne Jenkins, Pastor, New Hope Baptist Church, Pasco, WA pays tribute to his late mentor, the Reverend Matthew J. Thornton. Harley Bird was a leader in the United Construction Workers Association (UCWA) he talks about Reverend Thornton the Pipe Fitter and protester. *Reverend Dr. Leslie D. Braxton, Pastor, New Beginnings Christian Fellowship (NBCF) of Kent, WA comments on the "Songs of Black Folk" Music of Resistance & Hope Concert that will be held on June 18 at 7:00 pm (PDT) at Seattle's Paramount Theatre. He will be joined by Kevin Meeks, Media Services Coordinator for NBCF. *Vanessa Wells Bruce, Artistic Director, The Sound of the Northwest will be joined by Choir Member Shirley Young. They will invite you to their Saturday, June 3 7:00 pm Concert at Seattle's Langston Hughes Performing Arts Institute the theme is "History, Her-story,Their-story:Music from Different Perspectives. Urban Forum Northwest streams live at www.1150kknw.com. Visit us at www.urbanforumnw.com for archived programs and relevant information. Like us on facebook. Twitter @Eddie_Rye. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Thursday, May 25 on Urban Forum Northwest: *Congressman Robert Cortez (Bobby) Scott (D) VA-03 comments on the most pressing political issue of the year, paying the bills that the country has accumulated and does he think the USA will default on our obligation. *Raymond Miller, Chair, NAACP State Conference (Alaska, Oregon, Washington) Armed Services and Veteran Affairs Committee pays tribute to the Veterans who gave it all for the USA. *Reverend Dr. Wayne Jenkins, Pastor, New Hope Baptist Church, Pasco, WA pays tribute to his late mentor, the Reverend Matthew J. Thornton. Harley Bird was a leader in the United Construction Workers Association (UCWA) he talks about Reverend Thornton the Pipe Fitter and protester. *Reverend Dr. Leslie D. Braxton, Pastor, New Beginnings Christian Fellowship (NBCF) of Kent, WA comments on the "Songs of Black Folk" Music of Resistance & Hope Concert that will be held on June 18 at 7:00 pm (PDT) at Seattle's Paramount Theatre. He will be joined by Kevin Meeks, Media Services Coordinator for NBCF. *Vanessa Wells Bruce, Artistic Director, The Sound of the Northwest will be joined by Choir Member Shirley Young. They will invite you to their Saturday, June 3 7:00 pm Concert at Seattle's Langston Hughes Performing Arts Institute the theme is "History, Her-story,Their-story:Music from Different Perspectives. Urban Forum Northwest streams live at www.1150kknw.com. Visit us at www.urbanforumnw.com for archived programs and relevant information. Like us on facebook. Twitter @Eddie_Rye.

Thursday, May 25 on Urban Forum Northwest: *Congressman Robert Cortez (Bobby) Scott (D) VA-03 comments on the most pressing political issue of the year, paying the bills that the country has accumulated and does he think the USA will default on our obligation. *Raymond Miller, Chair, NAACP State Conference (Alaska, Oregon, Washington) Armed Services and Veteran Affairs Committee pays tribute to the Veterans who gave it all for the USA. *Reverend Dr. Wayne Jenkins, Pastor, New Hope Baptist Church, Pasco, WA pays tribute to his late mentor, the Reverend Matthew J. Thornton. Harley Bird was a leader in the United Construction Workers Association (UCWA) he talks about Reverend Thornton the Pipe Fitter and protester. *Reverend Dr. Leslie D. Braxton, Pastor, New Beginnings Christian Fellowship (NBCF) of Kent, WA comments on the "Songs of Black Folk" Music of Resistance & Hope Concert that will be held on June 18 at 7:00 pm (PDT) at Seattle's Paramount Theatre. He will be joined by Kevin Meeks, Media Services Coordinator for NBCF. *Vanessa Wells Bruce, Artistic Director, The Sound of the Northwest will be joined by Choir Member Shirley Young. They will invite you to their Saturday, June 3 7:00 pm Concert at Seattle's Langston Hughes Performing Arts Institute the theme is "History, Her-story,Their-story:Music from Different Perspectives. Urban Forum Northwest streams live at www.1150kknw.com. Visit us at www.urbanforumnw.com for archived programs and relevant information. Like us on facebook. Twitter @Eddie_Rye.

The Gun Trace Task Force (GTTF) was meant to help the Baltimore Police Department fight violent crime. Instead, its officers terrorised innocent civilians. In 2017, a criminal investigation resulted in the successful prosecution of the officers, and they were convicted of extortion, fraud, racketeering, and robbery. In I Got A Monster, director Kevin Abrams tells the story of what happened, and how a crusading defence attorney named Ivan Bates helped bring the corrupt police officers to justice. In the documentary, Kevin also speaks to the GTTF's victims, giving a voice to people too often denied one. Kevin tells host Matthew Sherwood about the GTTF's Jekyll and Hyde leader. Wayne Jenkins was a tough but charismatic cop. Away from the spotlight, however, he was also utterly corrupt. They explore the question of how so many officers, who were also the subject of internal police investigations, managed to end up in the same unit. Was it a coincidence or a conspiracy?  Kevin and Matthew discuss the broader issue of police corruption in the US, how it has been allowed to continue, and what has happened to the Baltimore Police Department since 2017, Kevin also reflects on his experience of making I Got A Monster, which was completed thanks to the goodwill and help of a diverse range of people, including the FBI, local journalists, and Baltimoreons. Watch the episode at https://factualamerica.com ”... documentary has a great ability to humanise things, and to make things feel real [so] that people can get a greater understanding emotionally of what people are dealing with... police corruption and the victims of it.” – Kevin Abrams

Director Kevin Abrams joins Matthew Pejkovic on the Matt's Movie Reviews Podcast to talk about his new film 'I Got a Monster', an investigative documentary that tells the story of corrupt police officer Wayne Jenkins, who through his criminal actions with the Baltimore Police Department's elite Gun Trace Task Force, pushed the already strained relations between the police and the black community of Baltimore beyond breaking point.   Support Matt's Movie Reviews Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=33903624  TeePublic:  https://tinyurl.com/2p9c5kpn Amazon: tinyurl.com/2p98rf6r   Follow Matt's Movie Reviews! Website: http://mattsmoviereviews.net Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Matts-Movie-Reviewsnet/151059409963 YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/MattsMovieReviews LinkedIn:  https://www.linkedin.com/company/1036986/admin/  Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/user/mattsmovierev  MeWe: https://mewe.com/p/mattsmoviereviews

Based on an explosive true story, I GOT A MONSTER retells in highly dramatic fashion one of the nation's biggest police corruption scandals. In 2017, Baltimore was rocked by the Federal indictment of Wayne Jenkins, a highly decorated super-cop and leader of the Baltimore Police Department's elite Gun Trace Task Force along with six other members on racketeering charges. In a city plagued by racial tension and violence, plain-clothes detectives from the Gun Trace Task Force had been celebrated for holding the Thin Blue Line, but in fact were terrorizing Baltimore's Black community. These dirty cops were stealing and reselling millions of dollars of drugs while brazenly planting evidence and falsifying police reports. However, they didn't plan for a campaigning defense attorney or a secret FBI wiretap operation to end their crime spree and expose decades of criminality inside the police department. I GOT A MONSTER takes viewers around every twist and turn of a real-life cat-and-mouse game where cops are also robbers and those meant to protect our safety turn out to be the ones jeopardizing it. Director Kevin Abrams (Left at the Rio Grande, Indirect Actions) joins us for a conversation on the depth and scope of police corruption within this decorated unit, as well as the havoc that was visited upon people, mostly, people of color, guilty of nothing except being in the wrong place, the flawed rationale behind the formation of “Special” police units and the citizens who stood up to the corruption and intimidation. For more go to: greenwichentertainment.com/i-got-a-monster

For the past few shows and in a few coming up, we are circling our wagons around a theme: In healthcare in this country, there are two teams. One team is employers, taxpayers, patients … those trying to keep healthcare prices down. Then on the other team, we have those looking for healthcare prices to continue to go up, meaning, as just one example, some health systems and some hospitals. There was a New York Times article recently, and Peter Hayes wrote an interesting comment about it on LinkedIn. He wrote: “This article is troubling on so many levels and clearly demonstrates that patient health and well-being are not the top priority of many in healthcare leadership in our hospitals. Unfortunately, it is much more about patient revenue than patient health. … The non-profit status of our health facilities is a huge hidden tax and wealth transference from every taxpayer that is estimated to be about $39 billion annually.” Look, for sure, not talking about everybody in healthcare leadership here, and increasingly I'm kinda thinking we need to maybe have more than one word for hospitals and their leadership because lumping them all together into a homogenous blob is really unfair to those rural and safety net organizations contending with all kinds of adversities—which is very, very different in circumstance to those so-called “well-resourced” hospital chains in suburban markets really raking in the cash and virtue signaling in very well-resourced press campaigns. And the irony of this whole thing is that a reason hospitals (that want to) get away with doubling down on profit-centric business models is actually their nonprofit status. This is a major loophole. If you are a nonprofit, you get to be excluded from some of the powers of the FTC (Federal Trade Commission), for example. But then there's also the lack of financial discipline, as Mike Thompson puts it in the show today. These nonprofit organizations have never had to run efficiently. They have never been asked to justify the new building or the other adds to their infrastructure that ultimately increase their costs of doing business in ways that, on the whole, might not benefit patient care. And I say “might not benefit patient care” fairly confidently because there is absolutely no correlation between high prices and high quality in healthcare. In fact, it can just as easily be the opposite. But if you overbuild and you buy too many MRI machines or whatever, then you gotta feed the beast. And then the downward spiral starts, and the anticompetitive, financially toxic behavior really kicks into high gear—which, again, is tough to regulate because our laws and legislation expect nonprofits to, you know, behave like nonprofits. In this healthcare podcast, I am thrilled to speak with Mike Thompson, who is the CEO and president of the National Alliance of Healthcare Purchasers. Interestingly, Mike is an actuary by background; and I am sure that that has come in handy as more and more data is becoming available for purchasers and also regulators. The National Alliance has created a playbook to help employers get a fair price from hospitals. In short, the playbook's five strategies to do so include (1) looking up what the fair commercial price is for your local hospital, which is really easy to see if you go to dashboard.sagetransparency.com. This Sage Transparency dashboard was created by the Employers' Forum of Indiana. Not to drown you in acronyms, but the Sage Transparency dashboard very elegantly combines RAND data showing what hospitals are actually charging employer plans and compares that to what's called the NASHP commercial break-even price. NASHP is the National Academy for State Health Policy, who crunched a lot of numbers to figure out this commercial break-even price. Once you know the fair commercial price for hospitals in your area, then one way to go could be (2) using an RBP (reference-based pricing) strategy and paying based on the fair commercial price plus a markup. Another strategy is to (3) start monitoring your ASO/TPA (administrative services organization/third-party administrator) carefully and see that they are paying this fair price and getting performance guarantees to hold them accountable to do so. Yet another strategy is to (4) gang up with other employers in coalitions, which is often necessary, given how much market power some of these hospitals have consolidated and all the anticompetitive practices they've managed to tuck into their FTC-exempt quiver. And last is to (5) regulate through legislation. One point that Mike makes very clear is that if nonprofit hospitals cannot remain true to their mission and if they are also not subject to market dynamics, that's a lose-lose for their communities. At that point, a very viable option is to regulate them like utilities. This is also what I talk about next week with Chris Skisak and Gloria Sachdev. The sad part about this whole thing is that hospitals and communities really should be sitting on the same side of the table working together to improve the health and well-being of their communities. And that should include—according to me, at least—keeping financial toxicity in check, especially just given everything we know for sure about how financial toxicity negatively impacts patient health. Oh, hey, here's a thing: Turns out I had a fever when I recorded this show, so yeah, Mike deserves a little extra kudos for very eloquently just going with it when occasionally my questions sort of ended without, you know, actually asking a question. You can learn more at nationalalliancehealth.org. Michael Thompson is the president and CEO of the National Alliance of Healthcare Purchaser Coalitions (National Alliance), the only nonprofit, purchaser-led organization with a national and regional structure dedicated to driving health and healthcare value across the country. Prior to joining the National Alliance, Mike was a Principal at PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) for 20 years. He is a nationally recognized thought leader for business health strategies and health system reform. Mike has worked with major employers and other stakeholders on sustainable cost reduction, integrated health, wellness and consumerism, retiree health, private health exchanges, and health reform. Known for developing and promoting collaborative cross-sector health industry initiatives, Mike participated on the steering board of the World Economic Forum's “Working toward Wellness” initiative and co-founded the Private Exchange Evaluation Collaborative. Prior to PwC, Mike served as an executive with diverse roles with Prudential Healthcare for over 17 years. Mike is a Fellow of the Society of Actuaries, serving on the Health Practice Council, and chairs the Medicare Sub-Committee of the American Academy of Actuaries. He is board president of the Innovation and Value Initiative. He is also widely recognized as a leading national advocate for mental health and well-being and was past president of the New York City chapter of the National Alliance for Mental Illness. 05:37 Check EP372 with Cora Opsahl; EP358 with Wayne Jenkins, MD; EP388 with Merrill Goozner; and EP346 with Peter Hayes for a deep dive. 05:48 Why should an employer health plan be concerned about how much area hospitals are spending? 07:01 How are hospitals quantifying their prices? 08:10 “I think we're not paying a fair price is the end game.” 10:45 How do we bring rigor back into the market? 11:12 What is NASHP? 15:10 What does the NASHP commercial breakeven take into account? 18:24 Why are hospitals conflicted when it comes to building a health system based on value and health? 20:17 Why is the onus on hospitals to defend the way they've spent the money they have? 21:58 “Where there are market dynamics, we typically see prices in that fair price range.” 25:06 What can employers do from a market standpoint, a program design point, and a policy standpoint? 27:11 What is the National Alliance of Healthcare Purchaser Coalitions playbook? 30:15 Why is changing the dynamics in the press important to changing hospital pricing? 33:02 How fundamental is the employer's role in making sure that they're paying a fair price for the healthcare services their employees are receiving?   You can learn more at nationalalliancehealth.org.   @IWLMikeT of @ntlalliancehlth discusses #hospitalpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitals #healthcarepricing   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Dr Rishi Wadhera (Encore! EP326), Ge Bai (Encore! EP356), Dave Dierk and Stacey Richter (INBW37), Merrill Goozner, Betsy Seals (EP387), Stacey Richter (INBW36), Dr Eric Bricker (Encore! EP351), Al Lewis, Dan Mendelson, Wendell Potter, Nick Stefanizzi, Brian Klepper (Encore! EP335), Dr Aaron Mitchell (EP382), Karen Root, Mark Miller, AJ Loiacono, Josh LaRosa, Stacey Richter (INBW35), Rebecca Etz (Encore! EP295), Olivia Webb (Encore! EP337), Mike Baldzicki, Lisa Bari, Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371)

Jon Bernthal is an actor known for such roles as Sheriff's Deputy Shane Walsh in "The Walking Dead," vigilante Frank Castle in "The Punisher," and more recently, corrupt cop Wayne Jenkins in HBO's miniseries, "We Own This City." Bernthal is also the host of the weekly interview podcast series "REAL ONES with Jon Bernthal." https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrOR14O-kBHEyrLQRdHJgDQ

We got two new reviews this week on the podcast, which I was thrilled to see. The first was from, it turns out, Dave Chase from Health Rosetta, who wrote that “with so many people in healthcare practicing ‘innovation theater' and bloviating versus driving real change, it's a breath of fresh air to listen to Relentless Health Value.” Thank you so much for saying that, Dave. We try really hard to get guests who are actually doing great things such as yourself. And then there's another review from mattiw2002, who says, “For anyone trying to stay abreast of developments in the healthcare space, there's none better than … Relentless Health Value.” Thank you so much to the two of you who took the time to write a review—could not appreciate it more. There have been two inbetweenisodes this year where I get deep into the why behind the “why collaborate.” And when I say collaborate, what I mean is anybody in the healthcare industry working together with and for the patients that we're supposed to be serving here. It's creating alignment amongst stakeholders around what's best for the patient. Here is the nutshell version of the two previous shows. First point: Patients fall into one care gap after another. You hear this from any PCP you talk to who's working in a care setting when there's little, if any, collaboration effort on the front end to ensure a non-fragmented patient journey. So then, all these care gaps wind up getting surfaced, which, by the way—let's not forget this—these care gaps were there all along negatively affecting patient outcomes. It's just, in the past, we didn't know about them. But now that we know about them, it becomes the fee-for-service PCPs' job to mop up all the care gaps while the faucet is still running. So, that's the situation analysis, and if we're going to put an end to this, it means that payers have to align with providers and give enough incentive for those providers to create a non-fragmented patient journey (ie, making sure that the care gaps don't happen to begin with). This also means providers need to talk amongst themselves and collaborate. Keep in mind that a multi-morbid Medicare patient sees something like 5 to 13 doctors, on average, depending on what study you look at … 13! If anybody thinks that a patient can see 13 doctors not collaborating with each other and coordinating care and not wind up with some polypharmacy adverse event or materially conflicting advice … I don't know. Call me. I just do not understand how consistent excellence in patient outcomes or patient care even could be achieved. That whole cliché the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing? That's a cliché for a reason, and I seriously suspect the entire field of medicine isn't weirdly excluded from it. So, first point: Collaboration/alignment is required amongst healthcare stakeholders for patients to get decent outcomes, especially patients with multiple chronic conditions. Payers gotta pay for the right stuff, and providers have to coordinate care. Otherwise, you wind up with all of the care gaps that PCPs currently working in systems with fragmented patient journeys are seeing. Here's the second point from earlier episodes: Financial toxicity is clinical toxicity. Patients are forgoing care they need and not taking drugs they need because they cannot afford them. This is not speculation. Trilliant Health just released a report that showed this. Healthcare utilization, if you subtract COVID care and behavioral health, might be permanently down. Other reports speculated that by 2030, a leading cause of death might be nonadherence due to cost concerns. Wayne Jenkins, MD, in episode 358, talks about a whole constellation of negative effects when patients can't afford care; and yeah … here we are. Patients cannot afford their care. They cannot afford premiums, deductibles, out-of-pockets. These are insured patients a lot of times we're talking about here. Also, this is not a “Medicaid” problem, as Dan Mendelson put in episode 385. So, go back and listen to the earlier shows for the who and the what and the why of the above and much more context; but nothing I've just said is stuff that I personally would regard as my personal opinion. There is one study after another that bears all this out. There is just one anecdote after another. Fragmented patient care and care that is way more expensive than a patient can afford is going to result in outcomes that are not, let's just say, super. Alright, all of this being said, does then aligning payers and providers, and providers collaborating with each other and coordinating care … if these things are done, do patient outcomes improve? Do care gaps reduce? Are patients more satisfied with their care? Said another way, when physician practices get paid to deliver health and not paid for sick care, does patient health actually improve? Why, yes. Yes, it does. Why do I say this? First of all, this very much seems to be the conclusion of CMS. Here's from the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation (CMMI). They released a report updating their strategic vision for implementing value-based care. One of the key new strategies focuses on creating greater care coordination between primary care doctors and specialists. What might be some of the success stories that precipitated the CMMI focusing their strategy on exactly what I've been running around squawking about for one to three years now? The ChenMed Case Study: ChenMed focuses on the most vulnerable patients and dramatically improves access for those patients, which has led to a 30% to 50% reduction in hospitalizations. They published there's been a 20% to 30% reduction of stroke. They've doubled six-month cancer survival rates and, in some cases, reduced heart failure readmissions by 50%, 70%, up to 90%. They see evidence that they are extending lives five or more years. How? By the providers being aligned with the payers and then also making sure that there is very coordinated care going on there. Johns Hopkins has a paper in JAMA that concluded that a care coordination model can be associated with improved outcomes, including substantial cost reduction. I was talking to Larry Bauer from FMEC, the Family Medicine Education Consortium; and he sent me probably a 40-page PDF of really great patient results when care is coordinated and payers are aligned to pay for health. As just one example, Dr. Daniel Hoefer from Sharp HealthCare, they have created what they call their Transitions program. And the idea is by moving aggressive care upstream via community-based palliative medicine, they have proven that the vast majority of people never need to see the inside of a hospital during the last year-ish of their life. The revolving door of hospitalization should be considered an archaic residual of a bygone era, as they put it. Again, this is very well-coordinated care with payer alignment. Do patients actually want this stuff? Before I get into our evidence here, just let me remind you that Kaiser is a payvider with a narrow network and also that Centivo is an innovative TPA (third-party administrator) pulling together narrow networks. On the podcast the other week, Dan Mendelson (EP385) from Morgan Health said that 40% of new employees are choosing lower-premium plans with either Kaiser or Centivo benefit designs. They are choosing lower-cost plans just as much for the lower premiums as for the care coordination and the “I don't want anybody between me and my doctor” messages. This is what happens when payers and providers are aligned. Nobody gets in the middle there. Heard a similar story from Nick Stefanizzi (EP383) from Northwell Direct. They're doing direct contracting with customers like Whole Foods. Everybody I talk to here is surprised how many employees are electing these kinds of plans. So, yeah … The Nuka System of Care in Alaska (EP312), where I get into this with Doug Eby, MD, MPH, CPE, in great detail. But wow, just wow there. With the Nuka ecosystem, they went from basically a failing mess into the health system that many consider to be the best or one of the best in the country at something like half the price per patient than in mainland US. They have this whole thing where they integrate specialty care into primary care. They have established an agreed-upon referral patterns and also an agreed-upon way to work with specialists that very much involves PCPs talking to specialists so that the whole person, the whole patient can be considered. They structure their whole program around paying for health and getting paid for health. Also, Nuka has a 96% patient satisfaction rate. So again, patients are certainly on board with this. If I was gonna sum up these five examples, I would certainly say that any physician practices looking to take better care of patients, rediscover clinical excellence and focus … get aligned with payers (CMS or otherwise). That's step one and certainly easier said than done. After that, work to collaborate with fellow providers. All of these entities that we just talked about who can brag about their patient outcomes and care quality are doing both of the stuff that we just talked about: aligning and collaborating with payers and other providers. They are also, at the same time, folding three other things into their strategy. And this other stuff is required because you kinda can't align with payers and you can't collaborate unless you're doing these three things at the same time: standardizing best-practice care, getting and using data, and using good technology in conjunction with that data. All of this in the service of this last thing, which is turning transactions into relationships. Human relationships. Relationships with patients. As Rebecca Etz, PhD, and her team at The Larry A. Green Center have shown quite crisply (discussed in episode 295), no relationship with a patient means worse outcomes for patients. End of sentence. But then there's also having relationships with colleagues and relationships with other docs who have patients in common. It is really tough to coordinate care without relationships, and it's also not very fulfilling. Alright, moving on to another question: Are doctors happy in these models where payers are paying for health and where it's a must-have to coordinate across the continuum of care? Well, I can tell you a couple of things. ChenMed has been named to Newsweek's “Most Loved Workplaces” list. Nuka System has a 93% employee satisfaction rating. Considering that elsewhere one out of two family practice docs are burned out, this is pretty striking in contrast. Also, here's another quote from a physician leader about good accountable care where health is being paid for. He said, “This has changed our physicians' lives … the idea that we can get paid to actually take care of people. To actually have data to send people to the best for follow-up care, who we know will continue and contribute to the patients' well-being in the same way. Burnout reduces here because burnout is moral injury in a cheap Halloween costume.” I'm really sorry I can't remember who said that because it's a great quote and so true. Larry Bauer from FMEC also told me the other day that DPC (Direct Primary Care) conferences have never had a session on burnout. Larry says he tells people if they want to see what 350 happy primary care docs look like, they need to come to a DPC summit. They're happy as clams. Now, while DPC isn't the “be entirely responsible for downstream costs” kind of accountable care, what is going on in DPC is, these docs are accountable to their patients and for the care that they are providing. Here's another anecdote which I think, in sum, adds up to a “yes” if the question is “Do docs really like this stuff?” I had a long conversation with Scott Conard, MD, the other day about his work with clinics in Queens. What I learned was, these clinics, they used to have waiting rooms overflowing with patients who had been waiting the entire day to be seen and just ... it wasn't good for anybody. Fast-forward a few years—high-risk patients get seen fast, and there's time for care coordination. Patients are happy; outcomes are better. But here is why I inferred that the docs are happy in this model: There was a new office manager. New office manager starts trying to go back to the old way, the “normal” way that practices are run. And it was mutiny on the bounty. No way no how were those docs going back. I took that as a pretty solid testimonial if I ever heard one. So, I don't know if anybody has done any sort of global physician satisfaction studies to determine if physicians who are in pay-for-health models where they're collaborating with one another are happier and less burned out than doctors in the current fee-for-service (FFS) environment. But I can tell you that if somebody did do this, there's gonna be one really big confounding factor … and this is what it is: There's a world of difference between a well-functioning accountable care model and a very terrible one. I have had a series of (as I said earlier) pretty heartbreaking, honestly, conversations with PCPs around the country who think value-based care pretty much sucks. For the big why on this, listen to the show with Dan O'Neill (EP359). But in short, in “not quite there yet” value-based care models, one's still in the two canoes messy middle (ie, they've got one foot in the value-based care world and one foot firmly in the FFS world). Life can get really hard for PCPs especially because they get the worst of both. They get to be care gap cowboys and cowgirls while, at the same time, having to do all of the FFS coding; and they still have seven-minute visits and RVU targets. There's not really great population health. Nobody's figured out how to defragment the care journey. And then there's the whole measurement industrial complex that gets piled on top of their day. I cannot stress this enough. Alright, so let's just check off our last big question here for the money motivated. This especially comes up when talking with especially specialists, who are doing very well, thank you very much—financially, I mean—in the current FFS status quo. So, let's not avoid the elephant in the room. Is taking on risk, getting paid for value, being accountable to deliver great results, deliver health … is it worth it from a financial standpoint? Alright, let's take a look at this. Here's from show 343 with David Carmouche, MD, when he was at Ochsner. He said, “Anything that we can do to convert the effective reimbursement in the Medicare space to something greater than Medicare fee-for-service rates, we think that this is in our best interest. So, we have gone very heavy into moving as much of our Medicare business into risk as we can. And we will take full capitation under a couple of Medicare advantage contracts.” So, that includes primary care as well as specialist care. Let's talk about One Medical for a moment. Five percent of One Medical members account for 51% of the company's revenue. You know which 5% account for that 51% of revenue? Right, the at-risk ones that are part of the Iora value-based medical group with a capitated model. That is a pretty strong financial endorsement there. There's a whole show with Brian Klepper, PhD (EP335), about why private equity is willing to pay $55,000 per patient in a capitated model. So, some actuaries somewhere think this is a very financially sound way to go. I am not sure if I would die on this hill, but I'd also say there's likely a downside to making zero effort on the accountable care front and banking on FFS being a forever cash cow. Everything I've just said, not a secret. Not at all. You see CMS moving in the “making providers accountable” direction. I already mentioned this and what CMMI is up to. But this is very much an overall strategy. Currently, 44% of traditional Medicare beneficiaries with parts A and B are in a care relationship with some accountability for quality and total cost of care. CMS aims to boost that number to 60% by 2024 and 100% by 2030. In sum across the industry, it looks like 19.6% of healthcare payments were risk-based in APMs (Alternative Payment Models) that include upside and downside. This is a couple points higher than in 2020, but it's not like it's skyrocketing. So, that might be a curb to our enthusiasm. However, in 2022 here, looking forward to 2023, you know who besides CMS is going heavy on trying to pay for health and not sick care? I have never seen my entire career more CEOs of Fortune 500 companies—CEOs!—who are actively taking a role in their employee health benefits. I think it's because they can't afford not to at this point. Again, financial toxicity is very, very real for employed individuals. Here's something that Jeff Hogan called out from a McKinsey report: “VBC [value-based care] models that show promise in the employer context include high-performance provider networks with cost- and quality-based metrics, episode-based payments for standardized patient-care journeys … , and risk-based contracts for end-to-end management of high-cost conditions.” You know what all those things have in common that I just rattled off? Only high-performing docs are in network—and this includes specialists. I say all this to say, I don't know, if I were a practitioner of healthcare and I knew that all this data was floating around about my practice patterns and given that doctors that don't perform well as per that data are being excluded from networks … I don't know, just given all of the signs that are pointing in a risk-based direction, learning to take on risk just seems like—I was never a Boy Scout, but the whole “Be prepared” seems pretty sound advice right now, especially given how long it takes to get good at this.   For more information, go to aventriahealth.com. To listen to the playlist of the mentioned episodes, click here. Each week on Relentless Health Value, Stacey uses her voice and thought leadership to provide insights for healthcare industry decision makers trying to do the right thing. Each show features expert guests who break down the twists and tricks in the medical field to help improve outcomes and lower costs across the care continuum. Relentless Health Value is a top 100 podcast on iTunes in the medicine category and reaches tens of thousands of engaged listeners across the healthcare industry. In addition to hosting Relentless Health Value, Stacey is co-president of QC-Health, a benefit corporation finding cost-effective ways to improve the health of Americans. She is also co-president of Aventria Health Group, a consultancy working with clients who endeavor to form collaborations with payers, providers, Pharma, employer organizations, or patient advocacy groups.   05:03 When physician practices get paid to deliver health and not paid for sick care, does patient health actually improve? 05:46 What is the ChenMed Case Study? 06:26 Can a care coordination model be associated with improved outcomes, including substantial cost reduction? 06:38 Are there examples of really great patient results when care is coordinated and payers are aligned to pay for health? 07:29 Do patients actually want this stuff? 07:46 Are employees choosing lower-cost plans just as much for the lower premiums as for the care coordination and the “I don't want anybody between me and my doctor” messages? 08:29 What is the Nuka System of Care in Alaska? 09:25 “I would certainly say that any physician practices looking to take better care of patients, rediscover clinical excellence and focus … get aligned with payers (CMS or otherwise). That's step one and certainly easier said than done.” 10:45 Are doctors happy in these models where payers are paying for health and where it's a must-have to coordinate across the continuum of care? 11:16 “This has changed our physicians' lives … the idea that we can get paid to actually take care of people. To actually have data to send people to the best for follow-up care, who we know will continue and contribute to the patients' well-being in the same way. Burnout reduces here because burnout is moral injury in a cheap Halloween costume.” —Physician leader 13:25 “There's a world of difference between a well-functioning accountable care model and a very terrible one.” 13:59 “Life can get really hard for PCPs especially because they get the worst of both. They get to be care gap cowboys and cowgirls while, at the same time, having to do all of the FFS coding; and they still have seven-minute visits and RVU targets.” 14:43 Is taking on risk worth it from a financial standpoint? 16:05 “There's likely a downside to making zero effort on the accountable care front and banking on FFS being a forever cash cow.” 17:11 “I have never seen my entire career more CEOs of Fortune 500 companies—CEOs!—who are actively taking a role in their employee health benefits. I think it's because they can't afford not to at this point. Again, financial toxicity is very, very real for employed individuals.” 17:54 “Only high-performing docs are in network—and this includes specialists.”   For more information, go to aventriahealth.com. To listen to the playlist of the mentioned episodes, click here.   Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast When physician practices get paid to deliver health and not paid for sick care, does patient health actually improve? Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What is the ChenMed Case Study? Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Can a care coordination model be associated with improved outcomes, including substantial cost reduction? Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Are there examples of really great patient results when care is coordinated and payers are aligned to pay for health? Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Do patients actually want this stuff? Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Are employees choosing lower-cost plans just as much for the lower premiums as for the care coordination and the “I don't want anybody between me and my doctor” messages? Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What is the Nuka System of Care in Alaska? Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Are doctors happy in these models where payers are paying for health and where it's a must-have to coordinate across the continuum of care?” Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “There's a world of difference between a well-functioning accountable care model and a very terrible one.” Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Is taking on risk worth it from a financial standpoint? Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “There's likely a downside to making zero effort on the accountable care front and banking on FFS being a forever cash cow.” Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Only high-performing docs are in network—and this includes specialists.” Our host, Stacey, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Dr Eric Bricker (Encore! EP351), Al Lewis, Dan Mendelson, Wendell Potter, Brian Klepper (Encore! EP335), Dr Aaron Mitchell (EP382), Karen Root, Mark Miller, AJ Loiacono, Josh LaRosa, Stacey Richter (INBW35), Rebecca Etz (Encore! EP295), Olivia Webb (Encore! EP337), Mike Baldzicki, Lisa Bari, Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington  

If you listened to the show with Dan O'Neill (EP359), you would know this already. But let me tell you: If you're a provider, even a provider very confident in your office's ability to confer better patient health, you will still have a super hard time getting off the fee-for-service (FFS) hamster wheel. Why? Because it's hard to find payer contracts out there which will reward you (the provider) for actually taking care of your patients and to be accountable for the value of healthcare that you deliver. This is a tangled web we weave because, despite some payers offering risk-based contracts, a lot of times there's some IPA (independent physician association) or other “holder of the actual payer contract” who does not pass along these contract terms. These IPAs or health systems even sometimes just keep paying docs or provider offices FFS even if they themselves have a risk-based or capitated or value-based-of-any-kind agreement. If I actually kept track of the issues raised in the emails I receive from docs, there's one thing that I would likely find amongst the most frequently cited points of consternation: Physicians or practices or CINs (clinically integrated networks) or ACOs (accountable care organizations) want contracts where they can do right by patients. These are the good docs. These are the ones burned out and suffering from moral injury because physicians, PAs (physician assistants), nurses, clinicians who actually follow up and coordinate care and spend time making accurate diagnoses instead of cramming in more procedures … these are the clinicians who want to do the right thing and are also the ones who are getting dinged on performance reports and paid less. Bottom line here, for a physician practice to transform itself from an FFS machine cranking out volume but not necessarily health or care, the office has to have a high enough percentage of their patients in value-based arrangements to make it actually feasible to transform. It is only when they hit a tipping point of enough volume, enough patients in risk-based contracts that they can afford to be accountable for their results. At that point, yeah, everybody wins—doctors, patients, actually the entire community wins because when a local practice transforms, all of their patients tend to benefit at some level from the new processes and procedures and standardizations and pop health systems that get put in place. So, let's move forward with this with all haste, shall we? Why aren't we? What's the problem here? Well, there are lots of problems, don't get me wrong. But a big one is self-insured employers on the whole are not offering any sort of accountable care arrangements to the providers in their community. This is 150 million patient lives we're talking about here—a huge chunk of many providers' patient panels. Self-insured employers have a really big opportunity to level up the care in their whole community due to the spillover effect when a provider practice transforms itself because it has enough patients to do so. But these employers are stuck. They are paralyzed. They are doing the same thing this year that they've done last year, and therefore their whole community is equally stuck in a smorgasbord of suboptimal FFS goings-on. So, offering accountable care contracts is one thing (a very big consequential thing) that is also one of the five things self-insured employers can do to improve employee health that I talk about in this healthcare podcast with Dan Mendelson. Dan Mendelson, my guest today, also wrote a Forbes article listing out these five things. Here are all five things that Dan mentions in one handy list: Expand availability of accountable care models to improve the care experience, quality, and affordability at a local level. For a deep dive on this, listen to the show with Dave Chase (EP374). Invest in the data access needed to assess health outcomes. For a deep dive on this, listen to the show with Cora Opsahl (EP372). Align employees' health benefits with pop health outcomes. For a deep dive on this, listen to the show with Mark Fendrick, MD (Encore! EP308). Prioritize care models that can meet employees wherever they are. For a deep dive on the DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) aspect of this, listen to the show with Monica Lypson, MD, MHPE (EP322). Make care navigation a central part of the benefits package and experience. I am looking for an expert to take a deep dive on care navigation who does not work for a care navigation company. Hit me up if you know someone (again, who does not work for a care navigation company). My guest today, Dan Mendelson, is CEO of Morgan Health at JPMorgan Chase. He previously founded Avalere Health. Before that, Dan served as associate director for health at the Office of Management and Budget. Besides exploring the why and the what for each of the five things employers should do right now, I also wanted to find out from Dan what's going on at Morgan Health and how they are looking to help self-insured employers who want to do these five things actually do them.   You can learn more at the Morgan Health Web site. Dan Mendelson is the chief executive officer of Morgan Health at JPMorgan Chase & Co. He oversees a business unit at JPMorgan Chase focused on accelerating the delivery of new care models that improve the quality, equity, and affordability of employer-sponsored healthcare. Mendelson was previously founder and CEO of Avalere Health, a healthcare advisory company based in Washington, DC. He also served as operating partner at Welsh Carson, a private equity firm. Before founding Avalere, Mendelson served as associate director for health at the Office of Management and Budget in the Clinton White House. Mendelson currently serves on the boards of Vera Whole Health and Champions Oncology (CSBR). He is also an adjunct professor at the Georgetown University McDonough School of Business. He previously served on the boards of Coventry Healthcare, HMS Holdings, Pharmerica, Partners in Primary Care, Centrexion, and Audacious Inquiry. Mendelson holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Oberlin College and a Master of Public Policy (MPP) from the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.   05:53 Why did Dan direct his article about health benefits at CEOs? 06:56 What does an accountable care model mean to a self-insured employer? 08:50 “This alignment of value will never work … if the 150 million Americans … getting their health insurance through their employer are not also aligned in the same way.” 12:21 “We're offering them a higher level of service.” 12:32 “Everything that we do is intended to be scalable and not just for us.” 13:01 “We have an obligation to do better for our employees.” 15:44 “Employers need to understand, the only way to get outstanding care is locally.” 18:21 Encore! EP206 with Ashok Subramanian and EP358 with Wayne Jenkins, MD. 19:10 Why is getting quantitative metric data important? 19:42 Encore! EP308 with Mark Fendrick, MD. 21:50 “This is a much broader vision of accountable care than … primary care.” 23:41 “Until everything is aligned, the employer is just not going to be providing an optimal product.” 24:32 “There are substantial issues with … health equity, and employers are paying for the care of 150 million Americans in this country.” 26:15 Is digital health access important for creating meaningful relationships between patients and providers? 30:43 What is the myth that employers need to tackle? 31:10 Why is care navigation important for employees? 32:37 EP334 with Sunita Desai, PhD. You can learn more at the Morgan Health Web site. @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why did Dan direct his article about health benefits at CEOs? @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What does an accountable care model mean to a self-insured employer? @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “This alignment of value will never work if the 150 million Americans getting their health insurance through their employer are not aligned in the same way.” @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “We're offering them a higher level of service.” @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Everything that we do is intended to be scalable and not just for us.” @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “We have an obligation to do better for our employees.” @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Employers need to understand, the only way to get outstanding care is locally.” @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why is getting quantitative metric data important? @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “This is a much broader vision of accountable care than … primary care.” @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Until everything is aligned, the employer is just not going to be providing an optimal product.” @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “There are substantial issues with … health equity, and employers are paying for the care of 150 million Americans in this country.” @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Is digital health access important for creating meaningful relationships between patients and providers? @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What is the myth that employers need to tackle? @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why is care navigation important for employees? @dnmendelson of @JPMorgan discusses #selfinsuredemployers on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Wendell Potter, Brian Klepper (Encore! EP335), Dr Aaron Mitchell (EP382), Karen Root, Mark Miller, AJ Loiacono, Josh LaRosa, Stacey Richter (INBW35), Rebecca Etz (Encore! EP295), Olivia Webb (Encore! EP337), Mike Baldzicki, Lisa Bari, Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein

Here's a Milton Friedman quote: “There is one and only one social responsibility of business—to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it [that entity] stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud.” Okay, so this is Friedman, Milton Friedman, pretty much the most influential advocate of free market capitalism, stating quite clearly that an entity's greatest responsibility lies in the satisfaction of its shareholders. His nod to social responsibility or ethics of any kind comes at the end there, where he says that for free market capitalism to function, there must be open and free competition and no fraud. So, let's compare this to what's going on in the payer space in the healthcare industry. First off, there was just a chart in the New York Times the other day where pretty much every major payer except one got a check in a box for being accused of fraud. Interestingly, if you look in the comments section of that article, people posted links where that one outlier was being accused of fraud. So, I'm not sure what's up with that, but yeah, let's just conclude that there's fraud in the payer space. On to Friedman's requirement for open and free competition. As we all know, there are a few very powerful, very big, consolidated entities who control the vast majority of the market with both regulatory capture as well as the capital to continue to buy more and more adjacent businesses, as well as any threatening upstarts and just close them down. As I often hear said, we're gonna wind up with single-payer healthcare but maybe not the single payer most people are thinking of. If anyone thinks that in the highly consolidated payer space there is open and free competition, send me a note. I'd love to hear from you. I mean, even if what I've just said is 50% or 75% true, we're still outside of Friedman's definition of functional free market capitalism in the payer space. I wanna shift gears now to discuss the rules of the game, and this is really the topic of today's podcast. Friedman said in that quote above that there are rules of the game that entities abide by. Therefore, these rules of the game are inarguably consequential. And in this healthcare podcast we're talking about how these rules of the game echo when it comes to payers—companies that are publicly traded on Wall Street with shareholders. So, that's your spoiler for where this episode is headed. But before we go there, let me just say one or two things to the many listeners who I would consider certainly part of our Relentless Tribe who also work for payers. If you work for a payer, you have a few options. One of them is to do as much social good as you can to offset even a little piece of the not so good going on. The other is to help those working elsewhere in the organization to understand the full impact of their actions and the hope that they figure out a way to be less financially toxic to members. You have already taken the first step, because simply by listening to the show, you see the problems with clear eyes. The larger question, though, is this: Is it possible to do well by doing good vis-à-vis leveraging the power of market forces to efficiently help patients, even if shareholders are demanding otherwise? Well, it ain't working out so great so far, just comparing us to the rest of the world. But the more white hats we have, the better. So, keep advocating for patients in the belly of the beast, and there's always a whistle around to blow should it come to that. Meanwhile, let's focus our clear eyes on where we are from a patient's eye view—just briefly here, because we've discussed this all before in great depth. Here's some stats to a Commonwealth Fund issue brief. In the first half of 2020, first quarter, one out of four adults in employer plans were functionally uninsured due to high out-of-pocket costs or high deductibles. Listen to the show with Wayne Jenkins, MD (EP358), for a deep dive on the human consequences of having insurance but not being able to afford to use it. We're in a place in this country where the majority (67%) of adults who reported medical bill or debt problems was insured when that care was provided. That's from Kaiser Family Foundation. There's 100 million Americans with medical debt. These numbers are staggering. What's the why with all of this? It's our dysfunctional healthcare benefits market. Listen to the show with Kevin Schulman, MD (EP366), for more on this at the systemic level. But today we're talking about one entity in this dysfunction, which are payers, insurance carriers. I invited Wendell Potter on the show to ask him to explain how for-profit payers contribute to our dysfunction, creating inequality and wage stagnation. You see this happening as well as I do, right? On one hand, we have entities claiming all kinds of worthy and beautiful things in press releases and maybe even doing pilot programs—pilots, which are great, and I wish they did more of them and scaled them more broadly, but then premiums go up the following year … again. Being blunt here, it's hard to attain broad success in improving health outcomes or improving disparities in care when getting and/or using their healthcare benefits is toxic financially and disproportionately impacts lower-income communities. The reality is, private payers have not been able to bring costs of care down. What they have done instead is settle more and more out of pockets with patients or with taxpayers or with employers. Speaking of more and more out-of-pocket costs, although this is not the focus of the show, I am not giving consolidated health systems a pass here, obviously. But in this episode, we're focusing on why payers behave as they do contributing to the dysfunctional healthcare benefit system in this country. I could not have been more thrilled to have an opportunity to speak with Wendell Potter. His name most likely precedes him. But in brief, for much of his early career, Wendell Potter was a health insurance executive. After 20 years, he left his job after a crisis of conscience. Wendell testified before then-Senator Rockefeller's Commerce Committee at a hearing about how healthcare companies actually operate. From there, he went on to write books and ultimately to start the Center for Health & Democracy.   You can learn more by following Wendell and signing up for his newsletter at wendellpotter.substack.com. Wendell Potter has more than four decades of experience as a communications professional, including a career as a reporter and a communication executive at the country's largest health insurers. After seeing firsthand how strategic PR and lobbying are used unfairly to tilt the scales toward corporate interests against the people's interests, Wendell left his corporate career to advocate for meaningful healthcare reform. He made headlines in 2009 when he disclosed in Congressional testimony how insurance companies, as part of their efforts to boost profits, have contributed to spiraling healthcare costs and the growing number of Americans without health insurance. Since then, he has spoken at more than 200 public forums and authored the award-winning New York Times bestseller Deadly Spin: An Insurance Company Insider Speaks Out on How Corporate PR Is Killing Health Care and Deceiving Americans. He is also the author of Obamacare: What's in It for Me? What Everyone Needs to Know About the Affordable Care Act. His latest book, which he wrote with Nick Penniman, is Nation on the Take: How Big Money Corrupts Our Democracy and What We Can Do About It. Wendell leads two nonprofit advocacy organizations, Business Leaders for Health Care Transformation and the Center for Health & Democracy that convenes the Lower Out-of-Pocket NOW Coalition that pushes for reforms that lower and cap out-of-pocket costs in the United States.   07:01 What is the medical loss metric? 10:04 “The reality is, insurers have been jacking up premiums … for a long time.” 11:19 “It's a short-term game.” 14:10 “You're seeing that these companies are not doing a very good job … of controlling costs because they don't have the incentive.” 16:37 Why are payers hammering the individual PCPs? 17:40 Why does a Wall Street publicly traded payer care what their medical cost is as long as their premiums are higher? 20:07 EP366 with Kevin Schulman, MD. 22:32 How do payers ensure that they're controlling utilization? 25:40 “It's death by a thousand cuts.” 31:42 “Just like independent practice physicians are endangered, so are community pharmacists.” 33:11 Who runs our healthcare system? You can learn more by following Wendell and signing up for his newsletter at wendellpotter.substack.com.   @wendellpotter of @cforhd discusses #healthcareshareholders on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthpayers What is the medical loss metric? @wendellpotter of @cforhd discusses #healthcareshareholders on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthpayers “The reality is, insurers have been jacking up premiums … for a long time.” @wendellpotter of @cforhd discusses #healthcareshareholders on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthpayers “It's a short-term game.” @wendellpotter of @cforhd discusses #healthcareshareholders on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthpayers “You're seeing that these companies are not doing a very good job … of controlling costs because they don't have the incentive.” @wendellpotter of @cforhd discusses #healthcareshareholders on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthpayers Why are payers hammering the individual PCPs? @wendellpotter of @cforhd discusses #healthcareshareholders on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthpayers Why does a Wall Street publicly traded payer care what their medical cost is as long as their premiums are higher? @wendellpotter of @cforhd discusses #healthcareshareholders on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthpayers How do payers ensure that they're controlling utilization? @wendellpotter of @cforhd discusses #healthcareshareholders on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthpayers “It's death by a thousand cuts.” @wendellpotter of @cforhd discusses #healthcareshareholders on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthpayers “Just like independent practice physicians are endangered, so are community pharmacists.” @wendellpotter of @cforhd discusses #healthcareshareholders on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthpayers Who runs our healthcare system? @wendellpotter of @cforhd discusses #healthcareshareholders on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthpayers   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Nick Stefanizzi, Brian Klepper (Encore! EP335), Dr Aaron Mitchell (EP382), Karen Root, Mark Miller, AJ Loiacono, Josh LaRosa, Stacey Richter (INBW35), Rebecca Etz (Encore! EP295), Olivia Webb (Encore! EP337), Mike Baldzicki, Lisa Bari, Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker

It's been said that healthcare in this country will not be transformed because of some incremental government policy, nor will this industry transform because of some tech company who techs the crap out of healthcare. It's been said that the only way the healthcare industry in this country is going to fundamentally change is vis-à-vis a seismic shift in the way Americans view the healthcare industry in their understanding of what is going on and the extent to which it directly impacts lives. You and I, all of us, have heard pundits say every year for a decade (at least) that this revolution is a-comin' and that this year … no más. Americans cannot afford to pay any more in premiums or out of pocket. We have reached the brink. And year after year, we've discovered that, in fact, Americans as patients, members, and taxpayers can pay more and are willing to do so. Well, maybe right now we are actually cresting the chop. Medicare can now negotiate drug prices legislation. Maybe it's a bit of a watershed moment here. In this healthcare podcast, I'm talking with Mark Miller, PhD, EVP of healthcare at Arnold Ventures; and this is what we talk about today: the why now—the why, all of a sudden, after years of talking and griping and nothing happening, how right now, what constellation of factors transpired that enabled Medicare drug price negotiation to become law. You need to listen to the show to get the context, but here's the seven main reasons by my counting that Mark Miller talks about in this episode: The sensitivity of the public to just healthcare costs in general, Pharma being an easy-to-spot component of those healthcare costs Sensitivity of policy makers to Pharma's R&D claims, and non-industry-sponsored information coming out that tempers some of those research and development claims that Pharma has been making Sensitivity that innovation isn't a homogenous broad stroke when it comes to new drugs. There's a difference between breakthrough innovations versus me-too-type drugs. Consider some new combination drug that's, I don't know, two generics and costs $2000 a month. There's eyes on that kind of stuff, and if Pharma's reputation travels in an industry-wide block, this compounds our #3 point here. Sensitivity of innovation in the future versus people getting access right now to today's innovations. If too many people (ie, voters) can't get access to today's meds, it's a reach to expect them to worry too much about their future selves where, in all likelihood, they are thinking that they still wouldn't have access to the drugs. The landscape shifted, but pharma talking points did not—and the result was labeled “tone deaf” by some. Voters wanted aggressive actions as a result of the aforementioned constellation of factors, and a majority of Congress people responded and either voted yes or didn't protest overly hard, even if they didn't. Patient voices became more sophisticated. While they still might have issues with PBMs (pharmacy benefit managers) and/or insurance carriers, there's a growing perception that the story here is more nuanced and Pharma is in that mix. This is what we talk about in this episode: the why now, exactly and specifically. So thrilled to have had this conversation with Mark Miller, who has had, and continues to have, such a storied career. In brief, Mark Miller ran MedPAC (Medicare Payment Advisory Commission) for 15 years. That's a big deal. He also has held other roles at CMS and the Urban Institute. Now, Mark is at Arnold Ventures, as aforementioned, which is a philanthropic organization. He oversees Arnold's work in healthcare. One last thing: The legislation that just passed also includes a few other parts that impacts drugs. A big one is limiting the catastrophic Medicare Part D out-of-pockets to beneficiaries to $2000. And then there's also an inflation rebate. So, there's a rebate back to Medicare if Pharma raises its prices faster than the inflation rate. You can learn more at arnoldventures.org.  Mark E. Miller, PhD, leads Arnold Ventures' work to lower the cost and improve the value of healthcare. He has more than 30 years of experience developing and implementing health policy, including prior positions as the executive director of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, assistant director of Health and Human Resources at the Congressional Budget Office, deputy director of health plans at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, health financing branch chief at the Office of Management and Budget, and senior research associate at the Urban Institute. 04:45 Why did Medicare's ability to negotiate on drug pricing happen now? 06:35 What's different about the drug market today that allowed Medicare to gain the ability to negotiate drug pricing? 12:08 How has innovation played into drug price negotiations? 12:40 “If you limit profits, you can end up limiting innovation.” 14:03 Why was the distinction between more drugs and innovative drugs important to changing the landscape of the drug market? 15:49 More versus new and future versus now in the drug market. 19:59 “As the landscape was shifting, Pharma didn't shift with it.” 23:00 How did voters change the landscape in drug pricing? 24:39 “Pharma did not have exclusive control over the patients' voice.” 29:59 “The industry would largely like to just stick with the patents that they have.” 30:16 “Of course, it's competition that ultimately drives innovation.” 31:30 “This is an exquisitely complicated market.” You can learn more at arnoldventures.org.   @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why did Medicare's ability to negotiate on drug pricing happen now? @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What's different about the drug market today that allowed Medicare to gain the ability to negotiate drug pricing? @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast How has innovation played into drug price negotiations? @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “If you limit profits, you can end up limiting innovation.” @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why was the distinction between more drugs and innovative drugs important to changing the landscape of the drug market? @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast More versus new and future versus now in the drug market. @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “As the landscape was shifting, Pharma didn't shift with it.” @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast How did voters change the landscape in drug pricing? @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Pharma did not have exclusive control over the patients' voice.” @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “The industry would largely like to just stick with the patents that they have.” @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Of course, it's competition that ultimately drives innovation.” @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “This is an exquisitely complicated market.” @MarkMiller_DC discusses #medicare #drugprices on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! AJ Loiacono, Josh LaRosa, Stacey Richter (INBW35), Rebecca Etz (Encore! EP295), Olivia Webb (Encore! EP337), Mike Baldzicki, Lisa Bari, Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins  

This show with AJ Loiacono is different than others you may have heard with him because in this healthcare podcast, we are not talking about PBMs (pharmacy benefit managers). We're talking about brokers and EBCs (employee benefit consultants). So, say I'm a self-insured employer. Here's the big question: Is my broker or EBC helping me make the right decisions, or is he or she helping me make decisions that will make them the most money? While there are some amazing and totally above-board EBCs and brokers out there, unfortunately, caveat emptor is a thing. Buyer beware, that is. Too many self-serving and I'm sure very charming sharks are out there circling plan sponsors. It is currently a fact that some EBCs and brokers and even TPAs (third-party administrators) or PBMs or others take hidden kickbacks or fees or percentages. They make a lot of money, maybe the most money, in these secret ways. All this money, money paid in secret backroom deals—let's not lose track, these dollars increase the total prices paid by plan sponsors and employees. Now, I say this to say that my guest today, AJ Loiacono, calls 2022, right now, a “magical moment” for plan sponsors—and for straight-shooting EBCs and PBMs and all the others who are actually doing the right thing by their clients also. It's because of the Consolidated Appropriations Act (CAA), which states quite clearly that plan sponsors can ask their healthcare and benefits service providers to disclose the money that they are making off of the plan—all of the money, not just the direct fees. The CAA went into effect last December (December 2021), and contrary to what some people have said or may believe, it is in force right now. The field memo went out on 12/31/2021. So, the CAA is the rule right now. And in fact, the CAA makes it imperative under ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act) to do what I just said: Plan sponsors must disclose the monies that they are paying out on behalf of employees and ensure that those fees are reasonable and free from conflict. If you're the fiduciary of the plan, you gotta disclose all these indirect and direct compensations of the people that you are paying or the people that you are paying who may be kicking back dollars to other people you are working with, unbeknownst to you. The Department of Labor is putting as much emphasis right now on healthcare as they put on 401(k) plans in the early 2000s, so this is a big deal—or it should be—for plan sponsors. So obviously, in order to comply with the CAA, self-insured employers should be requesting from their EBCs and brokers or others that they disclose, in writing, how much money they are making off the plan. You can see why this disclosure would be necessary if the plan sponsor is responsible to determine if those payments are reasonable and seem to be free from conflict, right? You can't evaluate something you do not know about, and if you don't know about it, the plan sponsor is the one at risk. Ignorance is not an excuse here. Here's one example: What if the EBC or TPA is collecting a $40 payment per prescription from the PBM? Wait … what? Some plan sponsor is paying $40 per script in, I guess you'd call it, a commission? Yes, that is a rumored example—$40/Rx. It is basically full-on arbitrage, and if anyone disagrees, let me know why and how it's not. Or let's say the EBC is making, say, $6 per script payable by the PBM, and this sum should be mailed quarterly to a PO box in another state. This was a condition, by the way, for a PBM to win an RFP (request for proposal) that the EBC wrote and picked the winner of. Yeah, you as the plan sponsor really probably want to know that this is going on because it's your butt on the line. Maybe they are happening right now to you if you haven't gotten the disclosures from your EBC or broker. So, in sum, the CAA is in effect right now. Penalties can be levied right now against plan sponsors. For a deep dive into the CAA, listen to the show with Christin Deacon (EP342) from last year.   What's the process if I'm an employer plan sponsor? Step 1: Request in writing the dollars that your EBC or broker is making off of you. Similar to the advice that you'll hear often on this show, ask for actual dollars, not a percentage of this or that. Ask for how much money did you (broker or EBC) make off each program that you recommended to us, and what did that total up to. Once you make that request, the EBC/broker/TPA (whoever you're asking) has 30 or 90 days to respond, depending on who you ask. But if they do not respond, then you, the employer, should report them to the Department of Labor. Keep this in mind: Once that EBC or broker is reported for failure to comply by anybody, meaning likely some other employer, it is only a matter of time before that information becomes public. And the second that info becomes public, I guarantee you that there's some attorney out there just waiting to file a class action lawsuit against every other self-insured employer who uses that EBC/broker because everybody else out there is now out of compliance. Right? I'm not a lawyer and I am certainly not a class action ambulance chaser, but even I can figure out that strategy. AJ Loiacono has been on this podcast before talking about PBMs, and in this episode he delivers, talking about the shenanigans of some brokers and how the jig is now up. AJ is the CEO of Capital Rx, which is a PBM 2.0, as they call it. To see how the CAA is playing out, you can read about one real-life example of a school district's lawsuit against an insurance consultant.   You can learn more at cap-rx.com and find resources through law firms. Anthony J. “AJ” Loiacono is the co-founder and CEO of Capital Rx, one of the fastest-growing health technology companies in America. He has over 20 years of experience in pharmacy benefits, finance, and software development. AJ's mission is to create the first efficient market for prescription prices and provide employer groups with the highest standard of patient care. AJ has spent his career studying the pharmaceutical supply chain and producing engineering solutions that have continually redefined the pharmacy benefit industry to achieve this goal. Prior to Capital Rx, AJ was a co-founder of Truveris, where he served for eight years as CEO, CIO, and board member, leading the company to record growth (Deloitte FAST 500 and Crain's Fast 50). Before Truveris, AJ co-founded SMS Partners, a joint venture with Realogy (RLGY), and in 2010 exited the partnership with a buyout. In his first venture, AJ started Victrix, a pharmaceutical supply chain consultancy, and successfully sold the company to Chrysalis Solutions in 2007. AJ is a graduate of Manhattanville College, where he studied finance while playing varsity soccer and rugby. 06:03 Who can get in trouble for mismanaging employee funds? 06:31 Who can begin the cycle for annual review? 07:53 “When you talk about conflicts of interest, they're everywhere.” 13:17 “You're paying for access.” 13:38 Why is it important to request that they disclose direct and indirect compensation? 14:08 What are the layers to these hidden fees and compensations? 18:17 What is a reasonable fee for a good plan admin? 19:32 “I think people need to step back and say, ‘How many different ways are they getting compensated?'” 24:57 “The compensation is not just unreasonable, but if they were to move it, they would lose access to an entire column of revenue.” 25:13 “For every good broker consultant, there's a horrible individual lurking out there and it's easy to figure out: Ask for them to disclose their fees.” 28:14 “You can't win if you can't even pay the house fee to come in.” 31:42 Why do you need to ask for disclosure, and what do you need to ask specifically? 32:27 What are some of the characteristics of a good plan consultant? You can learn more at cap-rx.com and find resources through law firms.   AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Who can get in trouble for mismanaging employee funds? AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Who can begin the cycle for annual review? AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “When you talk about conflicts of interest, they're everywhere.” AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “You're paying for access.” AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why is it important to request that they disclose direct and indirect compensation? AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What are the layers to these hidden fees and compensations? AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What is a reasonable fee for a good plan admin? AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “I think people need to step back and say, ‘How many different ways are they getting compensated?'” AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “The compensation is not just unreasonable, but if they were to move it, they would lose access to an entire column of revenue.” AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “For every good broker consultant, there's a horrible individual lurking out there and it's easy to figure out: Ask for them to disclose their fees.” AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “You can't win if you can't even pay the house fee to come in.” AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why do you need to ask for disclosure, and what do you need to ask specifically? AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What are some of the characteristics of a good plan consultant? AJ Loiacono of @cap_rx discusses #ebcs, #brokers, and #plansponsors on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Josh LaRosa, Stacey Richter (INBW35), Rebecca Etz (Encore! EP295), Olivia Webb (Encore! EP337), Mike Baldzicki, Lisa Bari, Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova

Okay, so … telehealth for Medicare patients. Currently, there's payment parity, meaning a clinician gets paid the same amount for a Medicare patient visit regardless of whether that patient comes in the office or has a telehealth encounter. Right? Or did that end already? And if it didn't end, how much longer will payment parity continue? Also, is it the same for commercial and Medicaid patients? Congress makes rules for Medicare patients, but is it Congress that makes the rules for commercial and/or Medicaid telehealth reimbursement rates? Or how do those reimbursement decisions get made? What about the doing telehealth across state lines thing … the idea that if I'm a doc in New York, I can take a telehealth appointment with a patient in Arizona even though I am technically not licensed in Arizona? And who's in charge of that? Yeah, I went into today's conversation with Josh LaRosa, VP at Wynne Health Group, with a lot of questions. As you may suspect, this program is about telehealth. But just to level set on what we're not talking about, this interview does not dissect the “should we use the telehealth or should we not” question; and it does not get into best practices or equity concerns. For that info, listen to the show with Christian Milaster (EP320) or Liliana Petrova (EP357) or Ali Ucar (EP362) or Ian Tong, MD (EP347).  Also, we are not talking about the politics, per se, of who's for telehealth and who's against it. We also aren't drilling too far into the telehealth fraud cases that are coming to light right now, but of course we cannot resist talking about them a little bit. So, let me tell you what Josh LaRosa and I are, in fact, talking about in this healthcare podcast. We're specifically discussing the near-term future of CMS reimbursement for telehealth and the allowed so-called “flexibilities” for telehealth. We talk about a few of the why's behind why are policy makers doing some of the stuff that they are doing. And then we chat about the when, how long some of the new flexibilities and reimbursements that were permitted originally during the pandemic will continue. We touch on the Cerebral incident (I guess maybe you'd call it) and the potential DEA or legislative actions that may result from that as well. An interesting point that we dig into for a couple minutes is this one: Do not forget that the whole telehealth reimbursement debate (do I wanna call it?)—Should we cover it? Should we not cover it? And for how much?—this whole debate is part of a bigger debate. A much bigger debate, actually: the fee-for-service vs the not-fee-for-service debate. That's the larger context of all of this, and I think it's often overlooked. Nobody anywhere is limiting how often a practice who wants to use telehealth as part of some kind of risk-based or capitated thing can use telehealth. Why? Because in a capitated or bundle arrangement, from a Medicare trust fund perspective at least, telehealth visits are not equivalent to additional spend or additional volume. In a non-FFS environment, there's little chance of fraud also, really. Also, patient safety—arguably, probably—becomes much more of a practice concern. It gets a lot less rewarding to do unsafe things over telehealth when you don't get automatically paid to do them … and also paid to fix the problems that resulted from the unsafe things, which is the perverse beauty of FFS that we're all so familiar with. Acronym alert! PHE stands for public health emergency. A public health emergency is the thing the government declares, for example, during a pandemic. You can learn more at wynnehealth.com or by following on Twitter and LinkedIn.   Josh LaRosa, MPP, is a vice president at Wynne Health Group, focusing primarily on regulatory affairs with a focus on the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). His interests lie in delivery reform and innovations in payment and care delivery models. Josh also supports the firm's Public Option Institute, which studies the emergence of public option programs at the state level. Prior to Wynne Health Group, Josh consulted for the CMS Innovation Center, where he worked to implement, monitor, and spread learning garnered from the center's high-profile demonstration projects, most recently including the national primary care redesign effort, Comprehensive Primary Care Plus (CPC+). Josh holds a Master of Public Policy from the University of Virginia's Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy. He also completed his undergraduate studies at the University of Virginia, graduating cum laude with a BA in political philosophy, policy, and law. 04:09 What is the story with telehealth policy right now? 06:08 What kind of flexibilities did HHS allow with telehealth after the pandemic? 09:46 Are we still under these pandemic flexibilities for telehealth? 12:15 Why isn't the government just making greater access to telehealth permanent? 18:24 How does telehealth lend itself to the risk of overspending when dealing with an FFS model? 21:13 Does telehealth fit into the new CMS fee schedule? 22:55 How do states factor into the future of telehealth? 24:40 What is Arizona doing specifically to improve and ensure the future of telehealth? 30:56 What's next in store for telehealth at the congressional level? You can learn more at wynnehealth.com or by following on Twitter and LinkedIn.   @josh_larosa of @WynneHealth discusses #telehealth on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What is the story with telehealth policy right now? @josh_larosa of @WynneHealth discusses #telehealth on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What kind of flexibilities did HHS allow with telehealth after the pandemic? @josh_larosa of @WynneHealth discusses #telehealth on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Are we still under these pandemic flexibilities for telehealth? @josh_larosa of @WynneHealth discusses #telehealth on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why isn't the government just making greater access to telehealth permanent? @josh_larosa of @WynneHealth discusses #telehealth on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth How does telehealth lend itself to the risk of overspending when dealing with an FFS model? @josh_larosa of @WynneHealth discusses #telehealth on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Does telehealth fit into the new CMS fee schedule? @josh_larosa of @WynneHealth discusses #telehealth on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth How do states factor into the future of telehealth? @josh_larosa of @WynneHealth discusses #telehealth on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What is Arizona doing specifically to improve and ensure the future of telehealth? @josh_larosa of @WynneHealth discusses #telehealth on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What's next in store for telehealth at the congressional level? @josh_larosa of @WynneHealth discusses #telehealth on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Stacey Richter (INBW35), Rebecca Etz (Encore! EP295), Olivia Webb (Encore! EP337), Mike Baldzicki, Lisa Bari, Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai  

Late in May of this year, three-ish months ago, I did an inbetweenisode that explores the “why with the no collaboration” amongst healthcare stakeholders and what the lack of collaboration signifies. That episode got a lot of traction and engagement.   This episode that follows is a pretty good approximation of a presentation that I made at the MTVA (Moving to Value Alliance) symposium that happened in Connecticut this past June. If you listened to the earlier show about collaboration, this one is slightly different, shorter, and more to the point. So, let's start here: When you listen to any patient with a chronic condition talk about their challenges with the healthcare industry—and yes, if a patient has a chronic condition, more often than not, that is what they will talk about, their challenges … I went on Twitter just now, and it took me literally 13 minutes to collect what I'm going to say are 300+ Tweets written by patients and their caregivers complaining about their chronic care journey. That's the sad part. I don't mean to kick this off talking about problems; however, if you're gonna solve for something, it is important to understand what problem you are solving for. You do not want to be a solution looking around for a problem. So, let's fix this, this rampant problem problem that chronic care patients seem to have. Many of the patient challenges in the 300 Tweets that I just collected can be grouped into two major categories. And these two major challenge groups can really only be solved for with collaboration amongst healthcare stakeholders. So, let's dig in here. The first major patient challenge is what I'm gonna call the care gap problem. I was talking to someone at a provider organization the other day, and she had 8000 known care gaps with patients and [insert overwhelm here]. And these were just the care gaps that showed up on somebody's radar because they added up to a quality metric, which is sometimes the definition people use for what is a care gap. But if we think about all the other holes in patient care, the typical care gaps that are identified probably come not even close to the total number of actual care gaps: patients who can't see their specialist because they can't get ahold of their records from the local health system or no coordination of care. Coordination is probably another synonym for collaboration. This is a huge deal. People literally die because their clinician cannot get their biopsy results or whatever from somebody else. That's a care gap as deep as a grave. Or patients who keep showing up in the ER because they aren't getting the help or the meds or the accurate diagnoses or the treatment plan that they need to stay out of the ER ... My grandfather had heart failure. At the end of his life, he was probably in the ER once a month. It was sad and painful and expensive and totally unnecessary. But his PCP didn't seem to be collaborating with the specialists, and the ER I don't think was telling anybody what was going on. Right? Or patients who can't get a drug they need approved by their insurance, so they wind up in crisis. Crappy prior auth processes create care gaps. All of these things are gaps in care. Carly Eckert, MD (EP361), was on the podcast; and she made a crucial point for me. In fact, I tried to get her to come on the podcast originally to talk about care gaps and closing care gaps; but she categorically refused. Chronic care management, she said, should not be a game of whack-a-mole. It may be better than nothing, a game of whack-a-mole; but it is certainly not ideal.   Chronic care management by care gap is like cooking with a fire extinguisher. If we want to eliminate care gaps for reals, let's just not have care gaps. So, how do you go about not having care gaps, then? The goal should be to craft a non-fragmented patient journey. Let's figure out what a great care journey looks like ahead of time and then try to keep the patient on it. That is the best way to eliminate care gaps: proactively. You don't have them. Immediately, because I am a person of action, I went into my filing cabinet; and I actually found an example of a patient journey map amongst my papers that I had worked on years ago. You have probably seen one of these and may have some of your own patient journey maps tucked away in a binder in your office somewhere. Most people have them. There are a few things that they all have in common, irrespective of the disease state or the organization or anything. The things that they have in common are they are complicated flowcharts with a lot going on. Besides just being complicated, the other thing that patient journey maps all have in common is that there are multiple parties mentioned with roles in that patient journey. You're gonna have a PCP, a specialist or two, a hospital, a payer, a pharma company more than likely, a PBM maybe, maybe a community organization … Here's a quote that kinda sums that up from Dr. William Bestermann: “Improving chronic disease management is an enormous problem that requires multiple stakeholders coming together to combine new science, new systems, and new payment models in a comprehensive solution. No one person or organization can make progress that matters. The problem is too big.”   Is this obvious? I think it's pretty obvious. But yet, collaboration in general at the organizational level is less than common. With uncommon exceptions, you not only don't have multiple providers working together but—heaven forbid!—you have payers and providers or other entities working together. But just taking this back to the thrust of this conversation, the first major patient challenge can only be solved for with collaboration to create a non-fragmented patient journey, which reduces care gaps by avoiding care gaps in the first place. So, collaboration is a rate critical for a non-fragmented patient journey to eliminate care gaps that patients have big issues with. So now, let's move on now to the second big problem category that chronic care patients were Tweeting about in those Tweets that I collected: They can't afford their care. This crisis of affordability is a huge patient challenge that, it's not the only thing, but we can't solve for it without being collaborative, without having collaborative relationships along the patient journey. I don't really want to get into how much healthcare prices have skyrocketed, but healthcare prices have been inflating at 4x the cost of everything else. This causes mental health issues; it causes stress. There's a show with Wayne Jenkins from Centivo where we dig into this deeply. Listen to EP358.   It is inarguable at this point that financial toxicity is clinical toxicity. I have a folder on my computer where I chuck references for this statement, and at this point, I probably have 400 studies and articles that all say the same thing in different ways with different patient populations. Most of these patients are insured. By the way, just because you have insurance doesn't mean that you can afford to use it. And patients who cannot afford their care have worse clinical outcomes. Period. End of sentence. Minor sidebar because I was really like head exploding emoji this morning: I saw somebody in a forum today lashing out at patients suffering with crippling medical debt saying that these people really should take some personal responsibility for the financial choices that they have made. WTH? The entity not taking responsibility for people losing their life savings and their homes simply because they had the fortune of getting sick or injured, the entity that should be taking some responsibility here is a broken, profit-driven healthcare industry. Let me just add some fidelity to what I mean when I say “the healthcare industry,” which really should take some responsibility here for the financial toxicity that they themselves are creating. Consider that a lot of medical debt is of a balance bill nature and the people being pursued generally signed a contract which they did not understand the consequences of, because most of them had “insurance” and they certainly weren't given a quote up-front so that they could make a rational economic choice. So, let's add some fidelity: How do we make healthcare more affordable? Or how do we make the charges not a complete surprise at a minimum? How do we do that? Lots of ways, big and small, are required; but let's talk about one of them: Navigate patients to high-quality providers charging a fair price. Navigate patients to providers who do not do low-value things and who have practice patterns that are aligned with evidence-based medicine (ie, get employers and providers to direct contract, especially in non-FFS ways, especially as it relates to primary care where there are measurable outcomes or quality). ACOs or CINs (clinically integrated networks) who know how to refer to high-value specialists or hospitals is another example of a collaboration that can help with affordability. Some health plans and TPAs (third-party administrators) are starting to get really data-driven about how they go about this. Point being, to coordinate care to or amongst high-value providers, multiple parties have to be involved (ie, collaboration). So, in sum, we talked about two common and major patient problems, which are probably not a surprise to anyone listening. The two are a lack of coordinated care (patients falling into gigantic care gaps) and then also a lack of affordability. We know how to solve for both of these issues. Defragment care and steer patients to high-quality provider organizations/hospitals/CoEs with competitive prices. Collaborate in these two ways. So, why are so few doing it, then? You can always count on me to say the quiet part out loud, so here we go: The business model of most, many, lots of healthcare organizations, both for-profit and tax-exempt, is revenue maximization. As Kevin Schulman, MD, said on the podcast (EP366), it's not A or B; we have a dysfunctional healthcare benefits system in this country.   But nonetheless, if we want to identify a root cause for why with the no interoperability, why with the info blocking to prevent network leakage, why with the no collaboration … it's not a technical problem at its core. It's not a HIPAA concern, really, at its core. It's a business case problem. And I don't say this as any sort of castigation. I say this because it's actionable information. Tiptoeing around a thing that we all know just clutters our ability to come up with a solution that is actually going to work. Really understanding a pretty big root cause behind why needed collaborations don't happen is necessary. This level of introspection is required for those who are mission driven to find others who are similarly mission driven to get a collaboration over the line. But the good news is success stories abound. It's my belief the healthcare industry won't be transformed in one giant turn of some flywheel. It's gonna be transformed one local market at a time. And there's a lot of great stuff happening in local markets. Listen to the show with Dave Chase (EP374) for a bunch of examples. There's a show with Cora Opsahl (EP372) that has some great examples of this. There's the one with Doug Hetherington (EP367). We also have a show coming up in October with Nick Stefanizzi from Northwell Direct.   All of these great examples are stakeholders harnessing the power of collaboration to defragment patient journeys and get patients into high-value care settings so that the overall cost of care is in range for employers, taxpayers, patients, and American families. I'm so excited, honestly, about that because the healthcare industry is a legacy that we will leave behind to children and grandchildren. I have a vision in my head about what I want the healthcare industry to look like in 25 years. Maybe you do, too. Listen to the show with David Muhlestein, PhD, JD (EP364), for more on that. But the point is, if this vision is going to come true, we need to—like, right now—start building the roadmap to get to that goal. And a lot of this involves facilitating collaboration. Actually collaborating, for reals. There's real momentum behind that in organizations such as the Moving to Value Alliance in Connecticut, where I originally gave a version of this same talk. Thanks, by the way, to Steve Schutzer, MD, for moderating the collaboration panel that I was a part of at aforementioned MTVA symposium. Not only is he a great moderator, but he also has done a great service for patients through his ability to get a whole bunch of surgeons—who are pretty competitive as a general rule—to collaborate and form a Center of Excellence. For more information, go to aventriahealth.com.   Each week on Relentless Health Value, Stacey uses her voice and thought leadership to provide insights for healthcare industry decision makers trying to do the right thing. Each show features expert guests who break down the twists and tricks in the medical field to help improve outcomes and lower costs across the care continuum. Relentless Health Value is a top 100 podcast on iTunes in the medicine category and reaches tens of thousands of engaged listeners across the healthcare industry. In addition to hosting Relentless Health Value, Stacey is co-president of QC-Health, a benefit corporation finding cost-effective ways to improve the health of Americans. She is also co-president of Aventria Health Group, a consultancy working with clients who endeavor to form collaborations with payers, providers, Pharma, employer organizations, or patient advocacy groups. 01:41 What are the two major patient challenges in chronic patient care that can only be solved by collaboration? 01:56 What is the “care gap” problem? 03:19 “Crappy prior auth processes create care gaps.” 03:25 EP361 with Carly Eckert, MD.  04:00 How do you eliminate care gaps proactively? 06:46 EP358 with Wayne Jenkins.  08:21 What is one way to make healthcare more affordable? 09:49 Why aren't more healthcare entities collaborating? 10:04 EP366 with Kevin Schulman, MD.  11:13 EP374 with Dave Chase. 11:18 EP372 with Cora Opsahl.  11:22 EP367 with Doug Hetherington.  11:25 Upcoming episode with Nick Stefanizzi. 12:00 EP364 with David Muhlestein, PhD, JD.   For more information, go to aventriahealth.com.   Our host, Stacey Richter, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What are the two major patient challenges in chronic patient care that can only be solved by collaboration? Our host, Stacey Richter, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What is the “care gap” problem? Our host, Stacey Richter, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Crappy prior auth processes create care gaps.” Our host, Stacey Richter, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast How do you eliminate care gaps proactively? Our host, Stacey Richter, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What is one way to make healthcare more affordable? Our host, Stacey Richter, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why aren't more healthcare entities collaborating? Our host, Stacey Richter, discusses #collaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Rebecca Etz (Encore! EP295), Olivia Webb (Encore! EP337), Mike Baldzicki, Lisa Bari, Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan    

I wanted to resurface this episode because when it originally aired over a year ago, the topic may have been ever so slightly ahead of its time. Look, here we are right now with everybody trying to do three big things relative to measuring PCP (primary care provider) performance: Come up with a fair measure for PCP performance. Account for diverse populations with diverse risks so that some docs don't get dinged because their patient populations have lots of comorbidities or behavioral health challenges or live in food deserts, or any one of the other social determinants of health. Not make measuring performance a total procedural nightmare. Right? We want fair measures, we want to account for equity issues essentially, and we want this whole measurement fandango to be as easy as possible. Enter Rebecca Etz, PhD, and The Larry A. Green Center with a really well-validated “instrument,” as she calls it, to measure primary care performance. I can think of more than one PCP frankly right off the top of my head who would be thrilled to be measured using this methodology. Even more so because it's one thing that's simple and not a jumble of numerators with various mix-and-match denominators. PCPs are really important to population health. Primary care is the foundation of any well-functioning health system, I am sure many listening to this podcast know well. For the Triple Aim to happen, patients really need access to robust primary care. This has been affirmed by almost anyone who looks into it. And yet, in this country, our system sort of anemically supports our primary care colleagues. As a general statement, poking and prodding and procedures are compensated at a far higher rate than anything requiring cognitive services. What a PCP or a pediatrician mainly does all day is really cognitive. It's listening and thinking and counseling and coordinating. But here is maybe an underappreciated point: If we're going to measure PCP performance, then we need the right measures to measure that performance. You might be doing this measurement as a basis for incentives or maybe for continuous improvement programs. Either way, if you don't have the right measures, then maybe great primary care is under-rewarded or your continuous improvement process is counterproductive—you're incenting the wrong things, you get the wrong activity. And to add to that, PCPs (ie, practices) can spend upwards of $40,000 a year of uncompensated time trying to add and subtract and tote up the difference in all these varied and potentially inapplicable measurement standards coming at them from all manner of directions. My guest in this healthcare podcast is Rebecca Etz, PhD. Dr. Etz and the team over at The Larry A. Green Center have worked hard to create a set of 11 performance measures for primary care. These measures went through the wringer as far as their creation and validation. These 11 measures take into account what patients want, what primary care clinicians (including pediatricians, nurse practitioners, and others) think is most important and possible to provide, and what payers want to pay for. These 11 measures are aligned across the three stakeholders, and they are actionable. Rebecca Etz, PhD, is associate professor of family medicine and codirector of The Larry A. Green Center, which is in Richmond, Virginia, at the Virginia Commonwealth University. You can learn more at green-center.org.   Rebecca S. Etz, PhD, is an associate professor of family medicine and population health at Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) and codirector of The Larry A. Green Center—Advancing Primary Health Care for the Public Good. Dr. Etz has deep expertise in qualitative research methods and design, primary care measures, practice transformation, and engaging stakeholders. Her career has been dedicated to learning the heart and soul of primary care through three main lines of inquiry: (1) bridging the gap between the business of medicine and the lived experience of the human condition, (2) making visible the principles and mechanisms upon which the unique strength of primary care is based, and (3) exposing the unintended, often damaging consequences of policy and transformation efforts applied to primary care but not informed by primary care concepts. As a member of the VCU Department of Family Medicine and Population Health and previous codirector of the ACORN practice-based research network, Dr. Etz has been the principal investigator of several federal and foundation grants, contracts, and pilots, all directed toward making the pursuit of health a humane experience. Recent research activities have included studies in primary care measures, behavioral health, simulation modeling, care team models, and adaptive use of health technologies. Dr. Etz currently leads the fielding of a weekly survey regarding the response to and impact of COVID-19 on US primary care practices. She also serves on the National Academies of Medicine consensus study, “Implementing High-Quality Primary Care.” 04:58 Why is primary care one of the “best-kept secrets” of better health outcomes? 09:45 “Measures are a form of communication.” 09:58 “If the way that you are assessed does not actually match up with the work you do or what you find to be important, it's pretty demoralizing.” 12:48 “It is the outcome of healthcare, but it is not the same thing as quality.” 17:18 “It creates a financial incentive to hit a target by any means necessary.” 18:53 “We incentivize people to have good outcomes, and what that means is that electronic medical records are no longer simply databases that tell us what the health of the population is. They are databases that tell us what is the optimal picture that a clinician is able to paint of their patients.” 21:54 “Primary care is a relational field.” 23:02 “How does this relate to cost and utilization?” 27:45 How has the measure of PCPs in the time of COVID held up? 28:03 What measure performs worse in the time of COVID? 29:59 EP270 with Dave Chase and EP272 with Guy Culpepper, MD.  You can learn more at green-center.org.   Rebecca Etz of @GreenCenterOrg discusses #primarycare performance on this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthtech #pcp “Measures are a form of communication.” Rebecca Etz of @GreenCenterOrg discusses #primarycare performance on this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthtech #pcp “If the way that you are assessed does not actually match up with the work you do or what you find to be important, it's pretty demoralizing.” Rebecca Etz of @GreenCenterOrg discusses #primarycare performance on this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthtech #pcp “It is the outcome of healthcare, but it is not the same thing as quality.” Rebecca Etz of @GreenCenterOrg discusses #primarycare performance on this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthtech #pcp “It creates a financial incentive to hit a target by any means necessary.” Rebecca Etz of @GreenCenterOrg discusses #primarycare performance on this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthtech #pcp “Primary care is a relational field.” Rebecca Etz of @GreenCenterOrg discusses #primarycare performance on this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthtech #pcp How has the measure of PCPs in the time of COVID held up? Rebecca Etz of @GreenCenterOrg discusses #primarycare performance on this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthtech #pcp   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Olivia Webb (Encore! EP337), Mike Baldzicki, Lisa Bari, Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes  

This encore episode seemed really apropos at this moment in time, since we've just basically published a course in the specialty pharmacy ecosystem, including who all of the various stakeholders are and what their vested interests are. Weirdly, in many of the episodes in the series/course, you'll find the word patient in short supply. And that's not a weird oversight in our podcast production. It is actually an egregious oversight in the specialty pharmacy market, an oversight with real human consequences, which I talk about with Olivia Webb in this encore. Check out a playlist of all of the specialty pharmacy episodes that comprise our series here.   If you listen to them all, let me know; and also let me know what you think and, I don't know, maybe we'll create a special certificate for you because at that point you will know more than 99.9% of the industry (even industry insiders) if you listen to the whole thing. Here's the cold hard truth: The whole specialty pharmacy operational model is not built to serve patients, a fact that becomes crystal clear when you're a patient. Instead, the specialty pharmacy model is, rather, pretty blatantly dedicated to the power struggle for revenue and captive patient populations. It's war between providers and the whole PBM/insurer/specialty pharmacy vertical consolidations. Employers and pharma manufacturers are, of course, on the battlefield as well. What is a drug that qualifies to be a specialty pharmacy drug? Usually, these drugs are complicated to store, dispense, to use, and/or they're expensive—generally, really expensive. Lots of zeros, completely unaffordable to pay cash for them as an individual. No one is using a GoodRx card and not using their insurance to pay for these puppies. They can cost as much as a house. Biologics, for example, usually considered specialty drugs—lots of cancer and immunology therapies, injectable medications, IV/infused medications—all these are usually considered specialty drugs. There's no one definition of a specialty drug. It's more that someone somewhere decided to not run the drug through your traditional retail pharmacy for any number of reasons. The problem with the current status quo, wherein the patient gets tossed around while everybody fights over them, is that some basic needs are not being met—like if a patient asks the person administering the drug maybe even a pretty simple question about the drug or its side effects. It's way more likely than it should be that the nurse or whomever doesn't know the answer. Not knocking nurses here at all but definitely knocking a system that allows that to happen. I mean, really now. We're injecting a six-figure therapy in someone's arm that will impact their body in a myriad of maybe frightening ways, some of which are a problem and some of which are not. Said another way, there's a really good financial and clinical use case for making sure that we're patient-centric at a specialty pharmacy point of service—if you care about the patient and cost efficiency, that is. But I guess therein lies the root cause of the trouble. In this healthcare podcast, I'm talking with Olivia Webb about what it would take and be like to create a “patient-first specialty pharmacy,” as she has coined the term—a specialty pharmacy dedicated to patients not only having a half-decent experience but also one that might actually create better patient outcomes. Olivia Webb is author of the Acute Condition newsletter. I would certainly recommend subscribing. One last thing: If you're following the whole PBM/insurer/specialty pharmacy vertical integration skullduggery, keep an eye on a bunch of lawsuits against these combined entities (three examples here, here, and here) alleging that they are doing some not super upright and honest things with their massive market power. (Say it isn't so!) You can learn more at acutecondition.com.  Olivia Webb is a healthcare strategist and writer. She publishes the newsletter Acute Condition, as well as working on other content across the healthcare and biotech ecosystem. She previously worked at Massachusetts General Hospital and Advisory Board Company. 04:43 Why did Olivia start thinking about a patient-centric specialty pharmacy? 06:05 “There's really no layer on top of it to make it look nice.” 06:55 “You're kind of dealing with this vertical stack that doesn't really deal with patients frequently.” 07:07 Is the specialty model more patient friendly or less? 07:39 What would a patient-centric specialty pharmacy look like? 08:29 “There's a lot of fragmentation; there's a lot of friction.” 08:42 What's unique to specialty pharmacy prescriptions? 11:09 Why can infusion centers be a high-drama place? 12:44 What's “the question” around specialty pharmacy? 13:11 Who has the vested interest in ensuring patients take their medications correctly in specialty pharmacy? 15:08 “It's really just a unique area of healthcare where the people that I think of as the good guys and the bad guys completely flips.” 16:34 Why might the time be ripe for disruption in the specialty pharmacy area? 20:26 “There's no one with a clear incentive to cap the prices.” 20:39 What are the barriers in specialty pharmacy? 21:01 “The patient just isn't at the center, the financial incentive, in any direction.” 29:44 “I think people who are designing these things need to see how patients are actually doing it.” 30:13 “I think there's a lot of money here; I think this market is going to only increase in size.” 30:32 “I think you need scale.” 30:42 AEE15 with David Carmouche, MD, of Ochsner.   You can learn more at acutecondition.com.  @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why did Olivia start thinking about a patient-centric specialty pharmacy? @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “There's really no layer on top of it to make it look nice.” @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “You're kind of dealing with this vertical stack that doesn't really deal with patients frequently.” @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Is the specialty model more patient friendly or less? @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What would a patient-centric specialty pharmacy look like? @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “There's a lot of fragmentation; there's a lot of friction.” @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What's unique to specialty pharmacy prescriptions? @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why can infusion centers be a high-drama place? @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What's “the question” around specialty pharmacy? @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why might the time be ripe for disruption in the specialty pharmacy area? @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “It's really just a unique area of healthcare where the people that I think of as the good guys and the bad guys completely flips.” @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “The patient just isn't at the center, the financial incentive, in any direction.” @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “I think people who are designing these things need to see how patients are actually doing it.” @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “I think there's a lot of money here; I think this market is going to only increase in size.” @OliviaWebbC of the #acutecondition newsletter discusses #patientfirst #specialty on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Mike Baldzicki, Lisa Bari, Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353)  

Members taking specialty drugs represent about 2% of any given employer's population but often consume as much as 30% of an employer's total cost of care. As Pramod John, PhD, in EP353 has said, this isn't just small companies we're talking about here. Some of the largest employers in the US are dropping big bucks on specialty drugs, and they are obviously overpaying and don't need to.  No employer or plan really need pay any more than the pharmacy's acquisition price plus a reasonable professional fee. But so many employers pay way more than that. Let's just keep in mind that specialty pharmacy spend extends beyond just pharmacy spend. Medical claims for pharma drugs that are infused, for example, can be more than 50% of an employer or plan's specialty pharmacy spend. What I'm talking about now is buy and bill–type stuff where a hospital or physician practice bills for an infused pharmaceutical product under a patient's medical benefit. Listen to EP370 with Autumn Yongchu and Erik Davis about how some hospitals, for example, are managing to charge employers 6x the cost of specialty meds to infuse them and also EP365 with Scott Haas about PBM shenanigans.   So, currently, specialty pharmacy spend is big; but it's grown bigger every single year. Every year, employers and the government/taxpayers alike spend more and more on these really expensive drugs. As you can see, there are billions and billions of dollars on the specialty pharmacy table here. Also, as you certainly know if you've listened to the recent series of specialty pharmacy shows that we've done lately, it's kind of a war out there.   There are multiple healthcare industry stakeholders trying to capture all of the money. If you can get your hands on a specialty pharmacy patient and manage their care—or, probably more pointedly, manage to bill for their care—it can be incredibly profitable. This show kind of wraps up some loose ends for me. In this healthcare podcast, I'm speaking with Mike Baldzicki, who is chief brand officer over at AscellaHealth. A majority of Mike's background is in specialty pharmacy infusion, capabilities with an array of different healthcare companies. So, he is a great guy to wrap up some of these loose ends with. On the show today, we discuss how many/the percentage of self-funded employers who have taken their specialty pharmacy business from the “Big Three” or “Big Five” PBMs, how many of them have actively started steering their members and managing their benefit carefully. I talk with Mike about what these employers are doing and how they are doing it. From there, the conversation, of course, naturally flows into preventing hospitals from rapaciously buying and billing, which then segues into a discussion about hospital strategy … because if you can't do your buy-and-bill thing for a whole bunch of your patients, then it makes sense for you to do two things strategically: (1) stand up your own specialty pharmacy and/or (2) set up your own network of infusion centers. Mike and I talk about this. We also discuss how much trying to get a specialty pharmacy drug sucks for most patients, which I deeply investigated in EP337 with Olivia Webb.   Also in this episode, you can hear me contend that maybe if Pharma and payers enter into outcomes-based contracts, maybe patients would be better served. It's kind of the pharmacy version of the whole “let's pay for value, not volume” thing. I ask Mike how many pharma outcomes-based contracts are out there in the wild, for reals. All of this and more … but you gotta listen to the podcast. Oh, by the way, acronym alert: SPP stands for specialty pharmacy provider. You can learn more at ascellahealth.com.   Michael J. Baldzicki, CRCM, is chief brand officer (CBO) at AscellaHealth. As CBO, Mike supports the AscellaHealth Family of Companies comprehensive business strategy to increase brand awareness, boost perceived value, and improve lines of services in the marketplace. He is responsible for oversight of their Family of Companies based on sales and marketing to finance, client services, and specialty pharmacy strategies throughout the organization that drive strategic business initiatives. Within his roles, he enhances the success of the strategic projects and applies business development, contract negotiations, network advancement, and marketing and outreach strategies that cultivate opportunities for AscellaHealth and their Family of Companies. With more than 24 years of experience, Mike held roles in senior executive management within the specialty pharmacy supply group, pharmaceutical and biotech industry of managed markets, group purchasing organizations, specialty wholesale, and integrated delivery networks. He assumed roles within the pharmaceutical organization such as Bristol Myers Squibb, Enzon BioTech, Novo Nordisk, Baxter BioScience, as well as roles within the distribution channel of AmerisourceBergen specialty groups, BioMatrix Specialty and Infusion Rx, Diplomat/BioRx Specialty Pharmacy, CareCentrix Medical Infusion, Asembia GPO, Axelacare Infusion, to other manufacturer and specialty pharmacy home infusion companies. Mike is active in the biotech community and is council advisor of the Council of Strategic Healthcare Advisors (CSHA), an advisor/faculty member of the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) for Specialty Pharmacy Advisory Group & Biosimilars Partnership Forum, NCPDP Specialty Pharmacy Stakeholder Action Group, Self-insured Institute of America (SIIA) advisor, National Alliance of Healthcare Purchaser Coalitions, and was 2014 Editorial Board Member for Specialty Pharmacy Times. Mike holds a bachelor's degree in business management and a Certificate in Clinical Research Compliance and Management (CRCM). He has completed programs in leadership development at Harvard University, Brooks Group, Miller Heiman Account Management, and MD Anderson Center Cancer Courses. 04:27 Is it a conflict of incentives to worry about the cost of million-dollar pharmaceuticals? 06:24 “Really, does it make sense to carve up my specialty pharmacy benefit … away from my typical PBM model?” 06:48 What's the trend line with moving away from the big PBMs? 07:20 Specialty pharmacy episodes.07:53 How does a small PBM contract with Pharma? 08:34 EP365 with Scott Haas.10:15 EP337 with Olivia Webb.11:32 “We're still lacking the overall insight to data.” 12:15 “When you have insight and good data, then you can start really driving the plan language and cover requirements.” 13:07 “It is a frustrating game because … the large PBMs that have traditionally managed an employer's spend … doesn't give them the data that's needed.” 13:48 What's going on with outcomes-based contracts? 14:16 What's the importance of aligning reimbursement around value instead of volume? 14:57 “The issue is, how real is the data?” 19:24 EP370 with Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu.20:36 Are hospital-based specialty pharmacies teaming up with big PBMs? 22:01 “It's market ownership.” 29:17 EP369 with Keith Hartman, RPh.30:43 “These are real scenarios that are happening in the self-insured planned sponsor market.” 30:59 “Employers really should start recognizing organizations that take more of an integrated and thoughtful approach.” You can learn more at ascellahealth.com.   Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Is it a conflict of incentives to worry about the cost of million-dollar pharmaceuticals? Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Really, does it make sense to carve up my specialty pharmacy benefit … away from my typical PBM model?” Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What's the trend line with moving away from the big PBMs? Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast How does a small PBM contract with Pharma? Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “We're still lacking the overall insight to data.” Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “When you have insight and good data, then you can start really driving the plan language and cover requirements.” Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “It is a frustrating game because … the large PBMs that have traditionally managed an employer's spend … doesn't give them the data that's needed.” Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What's going on with outcomes-based contracts? Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What's the importance of aligning reimbursement around value instead of volume? Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “The issue is, how real is the data?” Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Are hospital-based specialty pharmacies teaming up with big PBMs? Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “It's market ownership.” Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “These are real scenarios that are happening in the self-insured planned sponsor market.” Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Employers really should start recognizing organizations that take more of an integrated and thoughtful approach.” Mike Baldzicki of @AscellaHealth discusses #specialtypharma, #PBM, #hospitals, #employers, and #pharma on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Lisa Bari, Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352)  

Interoperability. Let's just review a few key points that probably everybody listening knows but certainly bear repeating because they matter. I don't want to dig into the technical or regulatory details of interoperability. That is above my pay grade. But I want to talk about the really important stuff that maybe doesn't get talked about a whole lot because you say the word interoperability and it's like the magic word that transports the unwary into the land of shadow and smoke and mist. It's like a self-published YA (young adult) novel half the time. But let's start here: First of all, consider that a lot of healthcare these days is conceived of as a scattering of micro-moments. It's not even like we think of patients one at a time. We think about patients one ICD-10 code at a time. And we think about those ICD-10 codes in 20-minute increments whenever a patient happens to show up in clinic. The average Medicare patient these days sees five specialists and more than one PCP a lot of times. So, we're not only breaking that patient down into codes per minute or something, but this is further broken down by clinician or practice. Now consider that everybody knows—and when I say everybody knows, I mean it's inarguable at this point—health happens at the whole-patient level, at the whole-person level, more accurately. It happens at the community level: 80% of patient outcomes are going to derive from what that patient does when they leave the office and whether they are able to and health literate enough to construct a reconciled treatment plan for themselves from the bits and pieces of information they've received scattered all over the place. You know in Star Trek when someone gets into the transporter to beam down to a planet and their whole body splinters into a gazillion little pieces? That's how our healthcare industry treats patients. They are frozen in that moment and rarely, if ever, become whole on the other side. So, when we talk about interoperability, what we're really talking about is a means to an end. What we are discussing is creating the ability to treat the whole patient or—Heaven forbid!—consider the whole community because we have enough data that we can accurately and adequately see the whole picture. We are able to avoid prescribing a treatment that is dangerous to the patient, inefficient, duplicative, or low quality—which is what happens over and over again. It's no amazing surprise that our healthcare industry wastes $1 in $4 we spend and doesn't net outcomes that are great in almost any respect when compared to other countries. Let me say this more bluntly, as if that wasn't already pretty blunt: If I don't know relevant and important details about my patient, then I cannot consistently deliver care that is high quality, safe, or cost conscious due to service duplication or uncoordinated care. I mean, how is anybody supposed to deliver evidence-based care when a lot of evidence may or may not be missing? So basically, without interoperability piping in the right patient information, I cannot succeed in any risk-based arrangement, right? If care provided is consistently lower quality, uncoordinated, unsafe, or inefficient, how am I supposed to optimize my care delivery? Said another way, interoperability is essential for anybody who wants to succeed in a value-based arrangement. I need all the data on my patients, and I need it in a way that I can separate the signal from the noise. Of course, getting 40 pages of duplicative SOAP (subjective, objective, assessment, and plan) notes that are semi-accurate and that no one bothers to look at is just unhelpful. Quick counterpoint: FFS (fee for service) loves siloed data. You know how much money everybody talks about could be saved if we eliminate duplicative services? Well, that's how much some fee-for-service health system is gonna lose if you make it easy for clinicians to see that the patient already got that CAT scan. So, in sum, interoperability is essential to high-quality, safe, and efficient care. A mark of a health system or provider practice who is really committed to patient outcomes is going to be their commitment to share data. The world has moved from a “Hey, you're permitted to share data if you really want to” to a “You are obligated to share your data.” And right now, I am loosely quoting Micky Tripathi, PhD, MPP, who is the ONC's (Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology) national coordinator and also the guy in charge of TEFCA (Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement) and implementing the provisions against information blocking that was in the Cures Act Final Rule last year. In this healthcare podcast, I am speaking with the perfect person about interoperability, and that would be Lisa Bari, who is the CEO of Civitas Networks for Health, which is a national collaborative working to improve interoperability in this country to improve health. Since interoperability is a huge topic, what I wanted to understand from Lisa most particularly are: Who are the current roster of players in the interoperability space? Like, what is going on there? Lisa told me that there are four main groups of interoperability folks—EHR (electronic health record) systems; APIs (application programming interfaces); HIEs (health information exchanges), both profit and nonprofit; and then others like clearinghouses, etc—which we talk about in some detail in this episode. We also discussed Larry Ellison's bold proclamation that Cerner is going to build one national medical records database. It's almost like Larry made it through the “welcome to the healthcare briefing” packet that his team gave him and immediately concluded that the interoperability problem is a technology problem, not a business case, fee-for-service, workflow, no universal ID, human, organizational, or government problem. Lisa adds some fidelity there.  Also, TEFCA … we talk about what it is and what it's not. Short version: It's a framework so that no one can say they won't share data lest they get in trouble in some way. At the same time, it's not gonna solve, as Lisa puts it, “the last mile of interoperability,” meaning it's not going to put the right information in the right clinician's hands at the right time. It just governs getting data from one organization to another organization but kinda has nothing to do with the clinical workflow, so to speak. The Civitas Networks for Health annual conference, by the way, is coming up on August 21-24 if you are interested in going.  You can learn more at civitasforhealth.org.  Lisa Bari, MBA, MPH, is the inaugural CEO of Civitas Networks for Health, a national nonprofit member- and mission-driven organization that was previously known as the Network for Regional Health Improvement and the Strategic Health Information Exchange Collaborative. Civitas counts over 100 multi-stakeholder-governed regional health improvement collaboratives and health information exchanges as members and creates national opportunities for education and community building between its members, policy makers, and business partners. Their upcoming conference (August 21-24, 2022, in San Antonio or via livestream) focuses on the theme of data collaboratives and information exchanges creating the critical infrastructure for health equity. Previously, Lisa was the health IT and interoperability lead at the CMS Innovation Center, working on primary care innovation model policy, and additionally has a background in health IT marketing and strategy. She holds an MBA from Purdue University and a Master of Public Health in health policy from the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health and serves on the boards of directors of HealthCare Access Maryland and the Zorya Foundation.  06:30 How does value-based care depend on interoperability? 07:38 Why is it really important to exchange information at the right time with the right purpose? 08:00 What is one of the easiest low-hanging fruit to achieve in value-based care? 09:42 What are the four kinds of companies getting into the interoperability space? 11:51 “As we know, there's sort of technical interoperability … and then there's semantic interoperability.” 12:59 Where are we right now with EHR basic interoperability? 15:33 Who should ACOs hire to get the right data at the right time? 17:00 Why is it important to delineate the different types of HIE? 22:09 What can ACOs assure with interoperability? 22:59 Is the demand among ACOs for interoperability there? 24:04 “If you're in value-based care, you better care about what's happening outside of the healthcare setting.” 24:36 EP108 with Chris Klomp.26:25 “Every couple of years, someone talks about creating the ultimate database to rule them all. … It hasn't happened yet, and I don't think it's going to happen.” 26:56 “The difficult thing about healthcare data … interoperability … is an organizational and a governance problem.” 28:49 “You've gotta start with the incentives … and then you do have to say … ‘We are not gonna hoard any more data.'” 29:10 What is TEFCA, and how does it fit into this interoperability conversation? 32:17 “I think partners are trying to solve for value and outcomes.” You can learn more at civitasforhealth.org.  @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth How does value-based care depend on interoperability? @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why is it really important to exchange information at the right time with the right purpose? @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What is one of the easiest low-hanging fruit to achieve in value-based care? @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What are the four kinds of companies getting into the interoperability space? @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “As we know, there's sort of technical interoperability … and then there's semantic interoperability.” @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Where are we right now with EHR basic interoperability? @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Who should ACOs hire to get the right data at the right time? @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why is it important to delineate the different types of HIE? @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What can ACOs assure with interoperability? @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Is the demand among ACOs for interoperability there? @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “If you're in value-based care, you better care about what's happening outside of the healthcare setting.” @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “Every couple of years, someone talks about creating the ultimate database to rule them all. … It hasn't happened yet, and I don't think it's going to happen.” @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “The difficult thing about healthcare data … interoperability … is an organizational and a governance problem.” @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “You've gotta start with the incentives … and then you do have to say … ‘We are not gonna hoard any more data.'” @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What is TEFCA, and how does it fit into this interoperability conversation? @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “I think partners are trying to solve for value and outcomes.” @lisabari of @civitas4health discusses #interoperability on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Betsy Seals (EP375), Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker

Medicare Advantage (MA), otherwise known as the “money machine,” is often the most profitable parts of many payers' business lines. Medicare Advantage plans can make a lot of cash if they are good at what they do. Look at any of these large, consolidated carriers' financial statements to get the magnitude of that statement. Also, in 2022, Medicare Advantage plans have enrolled 28 million participants between them, which represents 45% of all Medicare beneficiaries. This marks a three-point improvement in penetration over 2021 and a total program enrollment growth of 9%.   All of this is not a secret. So, what's happening right now is that this administration is looking carefully at Medicare Advantage plans and what they have been up to. We have had an amping up of government oversight, including regulatory actions and program audits. In this healthcare podcast, I am speaking with Betsy Seals, who is CEO and cofounder of Rebellis Group, which is a managed care consulting firm working with Medicare Advantage plans. Betsy says (and this is what we talk about in the interview) that there's three main areas that the government is currently scrutinizing: Sales and marketing. There have been these third parties, it seems, these field marketing organizations who were hired to do marketing and sales for some of the Medicare Advantage plans. And because they were third parties, it seems that many of them felt themselves to be excluded from CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) regulations and able to basically mislead prospective members with sales pitches that were highly suspect. Betsy gives some examples of these, and when you hear them, you will see why CMS is cracking down. Recouping improper payments is another area that CMS is all over. Interestingly, as Betsy Seals says in this interview, this might be one area where the government is actually ahead of private sector plans from a technology and analytic standpoint. CMS seems to have better analytics capabilities and is better at detecting fraud schemes and improper payments than the plans themselves. These plans are not sophisticated enough to notice stuff that CMS detects when it gets ahold of the plan data. But as unusual as this situation is where the government is ahead of the business sector, I can't say I'm shocked. We have had one guest on this show after another talking about just how far in the past some of these health plans are lagging. Dan O'Neill probably said it most eloquently and notably (EP359).   But I digress. So, recouping improper payments has the eye of CMS. This means two things largely. It means finding “outlier” codes that some MA plan paid for but which are clearly errors and should not have been paid. Another improper payment is when plans themselves do a little fancy upcoding so that they make more money than they should in their risk-adjustment payments. This has gotten some major attention lately. Let me quote from an OIG (Office of Inspector General) report:   “Our findings raise concerns about the extent to which certain MA companies may have inappropriately leveraged both chart reviews and HRAs [health risk assessments] to maximize risk-adjusted payments. We found that 20 of the 162 MA companies drove a disproportionate share of the $9.2 billion in payments from diagnoses that were reported only on chart reviews and HRAs, and on no other service records.” The sneaky idea here to get more money than they should from taxpayers is that someone somewhere puts down that a member has major depressive disease because someone somewhere said they did. But the patient clearly doesn't have major depressive disease because they aren't getting any treatment for it and nothing anywhere would indicate that they are suffering from a major depressive disease. So, the plan winds up getting more money from the government to care for a patient who is suffering from major depressive disease, but the patient doesn't require any additional care because they don't have major depressive disease. It's a great way to make some dollars for shareholders that is coming right out of the pockets of taxpayers. In sum, the #2 area of additional oversight is recouping improper payments either from paying claims that should not have been paid for or by wild upcoding. This is just kinda like the general sort of compliance oversight that CMS does, meaning grievances and appeals and formulary administration and models of care for SNP plans (special needs plans), compliance program effectiveness—normal stuff like this—which will be interesting given all of the articles coming out right now about how patients on Medicare Advantage plans are less likely to get more costly diabetes treatments and how often there's denials for cancer care or NCI cancer centers aren't covered, etc. One point of note here that's kind of thought-provoking on a few levels: If you're an MA plan, it is super important for you to get members in for their annual screenings. For one, CMS requires that you document diagnoses each year; and you need to do this to reduce the chances that CMS will question a treatment being paid for because there's no underlying diagnosis to support it—and these diagnoses must be re-upped every year. Recall what I was just talking about re: improper payments and fraud schemes. If a patient isn't diagnosed with something, then why are taxpayers paying for its treatment? Also risk adjustment ... if you wanna upcode, it's not a bad idea to have a diagnosis documented in multiple different ways so that when the OIG/CMS/DOJ comes knocking, you can have your ducks in a row. Getting patients in for their annual screenings is how you can safely upcode. Further, one more reason why getting patients in for annual screenings matters to MA plans, member experience counts for an increasing piece of star ratings. Patients who never see their doctor and never interact with the plan don't usually give the plan they have nothing to do with stellar marks—and besides that, these members are tough to retain. Last big deal for an MA plan to get members in for their annual is this is when the doc gets into screening for care gaps, which is also part of star measures. All this about annual screenings is a bit of a sidebar, but it is kind of interesting to contemplate as we get into the conversation today about government oversight. (For a meme on this topic, check out this Tweet from Rik Renard.) My guest, as I mentioned earlier, is Betsy Seals. Listen to our conversation about how MA plans are in the hot seat right now. Later in the fall, Betsy will be coming back to talk about trends in the Medicare Advantage marketplace. You can learn more at rebellisgroup.com.   Betsy Seals is the CEO and cofounder of Rebellis Group, a consulting firm established to provide advisory and hands-on services to Medicare Advantage Organizations (MAOs) and their subcontractors. Betsy is a nationally recognized leader in the managed care industry with over 20 years of experience. Betsy brings to the table a solid mix of leadership and business acumen, as well as regulatory and strategic knowledge within the managed care landscape. Betsy's expertise is focused in the areas of mergers and acquisitions, compliance, sales and marketing, strategy, supplemental benefit landscape, innovative benefit design that address social determinants of health, and health plan operations. Prior to founding Rebellis Group, Betsy served as the chief consulting officer for Gorman Health Group (GHG). In this role, Betsy managed the Medicare consulting practice, including implementation of strategic initiatives, development of new practice areas, and oversight of day-to-day consulting operations. Prior to her role as chief consulting officer, Betsy served as senior vice president, compliance operations, where she assisted MAOs and Part D sponsors to attain and maintain compliance with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) regulations and guidance by conducting risk assessments, preparing organizations for CMS audits, performing mock CMS audits, and creating and implementing internal and delegated entity oversight programs. Before joining GHG, Betsy worked for MAOs, where she served in customer service and compliance with responsibility for creation and implementation of oversight programs, CMS audit preparation, implementation of internal corrective action plans, and the day-to-day management of compliance operations. Betsy has also worked as a CMS subcontractor to conduct CMS Compliance Program audits. 08:15 What's happening with sales and marketing in the healthcare industry? 11:04 What's happening with the focus on recouping improper payments? 13:32 “When you look at the fundamentals of it, these are federal dollars. And what we're talking about is federal dollars that were paid when they should not have been paid.” 15:39 Are improper claim payments an administrative problem, or something more intentional? 16:20 “The health plan has a responsibility to catch those issues.” 20:10 What are specialty pharmacy prescriptions being scrutinized for? 22:12 “If this is where CMS is headed … the health plan should've already been doing this.” 23:58 Why do you see a bigger focus on social determinants of health? 25:54 Do these health plan audits actually have any teeth? 27:01 What is the biggest penalty a health plan can face from an audit? 29:57 “Navigating the Medicare program … was near to impossible. I know the program, and even for me, it was hours and hours and hours and hours on the phone.” You can learn more at rebellisgroup.com.   @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What's happening with sales and marketing in the healthcare industry? @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What's happening with the focus on recouping improper payments? @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “When you look at the fundamentals of it, these are federal dollars. And what we're talking about is federal dollars that were paid when they should not have been paid.” @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Are improper claim payments an administrative problem, or something more intentional? @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “The health plan has a responsibility to catch those issues.” @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What are specialty pharmacy prescriptions being scrutinized for? @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “If this is where CMS is headed … the health plan should've already been doing this.” @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why do you see a bigger focus on social determinants of health? @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Do these health plan audits actually have any teeth? @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What is the biggest penalty a health plan can face from an audit? @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “Navigating the Medicare program … was near to impossible. I know the program, and even for me, it was hours and hours and hours and hours on the phone.” @betsyseals of @GroupRebellis discusses #MedicareAdvantage plans on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Dave Chase, Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento  

So, let's put the last, I don't know, 300 episodes of Relentless Health Value into perspective here. The USA wastes about $1.5 trillion a year on some combination of paying way too much for low-value care, fraud, and waste—$1.5 trillion down the drain. As my guest, Dave Chase, says in this healthcare podcast, if this was a country, what we waste would be the 11th biggest GDP in the world. We could call it Healthcare-istan. Meanwhile, outcomes aren't anything to brag about on the world stage, and 41% of American adults have medical debt in this country. Also, all across the country, people making all kinds of healthcare decisions to save money that are clinically toxic. Financial toxicity is clinical toxicity, right? You know this already. You listen to this show. I just saw yet another study the other day—actually this one about cancer outcomes and how they are appreciably worse when patients are worried about how much money their treatment will cost. And a lot of people in this country—many people with a Part D plan, commercial insurance with big deductibles—there's a lot of people in this country who cannot afford tens of thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket spend every year. But let's change gears and talk about some good stuff, some inroads that are being made. Let's talk about Rosen Hotels for a moment. Rosen Hotels is a bright spot, for sure, in all of this. They are a leading indicator of what is possible. Rosen Hotels, which is a hotel chain in Florida, they saved over $450 million in healthcare costs and have healthier, happier employees. They spend 55% less per capita on health benefits despite having an employee population with significant health challenges. They saved so much money that Rosen was able to set up a scholarship fund so that not only kids of employees (and employees themselves) but also kids in the community can go to college. Turnover there is lower. Retention is higher. Employees are healthier. I mean, the ROI of a CEO and a CFO getting engaged and taking back control over their health benefits from third parties? It's huge. Check out this article about Rosen and also Dave Chase's TED Talk about Rosen.   My guest today, Dave Chase, says that what they did at Rosen Hotels was actually an inspiration for Health Rosetta, which is the organization that he founded to help employers take control of the out-of-control dysfunctional health benefits market in this country. Dave Chase says that the Health Rosetta community knows something that most don't (yet). Dave Chase has said that healthcare is fixed/fixable. He said that healthcare actually isn't expensive. Clinicians only receive $0.27 of every $1 that's ostensibly spent on healthcare. What is expensive is price gouging, profiteering, administrative bloat, fraud, and inappropriate treatment. And Dave Chase has also said that we're already investing more than enough money to not only fund world-class healthcare for everyone but also take all that money from Healthcare-istan and fund what drives 80% of health outcomes (ie, income, education, career opportunities, and clean air and water). There's so much money that is being wasted in healthcare. But all of this other stuff could be funded if we simply pay what we should be paying. (See Dave Chase's LinkedIn post to learn more about this.)   Health Rosetta currently has about five million lives stewarded through plans managed by their Health Rosetta advisors. That's probably another bright spot right there—five million lives. Another bright spot is the work of the Nuka System in Alaska. Listen to EP312 with Douglas Eby, MD, MPH, CPE. The Nuka System has won award after award for being one of the best health systems in the country, and it serves a challenging patient population for less money than most Medicaid plans.   So, here you have two entities, Rosen Hotels and the Nuka System, dealing with (on a good day) patient populations with multiple chronic conditions, high maternal mortality … At Rosen, 56% of their pregnancies are categorized as high risk, which not only has generational human consequences, of course, but is also a notorious budget-buster, as Dave Chase has said. There's substance abuse issues. These are patient populations who are doing appreciably better and cost far less than if they were covered by almost any other health plan in this country. Here's yet one more bright spot example company, and that's Pacific Steel. During our conversation, Dave Chase mentioned that the CFO of Pacific Steel said that when they went from spending $8 million in health benefits a year to spending under $3.5 million—basically cutting their healthcare costs in less than half—the CFO said that in order to make that same amount of net income, Pacific Steel would have had to raise their top-line sales revenue by 25% to 30%. So, okay … you're a CEO, and here's your choice to appease your shareholders or make your own bonus. Option A: Go out right now and figure out how to sell 30% more. Or Option B: Get your healthcare house in order, which may also improve retention if you do it right. To me, this doesn't seem like a head-scratcher. Two things that Dave Chase also brought up during our conversation that I thought were thought provoking. First, change is happening regionally and seems to adhere to the so-called “rule of three,” meaning that if three employers have worked with a qualified employee benefit consultant (EBC) and really fixed up their health benefits, then a cascade will start in that region. And secondly—and I never thought about this before—we spend over $4 trillion through various health plans (employer, ACA, Medicare, Medicaid), and yet have little to no objective mark of value for how good any given health plan is. The closest thing, as Dave Chase says, might be Medicare Advantage Star Ratings. To address this problem, Health Rosetta invested seven figures to build a Plan Grader™. This really helps employers make sure that the plan they put in place is a win-win the whole way around. You can learn more at healthrosetta.org or by emailing Dave at dave@healthrosetta.org.   Dave Chase leads the mission for Health Rosetta, which is to empower community-owned health plans (COHPs) with the vision of COHPs everywhere. Health Rosetta's purpose is creating and reinvesting the Health Rosetta Dividend (ie, redeploying the currently wasted $1.5 trillion in healthcare to a higher and better use—the social determinants of health such as income, better food, etc). Health Rosetta makes health plans local, organic, and sustainable transforming health plans from the number one driver of inflation, poverty, and bankruptcy to drivers of well-being and wealth. Health Rosetta ends the 30-year heist of stolen income from the working middle class. Health Rosetta plans have restored the American Dream for tens of thousands of people, giving them raises/bonuses and healthcare they can access without fear of bankruptcy. Individuals that had sky-high deductibles and co-pays no longer have that as a barrier (typically they are $0). School districts that once couldn't give teachers raises or had to have school levies to pay for music, art, and sports programs now have the funds (due to healthcare savings) to pay teachers more, have bigger class sizes, avoid cutting extracurricular programs, and more—all while giving teachers much better care outcomes. Health Rosetta's Plan Grader™ assesses the 40 most important attributes of a health plan “prescribing” proven strategies to transition into local, sustainable, world-class health plans. Health Rosetta community's transparency set a new industry standard and became the law of the land due to changes in laws that represent the largest change in employee health benefits since 1943. Through best-selling books, writing for various media outlets, TED Talk, and TV/film, Dave has reached over 10 million people with the goal of engaging, equipping, and empowering a broad grassroots movement designed to restore hope, health, and well-being to our communities. Dave received the Health Value Awards' Lifetime Achievement for Health Benefits Innovation at the World Health Care Congress. Prior to Health Rosetta, Dave cofounded Avado, which was acquired by and integrated into WebMD/Medscape, and founded Microsoft's $3-billion, 28,000-partner healthcare ecosystem. Outside of work, Dave coaches the next generation of leaders as a high school track and cross-country coach of state champion teams and individuals. Dave was a PAC-12 800 meter and 4×400 competitor. Most importantly, devotion to faith, family, and friends underpin a desire to be a servant leader to the five million lives (and growing) stewarded through the Health Rosetta community. 06:57 Why did Dave Chase start Health Rosetta? 07:42 EP312 with Douglas Eby, MD, MPH, CPE.07:51 How does Health Rosetta deem which health plans are succeeding? 11:07 What are the most important areas and factors for grading health plans? 11:22 EP365 with Scott Haas.11:38 “That $1.5 trillion of waste, how is that possible? Well, it's all codified in the contracts.” 12:18 “You can't manage what you can't measure.” 16:59 “What could be more disruptive than 30 years of wage gains stolen by the status quo health plans?” 17:39 “This is the last major area to modernize inside of corporate America.” 18:15 “This is not small dollars; there's a tremendous opportunity.” 19:04 “Go back to PBM. That's the first thing that starts to get at the care delivery side.” 21:52 “Can we even call it primary care if you can't get in to that doc for weeks?” 25:03 Where does Health Rosetta get their data to assess health plans? 27:00 Who are these self-insured employers, typically? 29:48 “3.5% [is] where the market flips.” 31:57 EP367 with Doug Hetherington.32:03 EP350 with Katy Talento.33:13 “We like to fetishize big in this country.” You can learn more at healthrosetta.org or by emailing Dave at dave@healthrosetta.org.   @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why did Dave Chase start Health Rosetta? @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth How does Health Rosetta deem which health plans are succeeding? @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What are the most important areas and factors for grading health plans? @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “That $1.5 trillion of waste, how is that possible? Well, it's all codified in the contracts.” @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “You can't manage what you can't measure.” @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “What could be more disruptive than 30 years of wage gains stolen by the status quo health plans?” @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “This is the last major area to modernize inside of corporate America.” @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “This is not small dollars; there's a tremendous opportunity.” @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “Go back to PBM. That's the first thing that starts to get at the care delivery side.” @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “Can we even call it primary care if you can't get in to that doc for weeks?” @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Where does Health Rosetta get their data to assess health plans? @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Who are these self-insured employers, typically? @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “3.5% [is] where the market flips.” @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “We like to fetishize big in this country.” @chasedave of @HealthRosetta discusses #healthplans in our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Cora Opsahl (EP373), Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33)  

In this healthcare podcast, I am speaking with Cora Opsahl, who directs the 32BJ Health Fund. This is the second conversation I'm having with Cora (last one was EP372), but these two conversations are not really linear—so listen in whatever order you want to.   Important to know about Cora's background, in previous roles, she has worked deep in the inner sanctums of the healthcare industry. So, she came to 32BJ armed with a BS meter that's finely tuned, which is, as I said last week, an unfortunately essential skill for anyone trying to help patients and members relying on them to successfully navigate the healthcare industry. Here's a pivotal fact: 56% of total spend at the 32BJ Health Fund goes to hospitals. So, from a “making the juice worth the squeeze” perspective, focusing on hospital prices can have a lot of impact. This is doubly true because of the seriously huge price variations for the same exact types of services at different hospitals, even in the same local market. Because the 32BJ Health Fund demands and gets all of its own data, it can actually run reports and see the impact and nuances of hospital spend very clearly—unlike, frankly, the majority of employers and unions who have zero clue this is all going on behind their backs because they think some other party is actually the fiduciary and not them, which is false, of course. So, let's just linger on this really high hospital prices that are various across a market for one moment. Here's a Tweet from Rik Renard: “The price of CABG [coronary artery bypass graft] varies more than 10-fold across US hospitals (ranging from $44,824 to $448,038). There was no evidence to suggest that hospitals that charge higher prices provide a better quality of care.”   WHAT?! An employer could pay $44,000, or it could pay $448,000. Seriously? This is why we can't have nice raises—because some employer spent $400,000 not on raises but on overpriced hospital services. Ugh … so frustrating. When employers, almost willfully at this juncture, turn a blind eye to all of this because they think it might be disruptive, meanwhile they're worrying about employee retention and trying to figure out how to give raises. Okay, well, here's a suggestion: Get your healthcare house in order and then you'll have enough money for raises, but that aside … In the New York City market, 32BJ used all of the data that we talked about in the last episode (EP372). They used all of that data to deduce, quite crisply, that NewYork-Presbyterian is really, really expensive—even in comparison to other expensive health systems in the New York metro area.   Furthermore, the Fund realized that it could not be sustainable without tackling the challenge of hospital prices. As Cora Opsahl says, “You can't reduce spend by benefit design alone.” Which reminded me of that famous quote by Uwe Reinhardt, “It's the prices, stupid.” Which, of course, reminded me of what David Contorno has said a million times, “You can't pay less for healthcare unless you pay less for healthcare.” I can't overemphasize these points and their impact on employers and workers. It's really hard to be competitive in the global marketplace when shelling out an extra $400,000 here and an extra whatever tens of thousand dollars there for fringe benefits that do not actually add any value from the workers' standpoint and/or confer any additional health. This is just blatantly throwing money away. So, there's gonna be a few health system peeps listening here who will reflexively mutter under their breath a sentence including the terminology “razor-thin operating margin.” It must be an AHA talking point because I talk to a lot of health system people from all over the country, and “razor-thin operating margin” is invariably the term that gets used. But let's just dig into that marketing-speak for a moment. While there are some hospitals who assuredly suffered under COVID (or were suffering even before COVID and definitely after), mostly these are rural ones—but let's not talk about them for a moment. Let's talk about the large, consolidated health systems who got billions in COVID relief. Are you kidding me with their razor-thin operating margin crocodile tears? Check out “New Study—Hospitals Hike Charges by Up to 18 Times Cost.”   Here's a few bullet points from that study: Hospital charges play a major role in mounting healthcare costs, with health expenditures closing in on one-fifth of the gross domestic product (GDP). Hospital profits/margins have mushroomed by 411% since 1999 to a record $88 billion in 2017. The rise in charges coincides with growing hospital mergers and acquisitions by large systems. (This is brutally apparent at this juncture.) The result is increased market consolidation, which leads to, again, higher profits and increased charges, not savings for patients as hospital systems often claim. Listen to the show with Kevin Schulman, MD (EP366). It explains a lot about how these “razor-thin operating margins” and the “oh no, we're losing money on Medicare, so we must cost shift” manifest if you actually follow the dollar. As Dr. Schulman says, it's not A; it's not B. I mean, it's not like payers aren't taking their own piece of the action. You just got to look at their stock valuations to see all that going on. We have a dysfunctional health benefits market and a lot of rational actors in that market doing what you'd expect rational economic actors to do.   So anyway, 32BJ sees in their own data that all this is going on with hospitals, and they aim to stop covering a super expensive hospital in their local market, which is just making bad even worse. It was a whole thing to do this, and in this episode, Cora Opsahl relays the dramatic tale. You can learn more at 32bjhealthfundinsights.org.   Cora Opsahl is the director of the 32BJ Health Fund, a self-funded plan that provides affordable, comprehensive, and innovative health coverage to 200,000 union members and their families. During her time at the Health Fund, Cora has led the implementation of multiple benefit changes: removing NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital System and physicians from the network, transitioning to a new pharmacy vendor and pharmacy group purchasing coalition, and implementing an expanded Centers of Excellence program administered by Mount Sinai Hospital System. These efforts are projected to save over $35 million in 2022. Prior to joining the 32BJ Health Fund, Cora spent 12 years with Express Scripts, a pharmacy benefit manager. During her time there, she held a variety of roles, including Medicare Part D, strategy and acquisitions, operations, and account management. 07:02 What motivated the decision for 32BJ to cut NewYork-Presbyterian out of their network? 09:14 How did 32BJ compare their spending at each hospital in their network? 13:01 “We cannot be sustainable as a health fund … without really tackling the challenge of hospital prices.” 13:38 “It is one of the challenges as a self-funded plan that, even having this data, there's not a lot we can do with it.” 16:10 What is 32BJ Health Fund's maternity program? 19:34 What is the HEAL Act, and why did 32BJ Health Fund support it? 21:39 “For us, we just don't feel it's right that anyone gets to dictate our benefit.” 22:43 EP368 with Ashleigh Gunter.23:34 Why did 32BJ Health Fund reprice their claims using Medicare rates? 24:58 “It really goes to show you how high the commercial prices are in comparison to Medicare.” 25:52 EP366 with Kevin Schulman, MD.   You can learn more at 32bjhealthfundinsights.org.  @CoraOpsahl discusses managing #hospitalpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What motivated the decision for 32BJ to cut NewYork-Presbyterian out of their network? @CoraOpsahl discusses managing #hospitalpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth How did 32BJ compare their spending at each hospital in their network? @CoraOpsahl discusses managing #hospitalpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “We cannot be sustainable as a health fund … without really tackling the challenge of hospital prices.” @CoraOpsahl discusses managing #hospitalpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “It is one of the challenges as a self-funded plan that, even having this data, there's not a lot we can do with it.” @CoraOpsahl discusses managing #hospitalpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What is 32BJ Health Fund's maternity program? @CoraOpsahl discusses managing #hospitalpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What is the HEAL Act, and why did 32BJ Health Fund support it? @CoraOpsahl discusses managing #hospitalpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “For us, we just don't feel it's right that anyone gets to dictate our benefit.” @CoraOpsahl discusses managing #hospitalpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why did 32BJ Health Fund reprice their claims using Medicare rates? @CoraOpsahl discusses managing #hospitalpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “It really goes to show you how high the commercial prices are in comparison to Medicare.” @CoraOpsahl discusses managing #hospitalpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Cora Opsahl (EP372), Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32)

In this healthcare podcast, I am speaking with Cora Opsahl, who directs the 32BJ Health Fund. Important to know about Cora's background is this: In previous roles, she's worked deep in the inner workings of the healthcare industry. So, she came to 32BJ armed with a BS meter that is finely tuned, which is, unfortunately, an essential skill for anyone trying to help the patients and members relying on them to successfully navigate the healthcare industry. So sorry to have to say that, but employers and unions, your employees and members need your help. If you do not help them, then your employees can find themselves defenseless against so many pit traps of financial toxicity and also clinical decision-making that is not made by patients and their clinicians in the service of improving patient outcomes but made by some other party in the service of financial maximization. It is really frightening what goes on in some cases. I really appreciated this interview with Cora Opsahl, which will be two shows, this week and next week. This whole conversation has been really a big bright spot for me and will provide hope, I think, for any employer/union who is seeking ways to protect their members and patients, the ones on their plans and therefore under their aegis and whom they have a fiduciary responsibility to look out for. It also should be a bright spot for dedicated clinicians out there suffering under the weight of moral injury because you are expected to do things that you know are not in your patient's best interest—or not do things, as the case may be. This whole conversation should put on notice health systems and others who have been really taking advantage of employers who are asleep at the wheel. Change is always really, really slow—until it hits a zeitgeist and then it's not slow anymore. I just attended the MTVA (Moving to Value Alliance) in Connecticut last month, and there were 30 employers there listening and learning. I hear similar numbers from business coalitions across the country penetrating their local markets (Houston, Indiana, for example). Also, spoiler alert, upcoming conversations with Dave Chase will continue this “yeah, there's good things happening out there” theme. So, let's start here with a little bit more about the 32BJ union and their Health Fund that we'll hear about in this episode. 32BJ represents about 200,000 members. They are mostly in residential and commercial real estate—so, for example, your doormen, your maintenance workers, your security, your cleaners, amongst others. Members are in about 11 states, but a lot of them are in the New York City metro area. These union members who are in the fund work for over 5000 different employers. The 32BJ Health Fund has zero-dollar premiums. Also, employees have no premium contribution. Wowza on that point—that's a huge benefit. Here's one more thing that I'm gonna say about the 32BJ Health Fund overseen by Cora Opsahl, my guest today. Let's talk about their amazing leadership, because I do not, nor should anyone else, take exceptional leadership for granted. We have had one guest after another on this podcast who, when asked what it takes to actually attain value for plan members or attain the quadruple aim, what it takes to navigate and overcome bureaucracy and inertia, every one of those thought leaders asked the “What does it take?” question came back with the following included in their list: It takes leadership. Real leadership. The mark of an exceptional leader is one who can conceive of a big mission statement, a goal to deliver better for their members at lower costs, and also the chops and determination to operationalize that vision. This operationalization requires brainpower and relentless dedication to untangle the deliberate opacity that some current healthcare stakeholders absolutely rely on as a business strategy. It takes work to get to the bottom of and disarm some deliberately labyrinthine and noncompetitive contract terms. Let me just pause for a beat on these basically egregious contract terms. Certain healthcare stakeholders seem to consider it somehow their birthright and their privilege to demand that employer and union customers sign on some pretty insane dotted lines—to the detriment of members and employees. By the way, if anyone is thinking CAA right now, I'm right there with you. Talking about the new Consolidated Appropriations Act that went into effect late 2021, and it's gonna take a lot of C-suite executives by surprise when they're named in class action lawsuits. So, there is another impetus to question bad contract terms if anyone at an employer or union needs an additional reason besides the health and safety of employees and members to justify getting their healthcare house under control. For more on the CAA, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, listen to the show with Christin Deacon (EP342).   But as I mentioned a moment ago, we are breaking this conversation up into two power-packed episodes. This first one gets into everything that the 32BJ Health Fund does with their data. They have lots of data. They demand it. Next week's show gets into their unprecedented decision to kick a major local health system out of their network. This decision was also a data-driven decision, but it's a whole other conversation, which is why it is now a whole other episode. So, besides kicking out overly expensive health systems from their network, here's other things that 32BJ is currently doing with their data and which other employers and unions may get a few ideas from. If you have the data, you (like 32BJ) can use it to: Make smart benefit decisions that are validated, not just guesses. Before you decide to do something (add a wellness program etc), be able to model it accurately for how much it will actually cost you—which, spoiler alert, is most of the time not what the vendor will estimate. You have way more data than the vendor does, so you can certainly use it to great effect in this way. Make sure that the right members are being communicated with so that benefit designs are successful. As Ashleigh Gunter said in EP368, success when changing benefit designs has a lot more to do with communication than many realize. Create dashboards for leadership that may show trend lines, for example, which could be very helpful to ensure that the fund doesn't run out of money etc … little things like that. Figure out how much the fund is spending on various procedures and where. There's all this talk right now about the crazy variability of prices for the same exact service in the same local market. At one hospital, a colonoscopy could literally cost $10,000; and in another hospital—same quality, same basically everything—that same colonoscopy will be $2000 or $3000. I mean, there's a 500% delta or something in some of these cases. Ensure that if a vendor said they were going to do something, that they are actually doing it. This is especially meaningful for point solutions because of the whole squeezing the balloon thing. I can save money in a silo, and you won't realize that those dollars are getting transferred elsewhere unless you are doing your own math. This is a big deal if you start thinking about how pharmacy benefits are typically siloed from medical benefits. So, if I'm a pharmacy benefit manager, I can talk about how much I'm saving by denying patients drugs without consideration of the medical downstream implications of that. Ensure you're not paying a bill and writing a check for more than the bill was for, which is weirdly common. There's a whole show with Dawn Cornelis (EP285) about this. 32BJ has an engineering team that is creating an app to help members navigate to great doctors with fair prices. All of these things roll into basically three categories: Cutting wasteful spending and finding fraud Making smart benefit decisions Being able to see trends and forecast the future, which is really helpful for financial solvency etc As Cora Opsahl says, “I think we [all can] recognize [that] you [cannot] make smart … decisions and be a fiduciary of [a] fund without having [data].” You can learn more at 32bjhealthfundinsights.org.  Cora Opsahl is the director of the 32BJ Health Fund, a self-funded plan that provides affordable, comprehensive, and innovative health coverage to 200,000 union members and their families. During her time at the Health Fund, Cora has led the implementation of multiple benefit changes: removing NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital System and physicians from the network, transitioning to a new pharmacy vendor and pharmacy group purchasing coalition, and implementing an expanded Centers of Excellence program administered by Mount Sinai Hospital System. These efforts are projected to save over $35 million in 2022. Prior to joining the 32BJ Health Fund, Cora spent 12 years with Express Scripts, a pharmacy benefit manager. During her time there, she held a variety of roles, including Medicare Part D, strategy and acquisitions, operations, and account management. 08:55 How much data does 32BJ Health Fund have, where do they get it, and how do they use it? 10:56 How did 32BJ Health Fund successfully demand their data from 100% of their vendors? 11:45 “We feel it's really important that we own this information ourselves.” 12:08 “It always concerns me—if a vendor doesn't want to give you the information, what are they hiding?” 12:34 “It's not just getting the data; it's then using the data.” 15:44 “Without data, you're really just taking a guess; and guesses are never gonna get you where you need to go.” 17:23 EP285 with Dawn Cornelis.17:42 Is the cost of creating a data analytics team worth the cost savings of those data discoveries? 21:07 “The use of data has really built our knowledge.” 22:55 “It's really important to us that as we make benefit decisions, we're doing it smartly.” 27:34 EP358 with Wayne Jenkins, MD.27:42 How is 32BJ Health Fund making their data knowledge actionable? 30:14 “If we can figure out how to make telehealth accessible … there may be an opportunity for telehealth … to upset some of these … monopoly systems or low-choice options.” 32:25 “It's really easy to think that we can solve this problem through benefit design … but in the end … it's the price.” You can learn more at 32bjhealthfundinsights.org.  @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth How much data does 32BJ Health Fund have, where do they get it, and how do they use it? @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth How did 32BJ Health Fund successfully demand their data from 100% of their vendors? @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “We feel it's really important that we own this information ourselves.” @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “It always concerns me—if a vendor doesn't want to give you the information, what are they hiding?” @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “It's not just getting the data; it's then using the data.” @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “Without data, you're really just taking a guess; and guesses are never gonna get you where you need to go.” @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Is the cost of creating a data analytics team worth the cost savings of those data discoveries? @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “The use of data has really built our knowledge.” @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “It's really important to us that as we make benefit decisions, we're doing it smartly.” @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth How is 32BJ Health Fund making their data knowledge actionable? @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “If we can figure out how to make telehealth accessible … there may be an opportunity for telehealth … to upset some of these … monopoly systems or low-choice options.” @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “It's really easy to think that we can solve this problem through benefit design … but in the end … it's the price.” @CoraOpsahl discusses #healthdata on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Dr Mark Fendrick (Encore! EP308), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294)  

I wanted to remind everyone about this show from last year because it's becoming increasingly relevant. We have this weird thing going on where everybody seems to be talking about physician incentives and payments and financial implications but so often disregards patient incentives and payments and financial implications. Consider that we're at a place in the time-space continuum where it is inarguable that financial toxicity has become clinical toxicity. Patients are increasingly in huge numbers abandoning care, splitting pills, doing all kinds of things to save money that are clinically toxic. And these are patients with “good insurance” that we are talking about here. So, here's a role play: Provider organization is actually paying doctors for outcomes. In wanders a patient with a huge deductible. Doc says, “Wow, Patient … so important that you take your insulin or med as directed or get a follow-up on that scary colonoscopy finding.” Patient says, “Sorry, Doc. Can't afford it.” And the doc gets dinged because the patient outcomes are avoidably poor. That's what this show with Dr. Mark Fendrick digs into: aligning patient incentives (aka benefit designs etc) with value-based payments on the provider side. And with that, here's your encore: And here I thought I knew a lot about value-based care. In this healthcare podcast, I am speaking with Mark Fendrick, MD, who is the director over at the University of Michigan Center for Value-Based Insurance Design. This conversation is for those of you who already know pretty much about value-based care concepts. If you do not, I'd go back and listen to, say, Encore! EP206, with Ashok Subramanian, before this one.   Dr. Fendrick talks in this healthcare podcast about what it takes for value-based care to happen in the real world. No kidding, it's about making sure that reimbursement is aligned with good things (no great surprise there). But two light bulb moments I had in this conversation with Dr. Fendrick: At the beginning of the year, how many doctors and nurses, inspired to do the right thing, have told their patients with diabetes, say, to go get an eye exam to check for diabetic retinopathy? No one would disagree that this is definitely a good idea. Diabetic retinopathy causes blindness. But here's the reality of that conversation. Doc says, “Go get an eye exam.” And patient says, “I can't. My deductible is huge, and I can't afford it.” So, the patient doesn't get the follow-up care and winds up in the hospital or blind. And the doctor gets dinged on his or her quality scores. Suboptimal outcomes all around, I'd say. This also happens on the pharmacy side of the equation, but I think a lot of us are a little bit more familiar with that scenario—like type 1 diabetics who can't afford to pick up their insulin because of a Medicare Part D or commercial deductible that they haven't met yet. I just never really connected the dots back to the provider getting black marks because their patient has a benefit design that's not aligned with the quality measures. In a majority of benefit designs, consumer price sharing is based not on the value of the service but on how expensive the service just happens to be. Wow! So, we're trying to get our plan members to be consumers and use the power of their wallets to make good healthcare choices. And what we're really doing is driving them toward cheap things or no care and discouraging them from indulging—and I say that sarcastically—in expensive things. But the expensive things might be the high-value care, and the relatively cheap things might be crap that's fully unnecessary or harmful and, over a whole population, adds up to a lot of zeros. Healthcare is not like a consumer market where the expensive things are usually a better version of the cheap things. For all you economists out there, you don't want the demand curve to be elastic when what's cheap and what's expensive has no correlation to quality or necessity. Nobody should be super flabbergasted when a $35 cure-all supplement peddled on YouTube makes some random influencer a millionaire. That's how supply and demand works. Much to ponder in this episode. You can learn more at vbidcenter.org. There's also a great newsletter you can sign up for there.   A. Mark Fendrick, MD, is a professor of internal medicine in the School of Medicine and a professor of health management and policy in the School of Public Health at the University of Michigan. Dr. Fendrick received a bachelor's degree in economics and chemistry from the University of Pennsylvania and his medical degree from Harvard Medical School. He completed his residency in internal medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, where he was a fellow in the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program. Dr. Fendrick conceptualized and coined the term Value-Based Insurance Design (V-BID) and currently directs the V-BID Center at the University of Michigan (vbidcenter.org), the leading advocate for development, implementation, and evaluation of innovative health benefit plans. His research focuses on how clinician payment and consumer engagement initiatives impact access to care, quality of care, and healthcare costs. Dr. Fendrick has authored over 250 articles and book chapters and has received numerous awards for the creation and implementation of value-based insurance design. His perspective and understanding of clinical and economic issues have fostered collaborations with numerous government agencies, health plans, professional societies, and healthcare companies.   Dr. Fendrick is an elected member of the National Academy of Medicine (formerly IOM), serves on the Medicare Coverage Advisory Committee, and has been invited to present testimony before the US Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; the US House of Representatives Ways and Means Subcommittee on Health; and the US Senate Committee on Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel. 05:00 Is back surgery high-value care? 05:51 If care is patient to patient, how is high-value care decided upon? 06:40 “Flintstones delivery: We have to move from the sledgehammer to the scalpel.” 11:14 “Almost all of the services that we recommend to reduce cost sharing … do not save money.” 12:30 “I didn't go to medical school to learn how to save people money.” 17:03 “When a patient and their clinician agree … the patient should be able to get that [service] easily, and the clinician should be paid generously.” 18:01 “When patients and providers are aligned, they do much better.” 19:59 What services are deemed high value, and what services should be pre-deductible? 21:50 “Are primary care visits high value? … The answer is, it depends.” 25:55 What are V-BID's core pillars to address value-based care? 28:04 How does Dr. Fendrick's method of value-based care and reimbursement actually enable better consumerism? 29:51 What do providers think about changing reimbursement on low-value and high-value care? 30:58 “We have incentives that are run amok.” 32:12 EP176 with Dr. Robert Pearl. 32:49 “It's all about incentives.” 33:43 “You do have the funding; you just have to have the courage.” You can learn more at vbidcenter.org. There's also a great newsletter you can sign up for there. Mark Fendrick, MD, of @UM_VBID discusses #valuebasedcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #digitalhealth If care is patient to patient, how is high-value care decided upon? Mark Fendrick, MD, of @UM_VBID discusses #valuebasedcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #digitalhealth “Flintstones delivery: We have to move from the sledgehammer to the scalpel.” Mark Fendrick, MD, of @UM_VBID discusses #valuebasedcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #digitalhealth “Almost all of the services that we recommend to reduce cost sharing … do not save money.” Mark Fendrick, MD, of @UM_VBID discusses #valuebasedcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #digitalhealth “I didn't go to medical school to learn how to save people money.” Mark Fendrick, MD, of @UM_VBID discusses #valuebasedcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #digitalhealth “When patients and providers are aligned, they do much better.” Mark Fendrick, MD, of @UM_VBID discusses #valuebasedcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #digitalhealth “Are primary care visits high value? … The answer is, it depends.” Mark Fendrick, MD, of @UM_VBID discusses #valuebasedcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #digitalhealth “We have incentives that are run amok.” Mark Fendrick, MD, of @UM_VBID discusses #valuebasedcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #digitalhealth “You do have the funding; you just have to have the courage.” Mark Fendrick, MD, of @UM_VBID discusses #valuebasedcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #digitalhealth   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP371), Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble  

So, this is a 400-level episode in specialty pharmacy options for plan sponsors, meaning here are your prerequisites: You gotta know what buy and bill is, and you gotta know what pharmacy bagging is, meaning white bagging, for example. If you do not, I would listen to Encore! EP282 with Aaron Mitchell, MD, MPH, where we go deep on buy and bill. And then listen to EP369 for the skinny on pharmacy bagging. If you already know what buy and bill is and you already know what white bagging is, then not only do you know more than 98% of the people in the healthcare industry, but also, you're going to get as much out of this conversation with Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu as I did.   Last week's show was also with Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu. Last week, we talked about how some hospitals and cancer centers are managing to ring up up to six times the cost of an expensive-already injected or infused drug through buy and bill. This is why pharmacy bagging became a thing, if we want to talk about this in historical perspective. It's a direct market response to buy and bill. Hospital systems start making egregious amounts of money marking up drugs that already cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and their markups are hundreds of thousands of dollars on top of that. Hospital starts making a fortune off of drug markups. Plan sponsors need an alternative, and … enter pharmacy bagging (ie, carving out specialty pharmacy drugs to a PBM [pharmacy benefit manager]). In this show, we compare the potential benefits and problematic loopholes and/or patient concerns for plan sponsors who are trying to figure out whether to carve out specialty pharmacy benefits to a PBM or grin and bear it with the buy and bill. Or, as another option, whether to steer patients to specific infusion centers or specific provider organizations that might have more favorable contract terms for the plan sponsor. Or, hooking up with a home infusion company, again, who is willing to negotiate terms that might be far better for said plan sponsor than just letting some hospital have their way with employees and the health plan. As another alternative, of course, plan sponsors could consider medical travel, which some certainly are. My biggest takeaway from this whole conversation and from the episodes that we have had in this, dare I call it, series about pharmacy benefits, starting with the show with Scott Haas (EP365) where we talked about PBM contracts, moving to the show with Dr. Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282) where we talked about buy and bill, then going to the show with Keith Hartman (EP369) where we talked about pharmacy bagging, then last week's show how hospitals manage to buy and bill at 6x the price of these expensive pharmaceuticals … my takeaway from this whole specialty drug extravaganza is that specialty drug procurement is very different than retail drug procurement. Retail drugs, you worry about them en masse at scale almost at the population level. Specialty drugs? You can have one patient on a specialty drug, and that one patient costs as much as the entire rest of the member population combined. So, managing specialty drugs and their administration becomes almost a case-by-case operation. What drug is it? Where is the patient? What options are available? It's possible to save hundreds of thousands of dollars on that one patient, for that one patient's care, and get better patient outcomes by getting the right patient on the right drug that is administered in the right setting.   You can learn more by connecting with Erik and Autumn on LinkedIn or by emailing them at erik.davis@usi.com and autumn.yongchu@usi.com.   Erik Davis, AAI, CIC, CRM, is senior vice president and principal consultant, managed care and analytics, at USI Insurance Services. He has over 30 years of experience in the insurance and risk management industry. Erik works to create an environment that supports the healthcare risk management goals of an organization while maintaining focus on compliance and financial accountability. He is instrumental in vendor negotiations, data benchmarking, population health strategies, claims analysis, recommendations in plan design, and communication strategies. In this capacity, Erik has been involved with development of rates, payment structures, and recommendations of changes in processes, policies, and procedures. He has a broad understanding of contract analysis, evaluating risk, auditing for correct payment, and structuring of excess loss and pharmacy programs. Erik's experience extends from overall employee benefits consulting to workers' compensation, as well as managed care organizations in Medicaid, Medicare, and commercial contractual risk arrangements. Erik earned his bachelor's degree in economics from Oregon State University. He holds Accredited Advisor in Insurance (AAI), Certified Insurance Counselor (CIC), and Certified Risk Manager (CRM) designations. Autumn Yongchu is a healthcare operational risk consultant at USI Insurance Services. Autumn works with multiple database platforms to examine data for trends and abnormalities. Using investigative querying, medical coding analysis, and report development, she provides resources that help identify cost control opportunities and assists organizations in strategic business decisions regarding the management of healthcare risks. Autumn analyzes and interprets healthcare utilization data, allowing the development of initiatives regarding claim and risk management. This includes identifying fiscal and clinical strategies and providing necessary information to develop, design, and implement management initiatives. Autumn also analyzes trends, assists with insurance underwriting, and adjudicates stop-loss claims. Autumn has an in-depth knowledge of Medicaid and Medicare billing guidelines and payment methodologies. Prior to joining USI, Autumn was a claims auditor and trainer for a managed care organization which serviced over 100,000 commercial, Medicaid, and Medicare lives. Her responsibilities included contract analysis, claims adjudication, ensuring accurate payment, and identifying and recouping errors. 04:45 Can you actually save money by carving out specialty infused drugs and making them a pharmacy benefit? 06:28 How can plan sponsors use white bagging as leverage to reduce costs from markups? 06:47 Does white bagging save money compared to buy and bill? 07:42 “You also need to understand that with some of these drugs, you're dealing with very vulnerable people.”—Erik 08:41 EP369 with Keith Hartman, RPh. 11:10 “When your insurance carrier is married to your PBM, it doesn't matter where the money goes.”—Autumn 11:33 EP365 with Scott Haas. 12:00 “You need to have a collective understanding of every variable … when you're making those … decisions.”—Erik 14:53 How can comparison shopping save plan sponsors money when it comes to specialty infusion costs? 16:51 How can comparison shopping be a vicious circle in the wrong setting for plan sponsors? 18:43 “That's part of the problem: It's not just the plan sponsor not being educated enough; it's also the consultant … that they believe is supposed to be that isn't.”—Erik 19:03 How has transparency been used by healthcare systems to keep buyers' eyes off the ball? 26:55 “It is very case by case, but it comes down to your risk appetite.”—Autumn 28:19 “It's something that you have to, as a plan sponsor, really continue to monitor throughout the plan year.”—Autumn 28:38 “The more you know, the better equipped you're gonna be.”—Autumn 29:27 What can employers who are feeling aggressive do? 31:19 “The dollars circle, whether people realize it or not.”—Autumn You can learn more by connecting with Erik and Autumn on LinkedIn or by emailing them at erik.davis@usi.com and autumn.yongchu@usi.com.   Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma Can you actually save money by carving out specialty infused drugs and making them a pharmacy benefit? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma How can plan sponsors use white bagging as leverage to reduce costs from markups? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma Does white bagging save money compared to buy and bill? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma “You also need to understand that with some of these drugs, you're dealing with very vulnerable people.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma “When your insurance carrier is married to your PBM, it doesn't matter where the money goes.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma “You need to have a collective understanding of every variable … when you're making those … decisions.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma How can comparison shopping save plan sponsors money when it comes to specialty infusion costs? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma How can comparison shopping be a vicious circle in the wrong setting for plan sponsors? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma “That's part of the problem: It's not just the plan sponsor not being educated enough; it's also the consultant … that they believe is supposed to be that isn't.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma How has transparency been used by healthcare systems to keep buyers' eyes off the ball? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma “It is very case by case, but it comes down to your risk appetite.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma “It's something that you have to, as a plan sponsor, really continue to monitor throughout the plan year.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma “The more you know, the better equipped you're gonna be.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma What can employers who are feeling aggressive do? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma “The dollars circle, whether people realize it or not.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #buyandbill and #pharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharmacy #pharma   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu (EP370), Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger  

I have been on a mission to figure out why some health systems, particularly in the oncology space but not limited to the oncology space, could manage to mark up the price of infused specialty pharmacy drugs up to 6x. Some employers and patients are paying six times the cost of a specialty pharmacy drug in markup for some already incredibly expensive specialty pharmacy drug at some oncology centers. Read more about this in a study by Roy Xiao, MD, and colleagues. Let's not forget now or ever that financial toxicity is clinical toxicity. This 6x is exactly how financial toxicity is operationalized. Many patients are charged a coinsurance percentage based on their cost of care, after all; and like 20% of 6x is a huge number, it is a huge bankrupting bill for some patients—maybe many patients. That, plus their premiums go up because, of course, their employers are picking up the remaining 80% of that 600% markup. Families are already, on average, paying I think it's $22,000 in premium; and the trend line on that premium growth continues to go up steeply in the 2022-23 projections that I have seen. Bottom line: This 6x is not a victimless modus operandi is my point. But what I wanted to know is how they do it, these health systems. Charging 6x the cost of a super expensive specialty pharmacy drug in markup would seem to require some skill, right? And any time I see a Pandora's box, I have a terrible habit of trying to get in there. Autumn Yongchu and Erik Davis to the rescue. Today's show digs into how some health systems and hospitals stack the odds that no one will notice their 6x markups and just pay the bills. Here's the short version of the playbook, but you'll need to listen to the show for a more robust explanation. First off, keep in mind that while Medicare Part B tells hospitals to charge ASP (average sales price) + 6% (ish) when they buy and bill Medicare patients, there is no such guidance for commercial patients. Commercial insurers negotiate a fee off chargemaster rates, and as we all know, those chargemaster prices are, in general, based on absolutely nothing and are, in general, sky-high. So that's the first thing. The second thing gets into coding. Let me give you the general idea here, but we talk about this in some depth in the conversation to come. As you likely know, hospitals get paid by sending bills with codes on them—procedure codes, for example. We the hospital did this procedure, and our charge for this procedure is $4000—so, here you go. Code followed by dollar amount is shown on somebody's bill or explanation of benefits document. These procedure codes are standardized across the industry for the most part. It's not like every health system and/or payer is making up their own. This standardized set of procedure codes is called the Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System, affectionally known as HCPCS. So, if someone starts talking about a HCPCS code, all it means is that the code comes out of that standard set of codes. Now, J-codes are one kind of code in this common procedure coding system. They are procedure codes that start with a “J.” These J-codes are for procedures involving (usually) specialty pharmacy drugs. A J-code identifies the specialty pharmacy drug that was used in the procedure. So, you'd think it'd be pretty easy to audit a hospital bill, right? You look at the J-code on the bill; you find the ASP, the average sales price, or whatever of the drug; and then you get out your trusty calculator and you do the math on what the markup is. And okay, maybe this works sometimes … but the problem is that so very, very often, the hospital doesn't put the actual drug's J-code on the bill. There's this miscellaneous J-code that doesn't specify the drug used, which is a quite common tactic, it seems. (I learned that in this episode.) Hospital just sticks “Miscellaneous chemotherapy” on a bill with a price after it, and nobody knows what drug was used. Or the hospital will send a bill that just includes revenue codes. I think about revenue codes as the name of the section of the bill. It's like on a menu: There's that section, that headline, that says “Seafood” with a whole list of seafood dishes underneath it. In this example, the Seafood header is like the revenue code; and the J-codes are the actual dishes. Some bills come from the hospital, and all they have on them are the revenue code. There was some seafood. We're not gonna tell you what dish or how much seafood, but yeah, seafood. The only thing we know about seafood is that there was some and it was very pricy. Here's a great example of a bill with some explanations.   The main point here is that how health systems get away, in large part, with charging a whole lot for specialty pharmacy drugs is that their bills roll up charges into these very opaque codes that include lots and lots of stuff that is not broken out. When I interviewed Marshall Allen (EP328) and we talked about his book Never Pay the First Bill, he said step one in getting an accurate and fair bill is to ask for the line item charges—and now that is totally making sense to me and also why this is so vital. Just be aware, if you ask for these breakouts, you will likely get a huge box of hard copies. Check out this photo of a literally three-foot pile of printouts that one patient-turned-artist exhibited at an art show recently that I saw. If you don't have the stamina to sort through all of those pages and pages and pages, you could be subject to 6x or more in markups or billing errors which are all too common and all too expensive. Hospital charges are a huge chunk of any employer's healthcare spend, after all—over half of it in some cases. These are not small potatoes that we're talking about. These are bills that bankrupt patients and make premiums go so high that patients cannot afford to get care.   In this healthcare podcast, as mentioned earlier, we have two guests—Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu—both from USI Managed Care Consulting and both having spent decades deep in the inner workings of the healthcare industry. And the topic of today's show required that depth of knowledge, for sure. You can learn more by connecting with Erik and Autumn on LinkedIn or by emailing them at erik.davis@usi.com and autumn.yongchu@usi.com.   Erik Davis, AAI, CIC, CRM, is senior vice president and principal consultant, managed care and analytics, at USI Insurance Services. He has over 30 years of experience in the insurance and risk management industry. Erik works to create an environment that supports the healthcare risk management goals of an organization while maintaining focus on compliance and financial accountability. He is instrumental in vendor negotiations, data benchmarking, population health strategies, claims analysis, recommendations in plan design, and communication strategies. In this capacity, Erik has been involved with development of rates, payment structures, and recommendations of changes in processes, policies, and procedures. He has a broad understanding of contract analysis, evaluating risk, auditing for correct payment, and structuring of excess loss and pharmacy programs. Erik's experience extends from overall employee benefits consulting to workers' compensation, as well as managed care organizations in Medicaid, Medicare, and commercial contractual risk arrangements. Erik earned his bachelor's degree in economics from Oregon State University. He holds Accredited Advisor in Insurance (AAI), Certified Insurance Counselor (CIC), and Certified Risk Manager (CRM) designations. Autumn Yongchu is a healthcare operational risk consultant at USI Insurance Services. Autumn works with multiple database platforms to examine data for trends and abnormalities. Using investigative querying, medical coding analysis, and report development, she provides resources that help identify cost control opportunities and assists organizations in strategic business decisions regarding the management of healthcare risks. Autumn analyzes and interprets healthcare utilization data, allowing the development of initiatives regarding claim and risk management. This includes identifying fiscal and clinical strategies and providing necessary information to develop, design, and implement management initiatives. Autumn also analyzes trends, assists with insurance underwriting, and adjudicates stop-loss claims. Autumn has an in-depth knowledge of Medicaid and Medicare billing guidelines and payment methodologies. Prior to joining USI, Autumn was a claims auditor and trainer for a managed care organization which serviced over 100,000 commercial, Medicaid, and Medicare lives. Her responsibilities included contract analysis, claims adjudication, ensuring accurate payment, and identifying and recouping errors. 07:33 How do hospitals maximize inpatient bills? 08:05 How can hospitals upcode on specialty pharmacy products? 09:44 “It's really not uncommon to be overbilled and overcharged.”—Autumn 11:11 Why do marked up bill charges actually affect the price commercial payers pay? 12:49 “If your payer's not double-checking … how do you know that fraud's happening?”—Autumn 12:52 “If the payer doesn't have the detail to validate what that drug actually is, then are they really checking?”—Autumn 13:33 Why is it so hard to verify what you're actually paying for on a hospital bill? 16:28 How do hospitals maximize profit with outpatients? 17:12 “Really it comes down to contracts and how [the] contracts are written.”—Autumn 21:54 “There are … silos within healthcare, and none of them actually talk to each other.”—Autumn 24:56 “There are these rules out there, but there are also big loopholes out there.”—Autumn 26:13 How can hospitals maximize payments for Medicare patients on drugs that have been out for a while? 29:30 “We just have a tendency to assume … that Medicare has a rate for everything, and Medicare doesn't.”—Autumn 30:32: EP369 with Keith Hartman, RPh.   You can learn more by connecting with Erik and Autumn on LinkedIn or by emailing them at erik.davis@usi.com and autumn.yongchu@usi.com.   Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems How do hospitals maximize inpatient bills? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems How can hospitals upcode on specialty pharmacy products? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems “It's really not uncommon to be overbilled and overcharged.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems Why do marked up bill charges actually affect the price commercial payers pay? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems “If your payer's not double-checking … how do you know that fraud's happening?” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems “If the payer doesn't have the detail to validate what that drug actually is, then are they really checking?” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems Why is it so hard to verify what you're actually paying for on a hospital bill? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems How do hospitals maximize profit with outpatients? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems “Really it comes down to contracts and how [the] contracts are written.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems “There are … silos within healthcare, and none of them actually talk to each other.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems “There are these rules out there, but there are also big loopholes out there.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems How can hospitals maximize payments for Medicare patients on drugs that have been out for a while? Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems “We just have a tendency to assume … that Medicare has a rate for everything, and Medicare doesn't.” Erik Davis and Autumn Yongchu discuss #specialtypharma billing in #healthsystems on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #hospitalsystems   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Keith Hartman, Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong    

Last week's show was an encore episode with Dr. Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), and we talked about buy and bill. To continue our exploration of specialty pharmacy intrigue, let's talk about so-called “bagging.” I wanted to get an overview of all of the different kinds of specialty pharmacy bagging. Bagging is a big deal. If you have anything to do with trying to control pharmacy costs or the clinical outcomes of specialty pharmacy patients, you too are going to want to understand what's going on here with bagging. I was thrilled to have a chance to chat with Keith Hartman, who is my guest in this healthcare podcast. He is the CEO of ContinuumRx. He's a pharmacist by education and has been in the pharmacy space for over 25 years now, touching just about every aspect of pharmacy from retail operations to long-term care and now, most recently, home infusion. This makes him an ideal person to chat with about this topic. And FYI, it was not easy to find someone to do so to clearly see the actions and reactions going on here because that's what this is all about: actions and reactions—how any self-respecting market distortion is going to cause a cascade of equal and opposite market distortions. So, let's cruise through the whole infused/injected specialty pharmacy historical play-by-play, shall we? It's like a “Who's on First?” routine—except very, very not funny. So, here we go. This is, of course, the semi-reductive abridged version; but let's do this thing. Once upon a time, the bagging story starts in ye olden days, meaning more than ten years ago, before specialty pharmacy drugs really became the massive profit centers for any party who can manage to get their fingers in the specialty pharmacy cookie jar. In these ancient and halcyon times, brown bagging was kind of a modus operandi. Don't forget, we're talking about infused or injectable drugs here, especially ones that need to be infused or injected in the provider's office. So, brown bagging means and meant when a specialty pharmacy drug is shipped directly to a patient, or a patient goes and picks up the specialty pharmacy drug at the pharmacy. Doc takes out prescription pad (this is in ye olden days, remember) and writes out the Rx. Patient picks up the drug from the pharmacy, which may be handed to them in a brown bag. Get it? But then they take that “brown bag,” as it were, to their doctor's office. The doctor takes the drug out of the brown bag and infuses or injects it. I say doctor's office because many times, in the olden days, that's where this went down. And this brown bagging had some issues, for sure; but specialty pharmacy drugs really weren't all that big of a thing either dollar-wise or frequency-wise. At some point in our story here, pharma manufacturers start seeing just exactly how much money the market will bear for specialty pharmacy drugs, and the prices of these specialty drugs go through the roof. At the same time, for a bunch of reasons I actually discussed with Dr. Bruce Rector (EP300), a whole bunch of these specialty pharmacy drugs start hitting the market all at once. So, these drugs have skyrocketing prices—and there's lots of them.   At that point, some (certainly not all, but enough) CFOs at provider organizations were like—wowza, epiphany, light bulb moment—there's a lot of money that can be made here because buy and bill. In buy and bill, which I talked about last week with Dr. Aaron Mitchell, provider organizations get reimbursed the cost of the drug plus some percentage when they administer it—meaning the more expensive the drug, the more money a provider can make because a percentage of a bigger number is, of course, a bigger number. Add to that a party-sized container of other provider shenanigans to maximize revenue on specialty pharmacy patients—and that revenue got bigger every single year. A recent report just came out that, on average, for oncology drugs, some providers are making six times the cost of the drug. Six times the cost of a drug that can cost lots of zeros! Just wow—6x! That's real money. This is winning the lottery every single time a patient needing a specialty drug shows up on your doorstep.   Continuing the tale here, this buy and bill health system extreme greed hits employers in their pocketbooks. And, of course, plan sponsors start desperately seeking relief. Who rides up on a white horse? PBMs (pharmacy benefit managers), of course. PBMs say that they will negotiate with drug companies and buy the drugs on behalf of the plan sponsors for much cheaper. Then they will ship the drugs purchased to the provider organizations. Thus, the plan sponsor only needs to pay providers to administer the drug, not that and some crazy markup on the drug itself. Ladies and gentlemen, white bagging has entered the building. White bagging is when the drug is not shipped directly to the patient à la brown bagging. It is when the drug is shipped to the provider. But wait … there's more to the story than a grand PBM gesture of goodwill. They see how much money the employers are used to paying providers for these drugs and realize that the PBM only needs to come in with a price that's less than that, at least at the beginning. So, over the years, weird stuff starts happening with rebates on the specialty drugs. Listen to the show with Scott Haas (EP365) for more on that. But bottom line, white bagging becomes not exactly a mecca of cost savings. PBMs are, as we all know, not known for their ability to moderate their profitability, after all. At this point in our story, let's just pause to say that provider organizations are very, very, very not happy with this whole white bagging intervention. Not only did a piece of the provider's specialty pharmacy cash cow get snatched by the PBMs, but there are also clinical issues with white bagging that we talk about on the show today. And some of these issues are not BS. Do not get me wrong. They are very real, and I do not want to minimize them. And so, provider organizations start to stand up their own hospital specialty pharmacies because then at least they can get some of the white bagging cha-ching. See what I mean? Plan sponsor, health plan mandates that the drug be filled in a pharmacy, hospital owns the pharmacy or part of the pharmacy … and now they have so-called clear bagging. Clear bagging is when one organization owns the pharmacy and the provider who will administer the drug. Clear bagging solves some of the clinical issues with white bagging, and the hospital also gets to take a cut. I'd be remiss not to mention here that some hospitals have worked very hard on their clear-bagging programs and definitely have tried to improve the quality of service here. You're going to have to listen to the show to hear about gold bagging and also the latest developments in this whole war employers and patients and taxpayers are fighting with PBMs and hospitals who are fighting with each other over who gets the money. Also, the continuing trend of brown bagging, especially as “in the patient's home” gets tagged on the end of lots of care delivery like “in bed” gets tagged on the end of lots of fortune cookies. Next week's show will dig into how exactly some providers are managing to get the up to 6x the cost of specialty pharmacy drugs when Medicare Part B at least says that they're only supposed to get ASP [average sales price] + 6% (ish). I just could not figure out how they were managing to get 6x just given that Medicare Part B rule, but yeah, they are—and we'll learn about that next week. You can learn more at continuumrx.com.   Keith P. Hartman, RPh, is chief executive officer of ContinuumRx and an experienced operating entrepreneur and pharmacy business owner spanning two decades. Keith founded and grew a chain of retail pharmacies, a compounding pharmacy, and two specialty pharmacies along with a long-term care pharmacy. All were built and grown under the guise of operational excellence and produced great results. Some were sold, while others he still owns and provides limited strategic guidance as a member of the board of directors. Keith graduated from the University of the Sciences with a degree in pharmacy. Today he is still involved mentoring future pharmacists and pharmacy owners. 08:09 What kinds of patients and/or drugs is the concept of bagging relevant to? 08:53 What is brown bagging, and what are the issues with it? 10:28 What is white bagging, and how is it different from brown bagging? 11:30 Who are the key players in pharma bagging? 12:25 Why does a PBM want a specialty drug to go through them? 12:49 From the physician's perspective, why is buy and bill ideal? 16:46 How does white bagging impact patient clinical care? 22:12 Encore! EP216 with Chris Sloan. 23:05 What are the two main reasons patients might not continue their therapy? 23:29 “We've got to leave some authority with our prescribers to be able to make a clinical decision of what's best for that … patient.” 24:41 What is clear bagging? 26:51 How does a hospital specialty pharmacy get in network with a PBM? 28:57 What is gold bagging? 30:11 “Outlook really needs to be what's best for the patient.” 32:10 EP337 with Olivia Webb.   You can learn more at continuumrx.com.   Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma What kinds of patients and/or drugs is the concept of bagging relevant to? Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma What is brown bagging, and what are the issues with it? Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma What is white bagging, and how is it different from brown bagging? Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma Who are the key players in pharma bagging? Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma Why does a PBM want a specialty drug to go through them? Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma From the physician's perspective, why is buy and bill ideal? Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma How does white bagging impact patient clinical care? Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma What are the two main reasons patients might not continue their therapy? Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma “We've got to leave some authority with our prescribers to be able to make a clinical decision of what's best for that … patient.” Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma What is clear bagging? Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma How does a hospital specialty pharmacy get in network with a PBM? Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma What is gold bagging? Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma “Outlook really needs to be what's best for the patient.” Keith Hartman of @continuumrx1 discusses #specialtypharmabagging on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #pharma #specialtypharma   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Dr Aaron Mitchell (Encore! EP282), Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider  

On Episode 61, Jeff delves into the wild story of a corrupt investigation unit in the Baltimore Police Department called the Gun Trace Task Force. The ringleader of the group Wayne Jenkins and his crew extorted and stole from citizens, planted drugs and guns, stole overtime and sold drugs. In the end, they'd face the wrath of the Feds and all sit currently in federal prison.  PLEASE give us a follow on socials!  FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE and please subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMYV0eyKQFhNZwLXpx7I0Ng FOLLOW US ON TWITTER: @thesitdown7  Check out our present sponsor BetterHelp... get help with online therapy now: www.betterhelp.com/sitdown for 10 percent off DO YOU WANNA ADVERTISE ON THE SHOW? Contact sales@advertisecast.com to advertise on The Sit Down Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Episode 61, Jeff delves into the wild story of a corrupt investigation unit in the Baltimore Police Department called the Gun Trace Task Force. The ringleader of the group Wayne Jenkins and his crew extorted and stole from citizens, planted drugs and guns, stole overtime and sold drugs. In the end, they'd face the wrath of the Feds and all sit currently in federal prison. PLEASE give us a follow on socials! FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE and please subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMYV0eyKQFhNZwLXpx7I0Ng FOLLOW US ON TWITTER: @thesitdown7

After that recent episode with Scott Haas (EP365), where we talked about the real deal with PBM contracting, I kicked into high gear trying to untangle this whole apocalyptic honky-tonk we call benefits for prescription drugs. Notice I did not say prescription drug benefits because that would imply that pharmaceuticals are only charged for under the umbrella of pharmacy benefits. Ha ha, that would be just too easy. No, some pharma drugs are charged as part of patients' medical benefits. An amazing primer for what that looks like in the real world follows.   Just pointing out that any self-respecting healthcare market distortion deserves another, and if anything qualifies as a market distortion, it's buy and bill—what I talk about with Dr. Mitchell in this healthcare podcast. In the following weeks, we'll chat about how the market has responded to this buy and bill market distortion that we talk about in this episode. So, next week, we're gonna get into all the different kinds of bagging: the so-called brown bagging, the white bagging, the clear bagging … and what is this newfangled gold bagging? Spoiler alert there. Tune in next week. And here's another spoiler alert: While in this show today we chat about how provider organizations tend to make somewhere between 4.5% and 20% additional over drug costs, there was a recent study claiming that 4.5% to 20% is chump change. Some provider organizations are, in fact, making four times to six times the cost of the drug—a very expensive drug, mind you (lots of zeros here)—in profit. In the show in two weeks, I'm speaking with April Yongchu and Erik Davis from USI about exactly and specifically how provider organizations can manage to perform this “let's make hundreds of thousands of dollars today” magic trick. So, with that, here's your encore. In the April [2020] issue of Value-Based Cancer Care (that's a journal), there's an article talking about a keynote presentation and a study highlighting a big problem for patients with cancer: toxicity. It's a fact that some chemo agents are pretty toxic, but in this healthcare podcast I am talking about financial toxicity. The financial burden of cancer care has a seriously negative influence on patients' quality of life. This keynote speaker quoted in the Value-Based Cancer Care article implored his fellow oncologists: “Think twice before ordering costly interventions that may have little impact on the clinical course,” he said. This might be difficult for a number of reasons, and one of them is that oncology centers make money, a whole lot of money, sometimes the most money, from infusing cancer medications. It's this little payment paradigm called “buy and bill.” The cancer center buys the meds and then gets paid an additional fee to infuse the drug. This fee is a percentage of the drug cost. You've probably heard a lot lately about the skyrocketing costs of some of these cancer agents. Realize that if you're an oncology center, the higher the drug costs, the higher your revenue. Now consider the patient suffering under the weight of increased cost sharing and employers and taxpayers who are funding this strange payment model. In this healthcare podcast, I dig into this so-called “buy and bill” payment model with Aaron Mitchell, MD, MPH. Dr. Mitchell is an oncologist and health services researcher over at Memorial Sloan Kettering. You can learn more at drugpricinglab.org. You can also connect with Dr. Mitchell on Twitter at @TheWonkologist.   Aaron Mitchell, MD, MPH, is a practicing medical oncologist and health services researcher. He is an assistant attending at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in the department of epidemiology and biostatistics. His research focuses on understanding how the financial incentives in the healthcare system affect physician practice patterns and care delivery to cancer patients. He cares for patients with prostate and bladder cancer.   04:34 Following the drug and following the dollar. 04:56 The “buy and bill” system. 05:43 The perverse and problematic incentives of the system. 08:38 “It creates the incentive for us to gravitate toward the more expensive drug.” 08:42 The hesitancy to address the financial toxicity of drugs for patients. 09:53 Why the only person losing in this situation is the patient. 10:51 The financial impact from the patient perspective. 13:57 Are patients realizing this impact? 14:42 Solving the problem of oncology drug choice. 16:45 Reimbursement reform. 18:24 Capitated systems and incrementalist impacts to reimbursement reform, and what these look like. 23:30 Are we at a tipping point? 23:51 “The current system … works too well for too many people.” 25:01 Who isn't well served by the current system. 25:32 Who has to lead the charge for change. 28:28 Large oncology providers vs small oncology providers in the buy and bill system.   You can learn more at drugpricinglab.org. You can also connect with Dr. Mitchell on Twitter at @TheWonkologist.   Check out our #healthcarepodcast with @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering as he discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Following the drug and following the dollar. @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth The “buy and bill” system. @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth The perverse and problematic incentives of the system. @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “It creates the incentive for us to gravitate toward the more expensive drug.” @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why is there hesitancy to address the financial toxicity of drug pricing for patients? @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why the patient is the only one that loses. @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What's the financial impact from the patient perspective? @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Are patients realizing this financial impact? @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Solving the problem of oncology drug choice. @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What should reimbursement reform look like? @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “The current system … works too well for too many people.” @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Who has to lead the charge for change? @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Large oncology providers vs small oncology providers in the buy and bill system. @TheWonkologist of @sloan_kettering discusses #oncology #drugpricing and #reimbursement. #healthcarepodcast #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Stacey Richter (INBW34), Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes  

The Ringer's Bill Simmons is joined by David Jacoby and Kevin Wildes to discuss Game 7 of the Eastern Conference finals, Jimmy Butler's 3-point attempt, and having trouble rooting against Steph Curry and the Warriors (1:42), before talking about the best daily sports show fodder, why the Cowboys are still America's team, NBA expansion, how the league would look if it adopted a relegation format (17:43), Half-Baked Ideas, Finals predictions, and more (41:54). Finally, Bill is joined by actor Jon Bernthal to discuss his role as Wayne Jenkins in HBO's ‘We Own This City.' They discuss meeting Wayne Jenkins, working (and arguing) with David Chase, wild stories from the set, filming ‘King Richard,' being a sports dad, and more (1:04:13). Host: Bill Simmons Guest: David Jacoby, Kevin Wildes, and Jon Bernthal Producer: Kyle Crichton Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Chris and Andy are joined by George Pelecanos, the showrunner for ‘We Own This City,' to talk about why he felt compelled to tell this story and return to the setting of Baltimore (9:34), John Bernthal's performance as Wayne Jenkins (36:02), and the final episode of the series (46:29). Hosts: Chris Ryan and Andy Greenwald Guest: George Pelecanos Producer: Kaya McMullen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Bill Simmons, Wosny Lambre, and Sean Fennessey recap Episode 6 of HBO's ‘We Own This City', discussing the “bleak and hopeless” ending to the miniseries (:42), Jon Bernthal's performance as Wayne Jenkins compared to iconic dirty cops in film (10:16), and the benefit of a show going against the Netflix model (27:29). Plus, what's next for creator David Simon (43:18)? Hosts: Bill Simmons, Wosny Lambry, Sean Fennessey Producer: Donnie Beacham Jr. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In INBW32, I talked about telehealth. In this episode, I'm talking about collaboration between healthcare stakeholders or the lack thereof. My grandfather suffered from heart failure. This was many years ago now. But when I say suffered, I mean it. As many of you know, when heart failure is uncontrolled, it is painful to go through or even watch a loved one go through. There was that one time when I accompanied my grandfather (and my grandma was there, too) on a trip to the emergency room, you know, because he was drowning in his own lung fluid and could barely breathe. And when we arrived, they were going to wheel him into one of the exam rooms. But my grandmother put her foot down. She did not want to go into that one exam room because the TV was broken in there. Yes, the two of them had been in the ER so many times that they were familiar with the pros and cons of the various exam rooms. The end of my grandfather's life was almost unbearable, and I can't even begin to estimate the hundreds of thousands of dollars racked up in ER visits and inpatient stays. He was in the ER once a month at a minimum, and he would come home disoriented and confused. Now, as everybody listening to this show knows, this anecdote is also a data point that is, dare I say, all too common. But to that end, let me just talk about heart failure data for a second. Patients with heart failure generate a third of Medicare spending and 40% of Medicare fee-for-service deaths. They are also responsible for 55% of Medicare readmissions. You'd think that if there were any chronic condition that we'd be looking to improve outcomes on, it'd be this one. So, everybody's on it, right? Oh, wait … heart failure readmissions have actually gone up in recent years.   I just want to point out that in between ER visits and inpatient stays, my grandfather received effectively no education, no PCP or cardiology follow-ups, no community support. He did not get a case manager. He got no coaching. He got 25 pages of tiny, printed instructions just before the door hit him in the butt on his way out to the parking lot. Obvious point here, but to do any of this in-between stuff would have required collaboration between the hospital and others. And it was conspicuous in its absence. Look, this is sad and I'm not telling the story because I think it's unique. If I asked who else has a story like this one where a family member or a loved one got lost in the gaps between their care, I am suspecting that everyone would raise their hands—even those of you who have medical degrees. No matter how much any of us know or care or try to help, stories like my grandfather's are painfully and unequivocally common in this country today. OK, so how to improve care, especially for chronic care patients. At its core, and I am not telling anyone listening something that you probably have not already thought about at great length, but there are two important contributors to patient outcomes. Not the only contributors for absolutely sure, but here are two important ones: Nonfragmented patient journeys that adhere to evidence-based best-practice care. My grandfather and anyone with a chronic condition requires a patient journey that isn't a game of whack-a-mole. Carly Eckert, MD, says this so well in EP361. Steering patients to the best care setting, which is required to get the highest-value best-practice care and also reduce financial toxicity. Short but important sidebar: We know that financial toxicity is clinical toxicity. There was just a study that came out that said in 2030, a leading cause of death will be noncompliance to treatment due to patients abandoning care because it costs too much. Wayne Jenkins, MD, from Centivo (EP358) talks about other implications of financial toxicity for a half-hour. Also, there's another paper that, again, is just more on this point. At this juncture, it is not arguable. Financial toxicity is clinical toxicity. So, we need to get patients, people, customers to the next place that is the highest value for them. Doing either or both of these things—nonfragmenting the patient journey and making sure patients get to the next care setting—it requires collaboration. Let me quote Dr. Steve Klasko, who, until recently, was president and CEO over at Jefferson Health in Philly. He said—and this is an adaptation of an old Steve Jobs mantra—but Steve Klasko said that for hospitals, our old math was inpatient revenue, outpatient revenue, and in-person tuition and funding. The new math is going to be strategic partnerships around this healthcare at any address model. Right? But good collaborations don't just improve patient outcomes. Here's another benefit: They also make happier clinicians or employees. If every outside interaction is a friction point, where employees, clinicians, doctors, nurses are rubbed raw because every interaction becomes a battle, if that's the ecosystem that any given party has created for themselves, patients aren't happy and clinicians aren't happy. And since everything in healthcare spirals around that one relationship, the one between the patient and their clinicians, this could not be more vital. There's that famous Richard Branson quote, which I'll paraphrase: If you want to keep the customers happy, keep the employees happy. How anyone thinks that patients are going to get amazing care when those providing the care are miserable is just the very definition of magical thinking. All right … so, let's get into the hard thing about hard things: why with the lack of collaboration across the industry there are a lot of excuses for why parties cannot collaborate. For example, interoperability, HIPAA, legal, cyber, bureaucracy … Also, people are busy, COVID response, being overworked and burned out is a big deal. And I'm not saying that some of these are not valid, but the elephant in the room is this: In healthcare today, most (if not all) big organizations for sure and a lot of small ones have a business model that is built on revenue maximization. Look, when I'm referring to organizations as revenue maximizers, maybe I'm not talking specifically about specific departments and people working hard in those departments within any given organization. Organizations are not one-celled organisms, after all. But what I am saying is that, as a whole, healthcare organizations—the vast majority and certainly every so-called incumbent payer and health system—when you factor in the actions of the CFO, the actions of the billing department, the group that sets premiums, the one that sets prices, the group that incentivizes brokers, the group that sells to employers, the group that lobbies politicians, the group that writes the contract terms … if you factor in the whole organization, what you get is an organization who acts to maximize outcomes—financial outcomes, that is. As per my normal MO, I'm gonna say the quiet part out loud here. One big reason why parties do not collaborate is because they are thinking they are going to maximize their revenue by info blocking to prevent network leakage, or not sharing data with an employer because then the employer might steer the employee to an infusion center for their chemo, or drugs will get switched from the profitable one to the not profitable one. I just saw another article the other day, entitled “The Many Barriers to Payer-Provider Alignment on Value-based Care.” Two entities vital for a nonfragmented frictionless patient journey cannot figure out how to align incentives, share data, or even figure out what good looks like. Speaking industry-wide here, but if patient outcomes were the top of either the payer or the provider's organizational lists of priorities, I do not think that this would be the case decades later. Listen to the show with Kevin Schulman, MD (EP366); Scott Haas (EP365); or an upcoming one with Autumn Yongchu and Erik Davis coming out in a few weeks that just drives this point home.   So, can you do well by doing good? Yes, you can. I have a degree from a business school, after all; but there is a line that gets crossed when maximizing revenue harms patients. And I'll tell you how you can tell if you're over the line. And again, I'm talking organizations here who have power and control in their local markets. I would say that a lack of collaboration is a symptom. If we all agree that collaboration is essential and some organization is not doing it, maybe it is a sign. It is an actionable bit of information that I hope, if relevant, gets contemplated. For example, back to my grandfather for a sec, it's pretty well known how to reduce heart failure revisits. There are more than a few care models that have definitely been shown to work. Here is one of them, and this was talked about in Dr. William Bestermann's Substacks. There was a nurse in the Carolinas—and I talked about this before—but there was a nurse in the Carolinas who decreased heart failure readmissions markedly by simply calling up heart failure patients and making sure they were doing OK and that they understood how to take care of themselves. She was caring, and she had relationships with these patients. That's all she did.   So, hospital collaborates with a payer case manager or a CBO (community-based organization) or an MSO (management services organization), or maybe the hospital has pop health capabilities internally. I mean, we can manage to transplant important organs in this country, and most healthcare organizations cannot figure out how to work together well enough that a nurse calls up a bunch of patients? Is this some arcane or highly complex thing to do? No, it's not. But most are not doing anything even close to this because revenue maximization is the goal of one or more of the entities who would need to be a party to this, and everything else is just an excuse. If anyone is thinking interoperability right now, I've heard Don Lee say on The #HCBiz Show! often enough that there's lots of evidence at this point that interoperability has been solved from a technical standpoint. It's been solved for years. The problem is a business case problem. No one wants to be interoperable because … revenue maximization All right … aspirationally here, despite all of this, great collaborations happen every single day—collaborations that are bright spots and that definitely improve patient outcomes and reduce financial burdens short-term and long-term. Let me give you some examples: what 32BJ is doing in New York City (upcoming episode with Cora Opsahl talking about the cool things that they are doing with Mount Sinai); CINs (clinically integrated networks), like Lisa Trumble, who talks about SoNE HEALTH in EP349.   There are MSOs that work with ACOs (accountable care organizations) and others. Listen to Shawn Rhodes (EP354); also what Nicole Bradberry and Kelly Conroy are doing in Florida (EP324).   In an upcoming episode, Dave Chase from Health Rosetta: He's got one great story after another about how employers these days are teaming up with provider organizations, pharmacies, and their communities to put a serious dent in costs while raising patient outcomes and satisfaction. Doug Hetherington's episode (EP367) talks about direct contracting with hospitals. Katy Talento (EP350) talks about this also. Steve Schutzer, MD, talks about collaborating with other local orthopedic surgeons to stand up a now nationally recognized center of excellence in Connecticut (EP294). We also have some pharma companies who are developing some pretty great disease-centric resources for providers. Some pharma companies and some internal teams at those companies can actually be fair and good community players. Mike Levitt and the work that he has done on the Accountable Care Learning Collaborative, which is headed up by Dr. Eric Weaver, who has been on the show (EP277); or I'm sure after this show airs, I'm gonna hear about more. Please send them my way.   Now, look … let's get real here. These collaborations may have been initiated with, let's just say, other beneficial side effects; but they all improve care and reduce costs. If I were gonna list some common and appealing side effects that could motivate some prospective collaborators to come to the table, some of the usual suspects are proposing that the collaboration will, for example, improve HCAHPS scores, quality metrics, star ratings; improve predictable spend; reduce shock claims; avenge your common competitor and steal their market share; gang up against a payer or some consolidated health system; improve OR utilization; or improve efficiency in some way. What I would say, though, is that if leveling up patient care happens and costs do not rise as a result, that's the shared priority I'd focus on. If someone gets some beneficial side action, this is kind of the definition of doing well by doing good. All right, so let's talk about the different kinds of collaboration just briefly. I'm gonna say that there's three kinds of collaboration: Collaboration along the patient journey by multiple parties who are all along the patient journey Collaboration by parties who can help inform the patient journey, but they're not necessarily on the patient journey themselves Collaboration by parties who can help navigate the patient journey I am mentioning these three because there's often sort of this insinuation that collaborators should have equal stature in the care journey or have similar roles, that if you're not actually on the clinical journey, then you don't have any responsibility or accountability for the clinical journey and, therefore, are not a worthy collaborator. That is limiting if you are trying to figure out who you might be able to collaborate with to help you. The patient journey is not like a movie showing all the minutes a patient spends in clinic, and then all the gaps in between visits are edited out. Care can be improved at the population level, at the community level. Care can be improved at the disease or the condition level when clinicians get needed insights or information or tools. I mean, frankly, to my mind, it shouldn't be considered a plus when a pharma company or a payer actually does something in the service of improving patient outcomes. It should almost be a requirement that they do. I don't mean by delivering care in any way. And for the record, most prior auth programs are the opposite of collaborative. Payers can collaborate by supplying data, as just one example. Heck, external collaborations are great, but we also could think about collaborating internally, like invite the CFO or maybe the gang rewarding brokers with sales competitions. I don't know. I'd consider ethically dubious: Invite them to come to some meeting where oncology patients are choosing to die rather than bankrupt their families. Communication is the first step to collaboration, after all. That's a place to start. Or life science types: They can supply knowledge and expertise about specific diseases or conditions with the purpose of improving patient outcomes. Informing the patient journey could be a collaboration with some of these amazing patient efficacy organizations or CBOs that are out in the community. Now, I think one barrier to collaboration that we all need to get over is the whole, I call it, stakeholder prejudice thing. Here's what Colton Ortolf wrote on Twitter the other day. He tweeted, “Hospitals are the Lance Armstrong of healthcare. Pissed [off] at all the [crappy] things they do economically, but also grateful for all the lives they save.” If we're gonna eliminate everybody in healthcare who has revenue maximization as their organizational goal, as aforementioned, there is going to be basically no one left standing. As Ge Bai, PhD, CPA, said in EP356, there's no angels and no demons in healthcare. Everybody is both.   If we're talking about stakeholder prejudice, though, I would be remiss not to single out Pharma. When I mentioned them a sec ago, I bet some of your eyebrows went up. Here's my take on it. Consider Pharma's potential role in leveling up disease-/condition-specific outcomes. I mean, there are thousands, millions probably, of diseases and conditions and health problems out there that any given doctor or clinician has to be familiar with. Pharma has huge infrastructures and physicians and smart people who focused on, like, six of them. They know more about those six than anybody else. We pay a ton also for their drugs. It's my view that people along the patient journey should ask for what they want and need relative to the expertise that Pharma possesses. It should be about helping those providing care on the patient journey to level up the standard of care. Frankly, I'd expect collaboration from some of these entities. Ask for it on your own terms, and if all you get back is a sales pitch, you deserve better than that. Find somebody higher up on the food chain to talk to. And also, outcomes-based contracts … yeah, we need to figure out how to operationalize them so that really good drugs that actually produce outcomes like overall survival get paid for and those that do not do not. Point of note must be said: Colluding and conflict of interest is not cost neutral. If someone is getting things bought for them and then thinking, falsely, that it does not impact prescribing, that is not collaboration. Any of these revenue-maximizing hookups are not included in my definition of collaboration. So, in sum, ultimately, what we're talking about here is our legacy. As David Muhlestein, PhD, JD, talks about really well in EP364, we got to ask ourselves, What do we want to leave behind to our children and our grandchildren? Some of this is generational change, for sure. But seriously, talking about today, I mean, who wants to sign their family member up for what my grandfather went through? Right now, across the country, there are heart failure patients going through exactly what he did; and there are other patients with care journeys so dysfunctional that lives are shattered.   Chronic care patients, oncology patients … and this isn't going to change unless we contemplate, first of all, what we can do today—right now. Even little things can matter a lot, but then also to really consider what we want healthcare to look like in 20 or 25 years and then start working back from that vision and collaborating today so that, slowly and surely, we reach a place with better care that is not financially toxic. Check out the 8-Step Collaboration Roadmap for more resources to operationalize a collaboration. For more information, go to aventriahealth.com.   Each week on Relentless Health Value, Stacey uses her voice and thought leadership to provide insights for healthcare industry decision makers trying to do the right thing. Each show features expert guests who break down the twists and tricks in the medical field to help improve outcomes and lower costs across the care continuum. Relentless Health Value is a top 100 podcast on iTunes in the medicine category and reaches tens of thousands of engaged listeners across the healthcare industry. In addition to hosting Relentless Health Value, Stacey is co-president of QC-Health, a benefit corporation finding cost-effective ways to improve the health of Americans. She is also co-president of Aventria Health Group, a consultancy working with clients who endeavor to form collaborations with payers, providers, Pharma, employer organizations, or patient advocacy groups. 03:07 How do we improve care, especially for chronic care patients? 03:18 What are two important contributors to patient outcomes? 03:40 EP361 with Carly Eckert, MD. 03:56 “We know that financial toxicity is clinical toxicity.” 04:09 EP358 with Wayne Jenkins, MD. 06:05 Why can't parties across the healthcare industry seem to collaborate? 08:05 EP366 with Kevin Schulman, MD. 08:07 EP365 with Scott Haas. 08:10 Upcoming episode with Autumn Yongchu and Erik Davis. 08:34 “I would say that a lack of collaboration is a symptom.” 10:10 There's lots of evidence that interoperability has been solved. It's been solved for years. 10:37 Upcoming episode with Cora Opsahl. 10:46 EP349 with Lisa Trumble. 10:53 EP354 with Shawn Rhodes. 10:57 EP324 with Nicole Bradberry and Kelly Conroy. 11:04 Upcoming episode with Dave Chase. 11:19 EP367 with Doug Hetherington. 11:25 EP350 with Katy Talento. 11:28 EP294 with Steve Schutzer, MD. 11:50 EP277 with Eric Weaver, DHA, MHA. 13:00 What are the three kinds of collaboration in healthcare? 13:23 Do collaborators need to have equal status in a collaboration? 13:57 “Care can be improved at the population level, at the community level … at the disease or the condition level.” 15:10 How is stakeholder prejudice holding healthcare back? 15:42 EP356 with Ge Bai, PhD, CPA. 16:55 “Outcomes-based contracts … we need to figure out how to operationalize them.” 17:08 “Colluding and conflict of interest is not cost neutral.” 17:30 EP364 with David Muhlestein, PhD, JD.   For more information, go to aventriahealth.com.   Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab How do we improve care, especially for chronic care patients? Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab What are two important contributors to patient outcomes? Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab “We know that financial toxicity is clinical toxicity.” Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab Why can't parties across the healthcare industry seem to collaborate? Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab “I would say that a lack of collaboration is a symptom.” Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab There's lots of evidence that interoperability has been solved. It's been solved for years. Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab What are the three kinds of collaboration in healthcare? Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab Do collaborators need to have equal status in a collaboration? Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab “Care can be improved at the population level, at the community level … at the disease or the condition level.” Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab How is stakeholder prejudice holding healthcare back? Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab “Outcomes-based contracts … we need to figure out how to operationalize them.” Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab “Colluding and conflict of interest is not cost neutral.” Stacey discusses #healthcarecollaboration on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcollab Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Ashleigh Gunter, Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes, Paul Simms  

Wayne Jenkins is abusing his power at ever turn. So much so that his own men are starting to see the bullsh*t! Opening song, "Lights, Camera, Action" by Mr. Cheeks. - Produced & Recorded By: Tremayne "Treezy" Johnson Presented By: On-Ear Network Follow Us: Twitter - @GramsOfSnow IG - @GramsOfSnowPod

People are averse to change. It's a thing. It's a thing that affects even those of us who consider ourselves highly educated and/or very smart. Nobody likes disruption or, even worse, the prospect of disruption and the uncertainty that goes along with that. Nobody likes to feel like the rug just got pulled out from under them or that they've lost control of something, especially something important like their health benefits or how they care for patients. Changes to health insurance and healthcare, from any angle, are fraught with stress. A big reason for this is because health and healthcare are filled with so-called “one-way-door” types of decisions and decision points. If I cannot get the care I need today, or if the care I want to provide today to a patient does not go as desired, I feel like the door is one-way: Once I make a decision, I cannot go back. I can't click “undo” on that and go back through the door and arrive at yesterday. Health decisions, therefore, have a very “you got one shot at this” kind of feel. And it's that, right there, that just upped the ante considerably in the stress department for employees and then also for any clinician who is working with patients. It's life or death, and this is why making changes either to the insurance side or the care side of the equation feels like they will be so disruptive. It's a big reason why some self-insured employers or even fully insured employers won't mess with the status quo benefit designs or switch up their EBC (employee benefit consultant) or their ASO/TPA (Administrative Services Only/Third-Party Administrator), even if everybody in the entire company is currently complaining about the price and complexity of said status quo (it's kind of like the devil that you know) and even if it's possible to offer employees overall better-quality care at lower prices, meaning that everybody in the company could get a raise funded by the sometimes massive savings that could be had. I just heard a union leader the other day, and she said that every worker would have an extra $5000 in their pocket if their healthcare costs were what they should be. So, for many employers, the prospect of disruption is just too much. It's not in the CHRO's (chief human resources officer's) job description to open that Pandora's box. Nobody gets fired for doing what they did last year—I guess, until they do (one straw or another is gonna break the camel's back, after all). But in the meantime, we have this fear-induced festering inertia. Let me just point out one thing: Implicit in everything that I just said is the notion that one day everyone will have their familiar insurance card snugly tucked in their wallet, and then the next day, it will be ripped from their bloody fingers in a violent and unexpected fashion. Or, let's talk about provider organizations now. Say one's trying to move from the world of fee for service to the world of value-based payment structures with downstream risk, or direct contracts with employers. To do this well, let's chat about one aspect of this that health systems seem to struggle with that's been a topic of some conversation lately. There's an article cautioning that “practicing at the top of one's license” and its attendant need for team-based care is a giant fail and/or a money grab, or it could be. And it could be both of these things, don't get me wrong. Team-based care isn't a homogeneous construct. It would be like saying that all movies are bad because Super Baby Geniuses 2 was such a dog.   I mean, team-based care—pretty much like team-based anything—if it's not implemented well, nobody on the team knows what they're supposed to be doing and nobody is accountable. There's no infrastructure supporting it. There was no testing or iteration or discussion about the intent. No one actually on the proposed teams was even consulted about the whole idea. And so, everyone starts to suspect, maybe rightfully or maybe not, that it's all financially driven and a cost-cutting exercise. On the show today, my guest, Ashleigh Gunter, warns about all of these exact things. You switch something up without going through the proper steps and stages, everybody gets very suspicious. And, nothing for nothing, their suspicion could be the least of the leader's problems. The initiative's ensuing failure maybe should be their biggest concern. Which is a shame if something was done in the spirit of better patient care, for example, because there's tons of research on the immense power of well-functioning teams as just continuing this one example. And there's just as much research and well-proven case studies showing that innovative benefit designs can be a 365-degree win when they cut out wasteful spending and navigate employees and plan members to high-value care. For all of these reasons and more, I wanted to get Ashleigh Gunter, who is an expert in change management, on the show to talk about how to succeed when you want to change something as touchy as healthcare and health insurance. This all really goes back to the show with Matt Anderson, MD, MBA (EP266) and what Robert Pearl, MD, writes about all the time. It's a skill we all need to learn to lead change. Many of us had to learn this the hard way because we see our vision so clearly and we want to make it a reality as fast as possible, but the result of our enthusiasm might be that we skip implementation steps that are really not optional.   As Thomas Edison said (and I love this), “Having a vision for what you want is not enough. Vision without execution is hallucination.” So, to transform anything effectively, we have to put as much effort into the implementation as we do into the strategy. If we don't do that, then sadly, despite all of the best intentions, whatever we're trying to do is not gonna work and it might be labeled disruptive. So, I couldn't be more pleased to have learned a thing or two from Ashleigh Gunter about change management that avoids this disruption label. Ashleigh Gunter is president of Translucent Healthcare Consulting. She also is an expert in change management as aforementioned and how to help align employees and staff so that an organization can move forward together. According to Ashleigh, there's five steps to effective change management that will ensure success: Having great leadership Creating a case for the change Finding champions, engaging people who have to change so that they can contribute and be supportive Overcommunicating Measuring how things are going and also celebrating small triumphs You can learn more at translucenthc.com.  Ashleigh Gunter, president of Translucent Healthcare Consulting, combines her experience, an understanding of organizational culture, and a practical mindset to meet her clients' needs. With over 30 years of management consulting experience, Ashleigh has deep expertise in advising in the dramatically changing healthcare market. Ashleigh specializes in helping her clients drive change within their health plans, resulting in increased employee engagement, improved human resources experience, and reduced cost for both the employer and the employee. She believes in challenging the status quo by creating direct relationships between employers and providers. Ashleigh has been a key contributor to several community-owned health plans in states from Washington to Virginia and has been credited with being key to employee participation and support of the plans. In working for Andersen Consulting/Accenture, Deloitte Consulting, and The Gunter Group, Ashleigh has provided advice and consulting support to Fortune 100 C-suite executives over her career. She has an MBA with a focus in strategic management and organizational change from the University of Texas at Austin and a bachelor's degree in business administration from the University of Denver with a concentration in finance. 07:46 How does change management go wrong in healthcare? 08:27 “Communication [of change] in and of itself isn't change management.” 10:03 What is change management? 11:06 What does great leadership look like in change management? 12:29 “Leadership sets the tone.” 12:38 What makes change management so hard? 13:27 “What's the company reason to make this change happen?” 15:57 What are change champions, and why do you need to create them when changing your benefit plan? 19:18 Why is it important to overcommunicate change? 22:46 Why is it important to measure your successes and communicate those after a change? 24:14 How does change management work on the provider organization side? 28:53 “You want to ensure you are educating the operational folks.” You can learn more at translucenthc.com.  Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast How does change management go wrong in healthcare? Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Communication [of change] in and of itself isn't change management.” Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What is change management? Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What does great leadership look like in change management? Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Leadership sets the tone.” Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What makes change management so hard? Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “What's the company reason to make this change happen?” Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What are change champions, and why do you need to create them when changing your benefit plan? Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why is it important to overcommunicate change? Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why is it important to measure your successes and communicate those after a change? Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast How does change management work on the provider organization side? Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “You want to ensure you are educating the operational folks.” Ashleigh Gunter of Translucent Healthcare Consulting discusses #benefitdesign and #deliverymodels on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Doug Hetherington, Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes, Paul Simms, Dr Steven Quimby  

Die korrupten Cops der Gun Trace Task Force denken, dass ihnen Baltimore gehört: WE OWN THIS CITY ist die neue Serie des THE WIRE Machers David Simon und basiert auf wahren Begebenheiten, die Reporter Justin Fenton für sein Buch WE OWN THIS CITY: A TRUE STORY OF CRIME, COPS AND CORRUPTION recherchiert hat. Eigentlich soll die aus 8 Mitgliedern bestehende Einheit rund um Wayne Jenkins, gespielt von JON BERNTHAL, die Straßen von Drogen und Waffen säubern – stattdessen fälschen sie Beweise und stecken sich das Geld der verhafteten Kleinkriminellen in die eigene Tasche. Auf Sky erscheinen die insgesamt 6 Folgen seit dem 25. April wöchentlich in Originalfassung. Für die deutsche Synchro müsst ihr euch noch bis Juni gedulden. Die echten Cops der Gun Trace Task Force haben vermutlich alle THE WIRE gesehen – genau wie unsere Serien Task Force im Set: Daniel Schröckert, Simon Krätschmer, Andreas Bardét und Timo Zocholl haben sich die ersten drei Folgen von WE OWN THIS CITY reingezogen und erzählen euch, ob die Serie sich lohnt oder ob ihr stattdessen lieber nochmal THE WIRE gucken solltet.

Host D. Watkins discusses episode four, which focuses on the corruption of Wayne Jenkins and the ripple effect of the Gun Trace Task Force on Baltimore's civilians. The show's executive producers George Pelecanos (The Deuce) and David Simon (The Wire, The Deuce), discuss the aftermath of the Freddie Gray case and the corrupt cops who remained on the force. Actor Dagmara Domińczyk talks to Watkins about her preparation to play FBI agent Erika Jensen and how her family's history as refugees informed her thoughts about law enforcement. Next, journalist Baynard Woods (I Got a Monster: The Rise and Fall of America's Most Corrupt Police Squad) joins Watkins to discuss what he saw covering the Freddie Gray trial and how it has shaped his understanding of police corruption in Baltimore, in addition to journalism's familiar blind spots in covering criminal justice. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Lots of talk about direct contracting going on these days. Many of you will be familiar with the term, but in short, direct contracting means when a self-insured employer directly contracts with a provider organization with no payer in the middle of that arrangement. And when I say “employer,” I mean the employer and all their peeps—their TPAs, repricers, other vendors, and consultants. Most of this talk, though, seems to come from the point of view of the employer. It's super easy to quantify what's in it for employers. US healthcare costs get blamed for all kinds of things: companies who have lost big global contracts because all of those fringe benefits cost way too much around here. If we're looking around for a why on that point, let me refer you to last week's episode (EP366) with Dr. Kevin Schulman entitled “An In-Depth Dissection of Our Dysfunctional Healthcare Benefits Market.” Or the show with Dr. Wayne Jenkins (EP358) about how premium and deductible financial toxicity negatively impacts plan members. Never forget that financial toxicity is clinical toxicity.   So, like a knight riding in on a white horse, direct contracting with a provider organization has some interesting potential. Most obviously, when an employer contracts directly with a provider organization, they cut out the middleman. They put the direct in direct contracting. Considering the multi-billions of dollars that some of these middle people are raking in every quarter in profits and/or “margins,” cutting out the middle people could have a financial upside as big as those billions in profit. If those billions get passed on to patients in the form of lower co-pays/coinsurance or premiums, there could be some big benefits to direct contracting for pretty much all involved … except the middle people, of course. My guest in this healthcare podcast, Doug Hetherington, says that it's not uncommon to see on the low end a 10% reduction in costs to maybe up to 50% reduction in costs. It's amazing what can be accomplished when everybody starts working together for the good of the local community and patient and is held accountable for more than just revenue maximization. But there's also quality and patient outcomes upsides to these cost reductions. Here's a few we can speculate about: For example, if the middle people add layers of bureaucracy and administrative burden that make it really hard and/or upsettingly inefficient for anyone trying to serve their patients' needs to actually serve their patients' needs, then yeah, direct contracting can make getting the right care to patients faster and easier. That matters to burned-out clinicians. Also, here's another potential point to ponder: benefit designs. Listen to the show with Dr. Mark Fendrick (EP308) on this, but most benefit designs offered by middle people are really, as they call them, blunt instruments. High-value care costs as much (or more) as low-value care. Deductibles don't care if you need your diabetic foot ulcers checked urgently or you might get your foot amputated. It's a known fact that health outcomes plummet in January when, all of a sudden, cancer meds or whatever essential lifesaving medical innovation cost as much as a patient's deductible. So, patients abandon care—and outcomes go down.   When an employer direct contracts with a provider, in its most sophisticated form—which my guest, Doug Hetherington, calls a “full-pay open contract”—the employer and the provider work together to construct a benefit design that helps patients get the best outcomes. Or here's another benefit, for the whole community, not just the employer: The whole community keeps the money local. Many of these middle people are big national companies. As Dave Chase and others have said often, when these Fortune whatever companies arrive on the scene, lots of money exits stage left out of the community. If local employers contract with local providers, the money stays local. So, all that I have said has been said before. What I wanted to dig into in this episode is the why and the how from the provider organization standpoint. I got curious about this after my conversation with Katy Talento (EP350). She talks about a major barrier for self-insured employers who want to work with local hospitals is that the local hospitals couldn't, frankly, get out of their own way. Maybe they couldn't see the benefit for themselves that made the juice worth the squeeze? That's what I talk about in this episode with Doug Hetherington: what's in it for providers and what a provider organization interested in direct contracting needs to actually pull it off.  Doug Hetherington is CEO of Health2Business, and he has done and continues to do pioneering work with community hospitals in eastern Idaho and elsewhere. Health2Business helps facilitate direct contracting between hospitals and local employers. You can learn more at health2business.com and connect with Doug on LinkedIn.  You can also learn how to engage in direct contracts from Doug's presentation, “Beyond the Direct Contract.”    Doug Hetherington is a health plan visionary, innovator, and program architect who believes providers are the key to sustainable and meaningful healthcare in our communities. Midway through his 20-year tenure as a benefit advisor, Doug began innovating around self-funding, captives, reference-based pricing (RBP), and population management in search of viable solutions that gave his employer clients control over cost and plan design. His creativity and tenacity for change drove his development of several first-of-their-kind innovations, including RB EmCap, a national access captive program for RBP employers. Doug founded Health2Business (H2B) in 2019 after successful proof of concept that better healthcare results when employers, providers, and health systems work together at the local level through direct contracts. Tackling one aspect of our broken healthcare system, H2B solves for how we access and pay for care. While establishing scalable direct contracts with some of the largest flagship health systems in the country, Doug realized that in order to truly decapitalize healthcare, direct contracts need to be transparent, open, and free for employers of all sizes to access. By establishing H2B's independent, agnostic, and collaborative direct contract administrative platform infrastructure, Doug has created an entirely new vendor class known as direct contract administration. An optimist by nature, Doug truly believes that the more we work together, the faster we can restore value to our healthcare system and create a sustainable mutual benefit for provider, employer, and employee/member stakeholders. 05:38 Why are health systems interested in direct contracting? 09:43 EP308 with Mark Fendrick, MD.10:06 What are the essentials for direct contracting between a health system and an employer or payer? 11:16 What are the three categories of open direct contracting agreements? 12:44 EP350 with Katy Talento.12:59 EP363 with David Scheinker, PhD.14:43 What direction do we need to be moving to solve the cost problems in healthcare? 18:10 “What does a value-based model begin to look like?” 20:31 What is one of the inherent benefits of a direct contracting environment? 21:01 What data should we actually be capturing? 25:01 “Sometimes you really begin to wonder, why is there such a high level of misalignment?” 25:16 How much can an employer save, on average, with a direct contract? 26:33 What are healthcare costs going up by per year? 26:50 “We pay for these insurance plans … and yet what you're paying for that and how they're assessing the risk is not … in line with the actual cost of care.” 30:20 “I would say that … consolidation … is one of the reasons why we're … seeing more movement towards direct contracting.” You can learn more at health2business.com and connect with Doug on LinkedIn.  You can also learn how to engage in direct contracts from Doug's presentation, “Beyond the Direct Contract.” Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Why are health systems interested in direct contracting? Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What are the essentials for direct contracting between a health system and an employer or payer? Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What are the three categories of open direct contracting agreements? Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What direction do we need to be moving to solve the cost problems in healthcare? Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “What does a value-based model begin to look like?” Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What is one of the inherent benefits of a direct contracting environment? Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What data should we actually be capturing? Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “Sometimes you really begin to wonder, why is there such a high level of misalignment?” Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth How much can an employer save, on average, with a direct contract? Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What are healthcare costs going up by per year? Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “We pay for these insurance plans … and yet what you're paying for that and how they're assessing the risk is not … in line with the actual cost of care.” Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “I would say that … consolidation … is one of the reasons why we're … seeing more movement towards direct contracting.” Doug Hetherington of @MyH2B discusses #directcontracting on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Dr Kevin Schulman, Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes, Paul Simms, Dr Steven Quimby, Dr David Carmouche (EP343)  

First of all, this is a 400-level discussion. If you think you already know all about our dysfunctional healthcare benefits market, then this show is for you. Before we begin, I just want to say something. I'm gonna refer back to David Muhlestein's episode (EP364), where he talks about the first step toward healthcare transformation. It is, let's just say, for incumbent health systems and payers, people who work there, to step back and in the harsh light of day really contemplate their business model—see it clearly. If you're listening to this show, then know that I love you; so this is not a condemnation of you or the great things that you are likely doing in your department. I see you as a changemaker. But contemplating your organization as a whole is like the first step of a 10-step program … to admit what friends and family were saying at the intervention. If you're not yet at the—what's it called?—contemplative stage in your journey toward transformation, you could skip ahead to the 23:00 mark approximately for some advice on what people who work at incumbent payers and/or providers can do right now. My one and only intent here is to see change happen. What I see currently are certainly efforts to improve quality at some level. But those responsible for finance, premiums, and the employer sales team are in a different part of the building. I mean, maybe a first step here is, Can you invite those guys and gals to your meetings? OK … so, there was a paper that came out in JAMA entitled “The Dysfunctional Health Benefits Market and Implications for US Employers and Employees.” It was by David Scheinker, PhD; Arnold Milstein, MD; and Kevin Schulman, MD, who is my guest in this healthcare podcast. David Scheinker, by the way, was on the show earlier (EP363), so certainly go back and listen to that.   This paper (the “Dysfunctional Health Benefits Market” paper) showed that commercial insurance costs have gone up 4x the rate of other benchmark goods or services in price. So, bottom line, “It is assumed that insurers compete intensely to improve the value received by employers and employees by negotiating to keep prices down and advocating for employers and employees.” It turns out, though … not so much with that. My guest in this healthcare podcast, as mentioned, is Kevin Schulman, MD, an author on that paper. And he says this much more eloquently than I will, but the skinny is this: Because insurer profits are capped at 15%, that means that the more healthcare costs go up, the more possible profit in absolute terms that a health insurance carrier can make. After all, 15% of a bigger number is … a bigger number. If you look at how Wall Street responds to these bigger numbers all the way around—higher costs translating to higher profits, that whole thing—you will find that Wall Street likes this profit-generating formula … very much. Share prices go up when that 15% goes up. What does Wall Street like less? It likes less restructuring and pushing providers to deliver better care for less cost and then passing those savings on to employers and employees. Even if you increase quality and decrease costs really well and/or profitably as an insurer, share prices do not rise nearly as much as they rise if you phone it in with the “negotiations” with providers. Nonprofits, by the way, get no pass here either. Some of the most expensive hospitals in the country, which are nonprofit, are doing their thing in areas where nonprofit carriers are the big kahunas. Call it margins. Call it profits. Whatever … same thing. Listen to the show with David Muhlestein, PhD, JD (EP364) from two weeks ago. It's all about the business models. And that business model is revenue maximization. Period. End of the sentence.  So, who loses in this equation? Oh, right … patients. And employers. Read anything by Dave Chase for more on how crushing this loss is that patients and employers suffer: middle-class wage stagnation, bankruptcies, financial toxicity that is actually clinical toxicity, skyrocketing premiums way over the cost of inflation, that healthcare costs borne by employers are a driver for offshoring because they make American labor so expensive. A study the other day said that nonadherence due to a patient's inability to pay for treatment will be a leading cause of death in 2030. That's what this all is adding up to.   Because of business models, insurers have become the piggy banks for health systems, as my guest Dr. Kevin Schulman says. This piggy bank is funded with the pennies, nickels, and dimes from you and me, the insured lives, our employers, and taxpayers. So, unless you're a shareholder in one of these carriers and their vertically integrated PBMs, of course, then, I guess, good for you. Or getting political donations from them might also be a net plus for you personally. Where are the activist investors in all of this? Something that Dr. Schulman said in this episode I had never heard before, and—wow!—it explains so much. It's this whole idea of some, not all, but some health systems clamoring about how they have to charge commercial patients more because they are losing so much on their Medicare patients. They have to cost shift to commercial lives. Here's what Dr. Kevin Schulman said about that in my own words: Cost is a construct. Cost is a dynamic fiction. I mean, say I buy a mansion. I put in a Jacuzzi and a tropical flower bed that needs to be misted with water on the half-hour. Then I tell you that my fixed costs are really high and, therefore, my tuna sandwiches are really expensive. I just made them expensive. I made the decision to increase my costs. The interesting backdrop for that is that in competitive marketplaces, or in Maryland, hospitals do just fine (thank you very much) getting paid Medicare rates. They don't have to price shift. But in markets with no competition, where the hospitals decided to build, baby, build, they created these giant brick-and-mortar money pits that, yeah, cost a boatload. And then they complain that they have to price shift to employers and their own patients to pay for it all. One thing that we don't talk about in this episode are non–fee-based brokers and the role that they play in all of this. One recent lawsuit is a pretty perfect example of what I'm saying here.   You can learn more by visiting Dr. Schulman's profile page and connect with him on LinkedIn. Kevin Schulman, MD, is a professor of medicine for the Clinical Excellence Research Center (CERC) at the Stanford University School of Medicine and, by courtesy, professor of operations, information, and technology at Stanford's Graduate School of Business. He is the faculty director of Stanford's new applied master degree program, the master of science in clinical informatics management program. His research focuses on broad, system challenges in the healthcare market, looking for ways to better understand hidden costs throughout the system. He then works to develop innovative solutions to deliver great care at lower cost. 07:13 Why have commercial insurers become price-takers? 10:04 How does a health plan get bigger profits? 10:40 “At the core at this, Wall Street rewards predictable performance; and the predictable performance … is great if healthcare costs go up.” 11:00 What does it mean to have a “dysfunctional equilibrium” in healthcare? 12:05 What's really changed in healthcare in the last 20 years that's caused this increase in healthcare pricing? 12:47 Commercial price versus Medicare: Do hospitals really need to cost shift? 15:51 How is value-based care really going to work? 17:43 “It's not A or B; it's a dysfunctional market.” 17:57 “Little changes in volume or incentives is not going to change the underlying dynamics.” 24:32 “I think it's an open question whether this model is really serving the American public.” 29:25 “It's a really important time for us to think about, how do we create a different trajectory?” You can learn more by visiting Dr. Schulman's profile page and connect with him on LinkedIn. @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket Why have commercial insurers become price-takers? @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket How does a health plan get bigger profits? @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket “At the core at this, Wall Street rewards predictable performance; and predictable performance … is great if healthcare costs go up.” @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket What does it mean to have a “dysfunctional equilibrium” in healthcare? @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket What's really changed in healthcare in the last 20 years that's caused this increase in healthcare pricing? @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket Commercial price versus Medicare: Do hospitals really need to cost shift? @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket How is value-based care really going to work? @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket “It's not A or B; it's a dysfunctional market.” @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket “Little changes in volume or incentives is not going to change the underlying dynamics.” @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket “I think it's an open question whether this model is really serving the American public.” @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket “It's a really important time for us to think about, how do we create a different trajectory?” @kevin_schulman discusses #healthcarebenefits on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #benefitsmarket   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Scott Haas, David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes, Paul Simms, Dr Steven Quimby, Dr David Carmouche (EP343), Christin Deacon    

Wayne Jenkins is in denial about what is happening. Rayam and Black are snitching. Suiter is trying to solve a murder. Shropshire and G-Money are showing their incompetence as criminals. No wonder the GTTF fell apart. - Produced & Recorded By: Tremayne "Treezy" Johnson Presented By: On-Ear Network Follow Us: Twitter - @GramsOfSnow IG - @GramsOfSnowPod

One of my mentors often said price is irrelevant. He said he would sell anything for any price as long as he could define the terms of the deal. During this conversation today with Scott Haas about PBMs, that quote was playing in my head like an earworm. I'm henceforth gonna struggle with the term rebate to define dollars that the PBM gets back from Pharma, because, according to my guest in this healthcare podcast Scott Haas, it turns out “rebates” comprise only about 40% of those back-end dollars that some PBMs manage to score from pharma manufacturers. I don't have any insight really into this, but Scott Haas certainly does—and this is the average that he has seen in his work and that we're going to dig into today. But in sum … wow! Let me just repeat that a mere 40 cents on the dollar of the gross amount that PBMs take in “rebates” from Pharma these days winds up going back to plan sponsors, even plan sponsors who are getting “100% of the rebates.” If you didn't understand what I just said, no worries. I'm gonna explain it right now. If you did and you know the why behind all of this also, you could probably skip ahead about five minutes. Here's the backstory on this whole rebate fandango. Let's start with part one of what is a two-part transaction. So, part one: the deal between pharma manufacturers and PBMs. In general, a pharma manufacturer signs a deal with a PBM to give back whatever percentage of their gross sales revenue to the PBM at the end of the year, say. It's along the same lines as a cash-back coupon for the PBM. Why would a pharma company be up for giving cash back like this? Well, to get on a PBM's formulary, giving cash back is like the price of admission. PBMs have a lot of leverage, after all—at least the big ones. They control access to millions and millions of patient lives. So, if Pharma wants their drug to be accessible to those millions and millions of lives, they have to play the cash-back game, otherwise known as the rebate game. They have to agree to give back to the PBM a certain amount of cash on the back end. So, PBM pays Pharma's list price up front—that's the gross amount paid, based on the list price of the drug—and then after all the cash back gets toted up at the end of the year, there'll be a net price. List price or gross price minus the cash back equals net price. It's this net price that's the true kind of final price which the pharma company gets paid per script by said PBM at the end of the day. These days, most everybody pretty much knows that PBMs are getting these so-called rebates—this cash back from pharma companies that I just explained. And it's pretty common knowledge the so-called gross-to-net bubble (the gross-to-net dollar amount) is pretty huge, meaning the rebate or cash-back amount is pretty huge. And many have also noticed that the gross-to-net dollar amounts seem to be growing bigger and bigger every year. I mean, for one insulin manufacturer, consider this: Their list price, their gross price, is $350 per script. And their net price after cash back/rebates was $52 this past year. Wait ... what? After all the cash back to the PBM, the insulin manufacturer got paid 86% less than their list price—$350 went down to $52 per prescription. The PBM vacuumed up 86% of the dough for every script written for this particular brand of insulin.   OK … so, say Pharma gives $100 back to the PBM based on the terms of their deal. Call that part one of this example transaction. Here's part two: the deal between PBMs and health plans or self-insured employers. Health plans and self-insured employers are customers of the PBM. They hire PBMs to manage the pharmacy benefits for their members or employees. So, because everybody knows this whole rebate thing is going on, as part of the contracts that the PBMs put in place with their customers (meaning the health plans or employers), the PBMs tell their customers that they're going to give 100% of the rebates back to the plan/employer. So, you'd think that if the pharma manufacturer paid $100 to the PBM, that the customers of the PBM (the plan sponsors) would get the $100 back then, right? The PBM would pass on 100% of the savings, as it were, if they're saying that they're gonna give 100% of the rebates. I mean, if this is actually true, that $100 in and $100 out, then the PBM is potentially performing a useful service, right? They're lowering drug costs for their customer, the plan sponsors for their members and employees. Except … turns out, not so much. Because what is a rebate, really? A rebate can be anything the PBM defines as a rebate. And it turns out that, on average, as I said before, according to those in the know, something like $60 of that $100 is not a rebate. It's an administration fee. Or a data fee. Or an education fee. A clinical program fee. Some other name that is not rebate. As my guest Scott Haas says, the term rebate is meaningless because it can mean whatever the PBM wants it to mean. It's like inconceivable from The Princess Bride. I do not think that word rebate means what you think it means.   Now it is a tangled web we weave here, and for more on why I say that, listen to the episode with Chris Sloan (Encore! EP216) entitled “How Medicare Part D Plans Became Addicted to Drug Rebates.” There's also a show with Pramod John (EP353) where we dig into, specifically, specialty drugs and rebating and so-called rebate walls.   But net net, all of this probably myopic focus on rebates means that you have to keep an eagle eye out for so-called exclusions in contracts if you are a plan sponsor. So, what are exclusions? This is that whole thing where some cheap generic is excluded from a PBM formulary while some expensive brand for the same condition is on formulary. Why would a cheap generic be excluded from a PBM formulary? Simple. Cheap generics don't have rebates. PBMs lose a lot of money when some high-priced specialty drug, for example, goes generic. They might have made thousands of dollars per script on that high-priced brand by collecting its rebate. Think about that insulin example. The rebate is 86% of the cost of the drug. And everybody wonders why some cheap generic insulin or biosimilar or whatever isn't on formulary. It is not a mystery when you're dealing with for-profit enterprises built around a model of revenue maximization. So, given all this, what's my guest Scott Haas's bottom-line advice in this whole thing? If you're a health plan or employer and you're trying to negotiate a PBM contract where your spend is predictable and your contracted price promises have any meaning whatsoever, Scott Haas's advice is, you have to ensure that the contract defines the actual prices for the drugs in the contract. With absolute numbers. Not percentages off or weird formulas or the empty promise of getting an AWP or a WAC (which means average wholesale price or wholesale acquisition cost) or any of the other various acronyms for some drug pricing schema. All of these are basically shorthand for “this price could change at any moment.” There's a reason in-the-know people say AWP stands for “Ain't what's paid,” meaning ain't what's ultimately going to be paid by plan sponsors. What is necessary in PBM contracts is the final price—that number. Some digits with a dollar sign in front of them and a “per unit” after them. No acronyms and no percentage signs. Whoever gets to define the terms ultimately controls the price. So, get the price up front. As mentioned several times already, I am talking to Scott Haas, who is a senior VP over at USI Insurance Services. He's speaking today from the perspective of a plan sponsor, meaning from the point of view of a health plan, including those health plans managed by and paid for by a self-insured employer and their employees. For more information on PBMs and how drugs get adjudicated, listen to the show with AJ Loiacono (Encore! EP231), which was one of the most popular episodes over here at Relentless Health Value. Somebody on a LinkedIn post the other day commented on how much she appreciated AJ Loiacono's frank assessment of things and how she would love to go to a meeting with more people similarly telling it like it is. That's pretty much what we aim to do at every episode over here at Relentless Health Value, and AJ nails it on that objective for sure in this episode.   One last thing, also on the show: Scott Haas brings up GPOs that the Big Three PBMs have been spinning up to aggregate and maximize all of those rebates that we just talked about. I discuss this exact topic at some length in another incredibly popular episode with Mike Schneider (Encore! EP288).   You can learn more at usi.com or by emailing Scott at scott.haas@usi.com.  Scott Haas has over 38 years of employee benefits experience. His background includes the development and validation of care management programs; prescription benefit management solutions; provider network evaluation, valuation, and negotiation; and underwriting. Scott started and operationalized a third-party administrator (TPA) and a pharmacy benefit manager platform from scratch. He has worked in the arena of alternative funding for most of his career. Scott's primary focus is in the area of alternative delivery and financing of healthcare other than fee for service, along with prescription benefit and healthcare risk management consulting. Scott has held officer-level positions within Blues plans and TPAs as vice president of sales and marketing, vice president of underwriting, and president. Scott has also served as a trustee for both union and non-union health and welfare and pension plans. Scott frequently shares his consulting expertise speaking at national events hosted by organizations such as Health Rosetta, the International Foundation of Employee Benefits, the Health and Welfare Plan Management Conference, the Western Pension and Benefits Conference, and the Self-Insurance Institute of America (SIIA). Scott has authored and coauthored articles on various topics over his career. Scott earned his bachelor's degree in business administration and economics from the University of Nebraska at Kearney. Scott also holds Chartered Life Underwriter (CLU) and Registered Health Underwriter (RHU) designations. 10:29 What's the major flaw with the buyer-seller relationship between plan sponsors and PBMs? 12:04 What are the five things that need to be considered in order to get a fair price from a PBM? 13:16 Why does using average wholesale price cause problems for plan sponsors? 15:05 What does it mean to put the network risk on the PBM? 17:10 What's happening with drugs moving from specialty brand to specialty generic? 19:14 “A generic is a generic; in our world, it's binary.” 23:31 “The term 100% of rebates is really irrelevant.” 23:54 What does it mean to have a minimum guarantee in drug rebates? 26:39 “When you do a line-item assessment … is it producing an optimal result in comparison to competitively achieved … pricing for generics … and for specialty?” 27:52 “Plan sponsors need to grow a backbone.” 28:36 EP342 with Christin Deacon.29:05 Why do you need to understand your consultant's process as a plan sponsor? 29:30 Why do you need to understand formulary exclusions as a plan sponsor? 29:41 Why is it important to create a more equal PBM contract? 30:52 “Rebates inure to the benefit of the plan sponsor; they don't necessarily benefit the consumer.” 31:45 What does Scott do at USI? You can learn more at usi.com or by emailing Scott at scott.haas@usi.com.  Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What's the major flaw with the buyer-seller relationship between plan sponsors and PBMs? Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What are the five things that need to be considered in order to get a fair price from a PBM? Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why does using average wholesale price cause problems for plan sponsors? Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What does it mean to put the network risk on the PBM? Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What's happening with drugs moving from specialty brand to specialty generic? Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “A generic is a generic; in our world, it's binary.” Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “The term 100% of rebates is really irrelevant.” Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast What does it mean to have a minimum guarantee in drug rebates? Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “When you do a line-item assessment … is it producing an optimal result in comparison to competitively achieved … pricing for generics … and for specialty?” Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Plan sponsors need to grow a backbone.” Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why do you need to understand your consultant's process as a plan sponsor? Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why do you need to understand formulary exclusions as a plan sponsor? Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast Why is it important to create a more equal PBM contract? Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast “Rebates inure to the benefit of the plan sponsor; they don't necessarily benefit the consumer.” Scott Haas of @USIIns discusses #PBMs and #drugrebates on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! David Muhlestein, David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes, Paul Simms, Dr Steven Quimby, Dr David Carmouche (EP343), Christin Deacon, Gary Campbell  

Host D. Watkins shares his story of how he went from the streets to the We Own This City writers' room. The show's executive producers George Pelecanos (The Deuce) and David Simon (The Wire, The Deuce) share some behind-the-scenes thoughts on the first episode of the series. And actor Jon Bernthal (The Walking Dead, The Punisher), who plays the notorious Wayne Jenkins, joins Watkins to discuss the war on drugs, how working on the show has changed his perspective on policing, and how he immersed himself in Jenkins' world to nail the character. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this healthcare podcast, we're gonna zoom out and look at the entire healthcare industry. I am very confident that you know a lot about the healthcare industry and its basic stats. It's huge. The healthcare industry is approaching the $4 trillion mark, and it employs more people than any other industry in 47 states. Think about that momentarily. More people work in healthcare than in any other industry in every state except for Wisconsin, Indiana, and Nevada. We could get into (but we won't) how many of the gigantic, consolidated incumbents in the healthcare industry are either for-profits sporting very happy shareholders or investors. Then, of course, we have our “nonprofits”—especially mega-nonprofit health systems—who enjoy some pretty healthy margins while, at the same time, these health systems in general offer up some fairly embarrassing levels of charity care considering the amount of taxes they deprive their communities of. You also are probably eminently familiar with various ways that have been cited to transform the industry. So, the usual suspects here are, of course, changing incentives—offering true value-based care contracts, for example—and then the whole creative destruction angle, wherein upstarts come in with far superior products and services, à la the whole Kodak case study or what happened to Sears and Kmart. Maybe this will happen in healthcare. Other ideas to transform the healthcare industry include employers harnessing the latent power that they have in some markets and then, of course, getting rid of middle people, for sure. Or we could go single payer, of course. That's another suggestion/solution. Today's conversation is a rather holistic look at all of this. I dig into this with David Muhlestein, who is chief research and innovation officer at Health Management Association (HMA). And when I say dig in, I mean dig in. David made some very intriguing points that I had not heard before, actually—and I've heard a lot in my time, so that's saying something. I'm gonna tick off a couple of them, but I don't do them justice. So, you'll need to listen to David explain them and give context. First off, what's the problem with healthcare being a $4 trillion industry in this country—I mean, almost 20% of GDP—and employing more people than any other industry in 47 of our 50 states? There are other big sectors in our economy, after all, that get lots of love. Why is big healthcare “bad” and these other sectors “good” in economic terms when we talk about employment? That's one thing I wanted to know. And David made a point that may be self-evident for some but is worth reiterating in all cases. The government pays for roughly half of healthcare, and from a consumer or just American standpoint, it kind of sucks. I mean, I don't see many Insta selfies of someone rocking their brand-new insurance premium. Dollars going to healthcare or health insurance are not going to consumer goods. And that matters economically as well as retail therapy. For all you econ geeks out there, this industry offers no marginal utility. Here's a second interesting point: Just changing incentives might not be enough. Organizations downstream and upstream need to be on board with the spirit and objective of the incentive change. If they are not, then it's game on for every CFO and their revenue cycle managers to finagle how to find the loophole that enables revenue maximization. Revenue maximization. Period. Revenue. The end. Which brings me to another interesting point: Boards of directors, CEOs, people with fiduciary responsibility … they need to know thyself and consider their actual customer. Spoiler alert: 99% of the time, that actual customer is not patients, no matter what is printed in big letters on the front door. No change can really happen unless those who serve in the upper echelons of these businesses get really real about where their bread is buttered. Organizations are built to serve their customer, after all. So, if a patient isn't identified as a customer, the organization at its very core is gonna have a lot of difficulty serving the patient. So, now what? If I want my organization to move forward in a way that is more patient-centric and less financially toxic, say, what to do? Here's thoughts after chatting with David Muhlestein. Four main steps: As I just said, you gotta get your current state unemotionally understood. For reals, who is the organization built to serve? So, first step is being introspective in the harsh light of day. Consider the timeline of your existential demise. Ha ha, this show is so uplifting. But unless organizations really think out 5 years, 10 years, 25 years and really internalize the existential threat, it's going to be hard to motivate change. I see this all the time. So do you. Inertia is real. Nobody does anything until they absolutely have to. Sidebar: But if you need an eventual demise to bring up at your next strategy meeting, I just saw a paper come out saying that by 2030, cost-related nonadherence could become a leading cause of death in the United States, surpassing diabetes, influenza, pneumonia, and kidney disease. This is as per a study by the nonprofit West Health Policy Center and Xcenda. Nonadherence … what does that mean? It means the patient is not doing their treatment. They are not going to the doctor or getting medical care or not taking their drugs. Meaning no one is making money off of all of those patients, especially when they're dead. This is where the rubber meets all of those excess profits everybody is reaping in the short term. I hope that was helpful for anybody trying to motivate change today.   Consider what legacy we want to leave behind. Do we all want to wait until we're forced to change to do so? Is this the healthcare system we want to leave behind to children and grandchildren? I mean, anybody who's got a loved one in the hospital with anything complex, fighting for their own patient records, on the phone for hours a day with insurance carriers while care is delayed with possibly devastating consequences, the family having to coordinate care and cross their fingers and pray they don't get a ridiculous bill for services that may or may not have been rendered and then use retirement savings to pay for them … if anyone is not looking to be a party to all of this, then let's think about our strategy moving forward and how it will change to meet the future we want to see. On to the evolve and change approaches: How exactly do you think about doing that? According to David Muhlestein, you can repair your current organization or remodel or rebuild. It sounds daunting, but as Dr. Eric Bricker said on our recent interview together (EP351) and as others have said as well, this is already happening in some regions across the country. There are pockets with real transformation. These changes are on the edges right now, but they're showing that this can and is possible.   You can learn more at healthmanagement.com.   David Muhlestein, PhD, JD, is chief research and innovation officer for Health Management Associates (HMA). He is responsible for the firm's self-directed research and supports strategic planning and innovation. David's research and expertise center on healthcare payment and delivery transformation, understanding healthcare markets, and evaluating how the broader healthcare system is changing. He is a self-identified data nerd and regularly speaks and writes about healthcare system evolution. David joined HMA via its acquisition of Leavitt Partners in 2021, where he was the chief strategy and chief research officer. Additionally, David is a visiting policy fellow at the Margolis Center for Health Policy at Duke University, adjunct assistant professor at The Ohio State University College of Public Health, and a visiting fellow at the Accountable Care Learning Collaborative. He previously served as adjunct assistant professor of The Dartmouth Institute (TDI) at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College. David earned his PhD in health services management and policy, JD, MHA, and MS from The Ohio State University and a BA from Brigham Young University. 07:38 Is it an issue for the healthcare industry that it is one of the largest employers in the country? 08:42 “I think that we need to figure out what is an appropriate amount to spend on healthcare and get to that level.” 09:01 How do we not decrease the amount of healthcare we're receiving while paying less for that healthcare? 10:11 What are the two ways we can look at decreasing healthcare spend? 15:39 “I think that a regional approach may happen.” 16:56 “When somebody takes less, others are going to follow them.” 17:33 Who is really paying in our current healthcare system? 19:47 “Any sort of a model that you start with influences everything else that you do.” 20:09 What's the common challenge David Muhlestein sees in value-based care systems? 23:21 “There are countless things that you can do to improve the current system today.” 27:25 What are the three options for building up better healthcare? 28:19 David's advice for healthcare executives. 33:22 “To really lower the total cost of … healthcare, it's a 30-year process.” You can learn more at healthmanagement.com.   @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Is it an issue for the healthcare industry that it is one of the largest employers in the country? @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “I think that we need to figure out what is an appropriate amount to spend on healthcare and get to that level.” @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth How do we not decrease the amount of healthcare we're receiving while paying less for that healthcare? @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What are the two ways we can look at decreasing healthcare spend? @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “I think that a regional approach may happen.” @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “When somebody takes less, others are going to follow them.” @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth Who is really paying in our current healthcare system? @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “Any sort of a model that you start with influences everything else that you do.” @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth What's the common challenge David Muhlestein sees in value-based care systems? @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “There are countless things that you can do to improve the current system today.” @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth “To really lower the total cost of … healthcare, it's a 30-year process.” @DavidMuhlestein discusses #healthcaretransformation on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! David Scheinker, Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes, Paul Simms, Dr Steven Quimby, Dr David Carmouche (EP343), Christin Deacon, Gary Campbell, Kristin Begley  

Administrative costs in the United States have a bad rap. You don't have to look too far to find an article about how there's now, like, 10 administrators for every 1 physician in this country. Or 3 to 4 billing people for every physician. Or find someone complaining about arduous prior auth processes and how long specialists sit on phones trying to get a prior auth approved while having a frustrating “peer consult” with a “peer” whose career has nothing to do with that specialty and, in fact, knows very little about it. Also consider the time that specialists' admin teams have to spend—or really any doctor's admin teams have to spend—when they are required to send documentation validating some prior auth request or appeal. They, in many cases, have to send this documentation via old-school, drop-it-in-a-mailbox mail … literally. This documentation can and often does amount to a sizable box full of paper patient records. They have to drag a box into their office and fill it up with paper to send to the insurance company to validate whatever appeal. Think about who prints out all that paper. Who does all this stuff? And who on the insurance side is unboxing it all and, I don't know, are they highlighting the good parts? Are they rekeying anything? What goes on there? Or here's another administrative cost: collecting and tabulating all the data needed to participate in some quality incentive program. Considering that each carrier has their own flavor of metrics … yeah again. Administrative burden, administrative costs. Or consider what Dan O'Neill was talking about in EP359 the other day. He was talking about IPAs (independent physician associations) and other managed care entities. These entities hold the contracts with payers on behalf of smaller provider organizations or solo practitioners. So, these smaller (usually) individual practices contract with the IPAs—you know, for leverage and all that. And then it's the IPA who then holds the contract with the payer. As Dan mentions, contracting with some of these IPAs is like an “I love 1990” flashback. The contracting process, again, transpires via mail. Not email, mind you. Mail. Like, stick-a-stamp-on-the-envelope mail.  So, in sum, there's a lot of pretty well-founded complaining about administrative costs in this country. A lot of this administrative stuff is truly inefficient and a fantastical waste of time—valuable clinician time. So, here we are freaking out about staffing shortages, overlooking that doctors at the heights of their careers are spending some percentage of their time not counseling, treating, or diagnosing patients but twiddling their thumbs on hold with one insurance company or another slowly burning out by the inefficiency of it all. Or doing pajama time, and we all know that too much pajama time means also burnout on a silver platter. Now consider this: Reducing admin costs are frequently cited as a fine way to reduce overall healthcare spending in this country. So then, let's get granular here. If we're trying to quantify admin costs, how you'd do that is to quantify how much each transaction costs. How much does it cost to send a bill and get paid for it? How much does it cost to file an appeal and a denial of a prior auth? Add all those transactions together and you get the full cost of the administrative burden. In this healthcare podcast, we're digging into a paper about admin costs written by David Scheinker, PhD (my guest today); Barak Richman, JD, PhD; Arnold Milstein, MD, MPH; and Kevin Schulman, MD, MBA.   I have the pleasure of speaking with David Scheinker, PhD (as I mentioned), who is the lead author on this paper. Dr. Scheinker is an associate professor of pediatrics and executive director of systems design and collaborative research at the Stanford Lucile Packard Children's Hospital. He is the founder and director of SURF Stanford Medicine at Stanford. David Scheinker's work centers around bringing together engineering PhD students and faculty with hospital administrators, leaders, doctors, nurses. The goal here is to design improvements to operations from an industrial engineering point of view. So, you can see how investigating administrative burden and costs and trying to reduce them fits in here. Before we begin, I just want to point out one thing: I alluded to this earlier when I mentioned staffing shortages. As reported by Gist a few weeks ago, health systems saw an 8% increase in labor costs per patient day; and many are budgeting for a negative operating margin. In the past, most administrative challenges were solved by throwing bodies at the problem. That is now untenable. This is one promise of technology. Tech can automate, replicate, and scale much of what has required human labor in the past. Tech is used to automate administrative functions in many other industries also, so there's a number of precedents for this. Now, just to underline a major takeaway from this conversation with Dr. David Scheinker, he reiterates a recommendation to eliminate a big proportion of administrative costs. I guess I should say spoiler alert here, but the major takeaway/recommendation is this: Standardize healthcare contracts between payers and providers. Every payer and every provider finds one contract template and uses it. I don't mean one template per payer or per provider, although that probably would be a revelation in and of itself. But I mean that all payers use one basic provider contract. A couple of specifics here: The template that I'm referring to (and that Dr. David Scheinker is referring to) consists of parameters. What do I mean when I say parameters? Consider what Airbnb does when you're looking for a place to stay, as an example. How many bedrooms (that's a parameter)? How many bathrooms (that's a parameter)? How many amenities (that's a parameter)? After everybody picks their standard set of parameters, at that point, all parties can negotiate and come up with whatever they want for what is the price of an extra bedroom or whatever value you're gonna assign to that parameter. Go nuts there, but from a data collection and analytic perspective and a getting paid perspective, it is way easier to do it that way—meaning it's way easier to execute and report when all of the contracts use the same parameters. Also, you can build tech to do a lot of that because you don't have to write algorithms with exponential variables. And anybody who has tried to write algorithms with exponential variables—and I am talking from firsthand experience here—it's a hot mess right out of the gate. You can learn more by connecting with David on LinkedIn and following him on Twitter.   David Scheinker, PhD, started his career as a research mathematician and switched to healthcare operations to work on an interdisciplinary team and have a more immediate impact. He is a clinical associate professor of pediatrics, the executive director of systems design and collaborative research at the Stanford Lucile Packard Children's Hospital, and a member of the Clinical Excellence Research Center (CERC) at Stanford University. He founded and directs SURF Stanford Medicine, which brings together students and faculty from the university with physicians, nurses, and administrators from the hospitals. He studies clinical care delivery, hospital operations, sensor-based and algorithm-enabled telemedicine, the socioeconomic factors that shape healthcare, and policy. 07:23 What's the quantitative administrative cost in an average transaction? 07:49 What's the quantitative administrative cost in a healthcare transaction? 08:43 What does the healthcare billing and administration cost add to the US's overall healthcare spend? 09:38 Is it possible to cut billing and administrative costs in healthcare? 11:01 “In some ways, the problem for healthcare should be simpler.” 12:14 What does the complexity of the current system look like in a doctor's office? 15:26 How did David go about studying healthcare administrative costs? 18:17 “It doesn't have to be simple; it should be standardized.” 21:41 What would be the pushback on standardizing contracts in healthcare? 22:35 Why is it possible to gain more value by losing customization in contracts? 24:11 “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” 24:33 “It's much easier in healthcare to build something new than to change something that exists.” 27:39 What benefits does telemedicine have to cutting administrative costs? 29:09 What is another significant benefit of using standardized contracts? 30:17 Why haven't standardized contracts become a common thing in the current healthcare system? You can learn more by connecting with David on LinkedIn and following him on Twitter.   @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts What's the quantitative administrative cost in an average transaction? @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts What's the quantitative administrative cost in a healthcare transaction? @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts What does the healthcare billing and administration cost add to the US's overall healthcare spend? @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts Is it possible to cut billing and administrative costs in healthcare? @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts “In some ways, the problem for healthcare should be simpler.” @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts What does the complexity of the current system look like in a doctor's office? @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts How did David go about studying healthcare administrative costs? @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts “It doesn't have to be simple; it should be standardized.” @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts What would be the pushback on standardizing contracts in healthcare? @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts Why is it possible to gain more value by losing customization in contracts? @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts “It's much easier in healthcare to build something new than to change something that exists.” @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts What benefits does telemedicine have to cutting administrative cost? @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts What is another significant benefit of using standardized contracts? @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts Why haven't standardized contracts become a common thing in the current healthcare system? @David_Scheinker of @SURFStanfordMed discusses administrative burden on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #healthcarecosts Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Ali Ucar, Dr Carly Eckert, Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes, Paul Simms, Dr Steven Quimby, Dr David Carmouche (EP343), Christin Deacon, Gary Campbell, Kristin Begley, David Contorno (AEE17)  

David Contorno the other day posted the life expectancy chart comparing the US to comparable countries. Spoiler alert: It's horrifying. You see Japan; you see Switzerland, Israel, Spain, Italy … basically everybody else in a cluster of pretty darn vertical lines: increasing life expectancies year over year without much cost increase at all. And then—wow!—off to the right, all by itself, you see the USA, costing nearly double the worst of the other countries with a life expectancy that is years lower. We pay a whole lot, and despite all of the advances in medicine and how much we pay, we don't seem to be getting the value for our dollar. We could dig into those poor outcomes that we pay for. If we were going to, I might mention our truly beyond-upsetting maternal mortality rates and also infant mortality rates, which are way above other comparable countries. We could talk about all of our issues with diabetes and obesity. But let's save all that for another day and just take one example that is really the quintessential example of what's going on. Let's chat about heart failure for just a sec. Here's some stats for you. They come from Dr. William Bestermann's Substack newsletter, and if you don't subscribe to it, you might want to. It's free.  Dr. Bestermann wrote: “Twenty-two percent of heart failure patients who are admitted to the hospital are dead within a year. Patients with [heart failure] generate a third of Medicare spending and 40% of Medicare fee-for-service deaths. Overall, heart failure patients have a mortality of 22%, compared [to] 4% for Medicare patients without heart failure. They are responsible for 55% of Medicare readmissions.” But here's some good news: In Denmark, investigators proved that using optimal medical therapy reduced heart failure admissions by 70% compared with usual care. Here's some more good news: There was a small, impoverished town near the coast of the Carolinas that had very few heart failure admissions. How did they accomplish that, you might wonder? Well, there was a nurse—one nurse—who was working under a grant. She was very dedicated. She had a list of all the heart failure patients in the area, and this was her job: making certain that every patient was on the best treatment for heart failure. She called the patients. She spent time with them. She had a trusting, caring, long-term relationship with them. That's it! That was the secret sauce. As Dr. Bestermann says, “Every poor community in our country could do that, but they don't.” So, this leads us to care gaps—dare I say, this country's seeming care gap fetish dealing with care gaps retroactively. In this healthcare podcast, I'm speaking with Carly Eckert, MD. It's kinda funny, actually. I originally wanted to get Dr. Eckert on the show to talk about care gaps and how to close them, but this show did not wind up going how I thought it was going to go because Carly Eckert is a physician by training who got really interested in the upstream causes of what she was seeing in clinical practice. Despite my best efforts, she refused to be lured into my closing care gaps conversation. So, instead, this conversation is about the construct of care gaps and thinking about them in context. Closing care gaps is a model of care and maybe not a particularly great one, relatively speaking. In fact, here's another name for the model of care called closing care gaps: care gap whack-a-mole. Care gap pops up … we whack it. Care gap pops up … we try to close it. Another care gap pops up … we try to close it. Another care gap … you get the idea. Carly Eckert has worked in epidemiology and public health and also clinical informatics for health systems and payers. She is currently leading a team at Olive AI working on network data analytics and machine learning algorithms. I recorded this show with Dr. Eckert prior to EP359 with Dan O'Neill. In that interview, which you should go back and listen to when you have a sec, Dan O'Neill cleared up a couple of things that I struggled with during this interview.  Here's the big one that I could not figure out: Why with the whack-a-mole? Why do we still insist as a nation on waiting for someone to show up in clinic to retroactively and reactively address a missed preventative care opportunity? Why don't so many more provider organizations create pop health programs that consider the whole person proactively? Why don't they take the time to operationalize whole-person care in a meaningful way? Why don't they do what that nurse was doing in the Carolinas? Ah, yes … to the surprise of exactly no one, it's all about the Benjamins. As Dan O'Neill put it, if all a provider organization is doing is slapping a sheet on a doc's desk every morning with a list of care gaps for all the patients that he/she will see that day, it's highly likely that incentives, or penalties to do anything else, are very weak. It's a sign that, from a paying for value perspective, we're not paying enough for value that it's worth it or maybe even feasible for any provider organization to take the time and capital expense to switch up their business model in any meaningful way. So, the provider gets a little bump or a little knock if they don't meet some quality standard. OK, great … so then they'll minimally tweak their workflow and have doctors within their 7- to 15-minute visit suss out and try to close care gaps. I don't want to say this is entirely negative. It's known that when provider organizations do close care gaps, patient outcomes do tend to get better—so, not arguing that. But there's opportunities that get left on the table with all this reactiveness. Bottom line: You insurers, you purchasers of healthcare, get to it. Pay for value, for real. If you're still just kinda paying mostly FFS with an icing of quality measures, maybe think a little bit harder about what's next that's really gonna end the whack-a-mole and bring about a more proactive and in-context mindset. But you provider organizations, if you don't fix this stuff yourself, you're gonna get doctors and other clinicians (as we're seeing) burning out and quitting because there's only so much you can jam into a 7- or 15-minute visit, number one. But number two, doing population health reactively like this is suboptimal—and everybody knows it. So, what winds up happening is dedicated doctors and nurses desperately want to do the right thing but simply do not have the time. And they watch patient after patient suffer for it. That sucks. So, fix it. Maybe find a nurse like they did in North Carolina. At the end of the day, it's probably cheaper to stand up a program like that than having to recruit all new doctors and hire traveling nurses when all of the current staff quits due to burnout and/or moral injury. You can learn more at oliveai.com. You can also connect with Dr. Eckert on LinkedIn and follow her on Twitter.   Carly Eckert, MD, MPH, is a product leader at Olive AI, the automation company creating the internet of healthcare. As a trained physician, epidemiologist, and informatician, Dr. Eckert brings a tremendous amount of clinical experience and relevant healthcare industry knowledge to her work. In her role, Dr. Eckert combines her expertise, data understanding, and deep passion to impact healthcare for all patients. Prior to her role at Olive, Dr. Eckert led product for multiple AI start-ups with a particular interest in socially responsible technology and community impact. 06:59 What is the true goal in making population health successful? 07:26 How does the clinical pathway need to manifest in population health? 08:00 How do we get a nonfragmented state of care? 08:25 What is the best model of care? 10:08 “Identifying and addressing care gaps is an important element of population health.” 13:01 Closing care gaps vs creating a nonfragmented system of care. 17:11 “I think you have to take small steps with people.” 18:18 “There's a lot of power in peer support.” 18:52 Why should provider organizations connect with peer groups? 20:39 “The key is that it's not going to be the same for everybody.” 24:43 Why is diversity of the workforce key to closing care gaps? 25:07 EP322 with Monica Lypson, MD, MHPE.25:11 EP347 with Ian Tong, MD.30:09 Where can providers improve transparency to help close care gaps? You can learn more at oliveai.com. You can also connect with Dr. Eckert on LinkedIn and follow her on Twitter.   @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc What is the true goal in making #populationhealth successful? @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc How does the clinical pathway need to manifest in #populationhealth? @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc How do we get a nonfragmented state of care? @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc What is the best model of care? @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc “Identifying and addressing care gaps is an important element of #populationhealth.” @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc Closing care gaps vs creating a nonfragmented system of care. @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc “I think you have to take small steps with people.” @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc “There's a lot of power in peer support.” @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc Why should provider organizations connect with peer groups? @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc “The key is that it's not going to be the same for everybody.” @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc Why is diversity of the workforce key to closing care gaps? @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc Where can providers improve transparency to help close care gaps? @md_carly discusses #caregaps in #healthcare on our #healthcarepodcast. #podcast #digitalhealth #valuebasedcare #vbc   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Jeb Dunkelberger (EP360), Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes, Paul Simms, Dr Steven Quimby, Dr David Carmouche (EP343), Christin Deacon, Gary Campbell, Kristin Begley, David Contorno (AEE17), David Contorno (EP339), Nikki King

Before I get into the show today, let me just remind everybody about our mailing list, which you can sign up for on our Web site, relentlesshealthvalue.com. You might follow Relentless Health Value on LinkedIn or Twitter, which is a great option, for sure; but I wanted to point out that what you see there is abridged at some level. Meanwhile, if you subscribe to our mailing list directly (again, by going to our Web site, relentlesshealthvalue.com—it's over on the right sidebar where you can sign up for the mailing list), if you subscribe that way, each week you'll get an email with a full transcription of the whole introduction of the show with timed show notes. Also, we don't send out literally anything else beyond what I just described on a weekly basis. Also, you can unsubscribe easily and anytime you want. You just hit the unsubscribe in the email. Also, we don't share our list with anybody. We barely have time to look at it ourselves, so if you have any concerns there in that regard, please don't.  Last week's show (EP359) was with Dan O'Neill, and he talked about the four gradations of value-based payments, from paying purely for volume on one end of the continuum to paying purely for value on the other. When you have a moment (not now, but when you can), go back and listen to that show, as it adds some color to what we talk about in this healthcare podcast.  But in the meantime, one of the points that Dan O'Neill makes is that patients in this country won't gain the benefits of value-based care unless commercial insurers pay for value, for reals. After all, value-based payments are payments that incentivize value-based care. Without value-based payments, how does anyone expect to get value-based care? To belabor this point momentarily, a provider is not gonna switch up their FFS business model when insurers, especially commercial insurers, pay whatever for whatever with no reward going to providers who spend time and effort to create value and/or better outcomes for patients. I'm being super cynical here, I will grant you. But in this day and age of private equity and record profits by a consolidated healthcare industry, if I'm in charge of a provider organization just realistically here, Pramod John, PhD, says this really well in EP352. He's talking about drug development in that episode, but same thing here is true for medical care. If you indiscriminately pay Ferrari prices for Hyundais, you're gonna get a Hyundai for the price of a Ferrari.   To add insult to injury—and this is just one important reason why providers aren't really willing to invest in lifting outcomes—any value that they would manage to create is gonna be realized by the insurers. It's gonna go right back into insurers' pockets. Steve Schutzer, MD, talks about this in his episode (Encore! EP294) about the why and how to create a center of excellence. If, as a provider in a pure volume contract which is FFS, I work really hard to save downstream costs and complications for patients, some carrier is gonna bank the difference.   It's go time, all you self-insured employers out there. Pay for high quality. Make the carrot an orange-colored stick, as they say. Patients will benefit. Probably doctors and other clinicians, too, honestly: less moral injury and crappy workflows. In this healthcare podcast, I am talking with Jeb Dunkelberger. Jeb Dunkelberger is the CEO of Sutter Health | Aetna, which is a payvider. Payviders, by Jeb's definition, take on full risk. They have a full-risk insurance product, meaning they must switch up their business model and how they deliver care so that it works in a total capitation payment situation. We go deep on payviders the last time Jeb was on the show (EP348). But in this relatively short conversation, I wanted to talk to Jeb about the operational imperatives of moving to value-based care, moving to a care model that is aligned with value-based payments—what needs to switch up in the day-to-day to ensure that patients don't have care gaps that cause expensive trouble downstream, or patients at rising risk get taken care of promptly before something avoidable and/or acute (ie, expensive) happens.   There are three main things that Jeb talks about: Fixing up the clinical workflow Having care navigators Aligning physician comp to organizational goals Let me dig into each one of them briefly. 1. Fixing up the clinical workflow. There's basically five aspects to that: Ensuring that the right data is in the clinical workflow. Let's talk about this data for just one sec and we'll find actually one more reason that payers and purchasers need to get kinda engaged in this making sure members get care thing. Because data—data that payers have that is needed at the point of care. Like claims data. Please provide it to providers and actually insist that it gets used by clinicians making clinical decisions at the point of care. Ensuring that there are pick lists of drugs, with generic drugs first Making sure it's easy to get to pended orders that close care gaps right within the clinical workflow Empowering medical assistants and holding them responsible to create value for members Building referral management into the clinical workflow in pursuit of a nonfragmented patient journey 2. Having care navigators. I just want to remind everyone: This is even more important if the EHR doesn't support referral navigation. Also, Liliana Petrova talks about this extensively, the need for care navigators, in EP357. She's talking about it relative to telehealth, and she makes a really important point: If you want to ensure that the right patients are getting telehealth and also taking advantage of it to streamline their longitudinal care and make it less fragmented, you have to have navigators involved in scheduling. Otherwise, how's a patient supposed to know whether to go in person or telehealth or even that telehealth is available?  3. Aligning physician comp to organizational goals. We definitely get into this in some detail. We cover these three top-line operational must-haves in this episode, and you'll hear about them right from a CEO who is doing them right now. Besides this conversation, another resource I would highly recommend checking out is a recent article in Nature entitled “Deploying Digital Health Tools Within Large, Complex Health Systems.” While this article is about digital health tools (obviously by its title), 80% of the article is pertinent to deploying pretty much anything in a big provider organization, including an upgrade to value-based care delivery—and/or probably digital health tools are pretty requisite in any attempt to effectively remodel the clinical workflow in this way in 2022, so there's that, too.   For additional Relentless Health Value episodes on this topic of how to build an operational model that fulfills value-based care objectives, I'd listen to the show with Shawn Rhodes on the essentials for clinical integration (EP354)—also the show with Lisa Trumble (EP349) on what that clinical integration looks like from a care perspective. I am also going to refer you to the episode next week (EP361) with Carly Eckert, MD, MPH. So, check that out for sure. We talk about care gaps.  You can learn more at sutterhealthaetna.com.   You can also connect with Jeb on LinkedIn and follow him on Twitter.   Jeb Dunkelberger, MSc, MHCI, currently serves as CEO of Sutter Health | Aetna (SH|A), a commercial insurance plan serving Northern California. The health plan aims to combine the value of retail, provider, and payer via its partnerships with CVS, Sutter Health, and Aetna. Prior to SH|A, Jeb led growth for two bay-area healthcare start-ups: Cricket Health and Notable Health. Jeb has also held executive roles at Highmark, McKesson, and EY. Jeb holds healthcare-related degrees from Virginia Tech, The London School of Economics, Cornell University, and University of Pennsylvania. 08:36 What must a provider organization consider operationally when incorporating value-based care and value-based payments? 09:44 How can you use perverse incentives to encourage people to do the right thing? 12:25 How should clinical workflows operate to incorporate value-based care? 14:10 “How do you align patients?” 15:52 How should the EHR operate to maximize value-based workflow? 16:52 Why is taking action on claims data and clinical data together important? 20:26 “Have they actually solved the last mile of integrations?” 21:15 “Changing the behavior of a provider is an absolute art and science.” 22:57 “We have to do more.” 27:09 “That administrative headache … doesn't just end with the insurer.” You can learn more at sutterhealthaetna.com.   You can also connect with Jeb on LinkedIn and follow him on Twitter.   @Jeb_Dunk discusses #valuebased #clinicalworkflows in this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #valuebasedcare #ffs What must a provider organization consider operationally when incorporating value-based care and value-based payments? @Jeb_Dunk discusses #valuebased #clinicalworkflows in this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #valuebasedcare #ffs How can you use perverse incentives to encourage people to do the right thing? @Jeb_Dunk discusses #valuebased #clinicalworkflows in this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #valuebasedcare #ffs How should clinical workflows operate to incorporate value-based care? @Jeb_Dunk discusses #valuebased #clinicalworkflows in this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #valuebasedcare #ffs “How do you align patients?” @Jeb_Dunk discusses #valuebased #clinicalworkflows in this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #valuebasedcare #ffs How should the EHR operate to maximize value-based workflow? @Jeb_Dunk discusses #valuebased #clinicalworkflows in this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #valuebasedcare #ffs Why is taking action on claims data and clinical data together important? @Jeb_Dunk discusses #valuebased #clinicalworkflows in this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #valuebasedcare #ffs “Have they actually solved the last mile of integrations?” @Jeb_Dunk discusses #valuebased #clinicalworkflows in this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #valuebasedcare #ffs “Changing the behavior of a provider is an absolute art and science.” @Jeb_Dunk discusses #valuebased #clinicalworkflows in this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #valuebasedcare #ffs “We have to do more.” @Jeb_Dunk discusses #valuebased #clinicalworkflows in this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #valuebasedcare #ffs “That administrative headache … doesn't just end with the insurer.” @Jeb_Dunk discusses #valuebased #clinicalworkflows in this week's #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #vbc #valuebasedcare #ffs Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Dan O'Neill, Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes, Paul Simms, Dr Steven Quimby, Dr David Carmouche (EP343), Christin Deacon, Gary Campbell, Kristin Begley, David Contorno (AEE17), David Contorno (EP339), Nikki King, Olivia Webb  

Last week's show was with Wayne Jenkins, MD, from Centivo; and we talked about how insurance design, when not done well, can lead, in a nutshell, to mental and physical health problems for employees. This is a great lead-in to the conversation in this healthcare podcast with Dan O'Neill. And before I get into why it's a great lead-in, let me just start here—and don't roll your eyes. What is value-based care? Consider this delineation: There's value-based payments, and then there's the type of care that these payments incentivize. You would hope that a value-based payment would result in care that was of value (ie, great patient outcomes and patient satisfaction at a fair total cost of care). But those are two distinct things—the payment and the care. If we change the payment model but the provider behavior doesn't change in a way that actually improves patient outcomes and care, then what are we doing here? Or the converse: If we do not change the payment model, then how does anyone expect the care paid for is going to change? Employers or carriers who just meander along with the broad PPO network happily paying as much for low-value care as for high-value care and happily paying centers of excellence as much as non–centers of excellence … how is a provider who wants to spend time and money building out a practice to deliver better patient outcomes, how can they do that without overcoming some pretty fundamental business model challenges? This whole concept is one that my guest today, Dan O'Neill, has talked about and will talk about in this episode. Dan says the first step is for insurers, IPAs, managed care organizations to take an absolute chainsaw to their network management bureaucracy. There must be a clear door to a value-based payment model. It must be that if you're a provider or you're a physician practice (primary care practice, in particular), and you want to go down a value-based care path, there has to be a clear door and a pathway for you. I think I have a non-perfect litmus test for anybody with a value-based payment program who wants a heuristic to check if their value-based payment program is actually meaningfully impacting models of care in the marketplace: If most of the provider organizations who are part of that value-based program still incentivize and pay their doctors using FFS incentives like RVUs (relative value units), I'd step back and think about that for a piece. Contemplate that doctors, who are responsible for care decisions, still have every incentive to do everything that they would have done had the provider organization just been paid FFS. What's the point of value-based payments that extract exactly zero behavior change? And that is not a rhetorical question. So, back to the conversation from last week with Dr. Wayne Jenkins citing all of the things that can go horribly wrong when an employer's benefit designs are misaligned with the financial realities of their workforce. You get what you pay for, and I don't just mean that in terms of the dollars outlaid, since we all know in healthcare prices and quality have nothing to do with each other—I mean, in terms of what you choose to pay for and how you choose to pay for it. That's the macro of this whole thing, but indulge me as I get into the micro for just one sec. Let me just remind everybody about Goodhart's Law: “When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.” More on the why of this in the interview with Rishi Wadhera, MD, MPP, on the hospital readmission reduction program (EP326) and also what happens when we don't adhere to Goodhart's Law as we evaluate PCPs, which Rebecca Etz, PhD, talks about in EP295.   In this episode with Dan O'Neill, we go through where we're at on the continuum of value-based payments and how those payments are impacting the care, value-based or otherwise, that is incentivized by those payments. We tick through four gradations of value-based payments: A pure volume contract (otherwise known as FFS [fee for service]) A clinician bonus for achieving quality measures A piece of the savings (ie, MSSP [Medicare Shared Savings Program]) Global risk My guest, Dan O'Neill, is chief commercial officer over at Pine Park Health. Besides over a decade in healthcare tech and services, he was a policy fellow at the National Academy of Medicine and worked in the Senate on the Senate Health Committee. You can learn more at dponeill.com or connect with Dan on LinkedIn. Daniel O'Neill, MA, MS, currently serves as chief commercial officer for Pine Park Health, a value-based primary care group that delivers on-site care in senior living communities. Prior to that, Dan was a health policy fellow at the National Academy of Medicine, working primarily in the US Senate on legislation focused on surprise billing, anti-competitive contracting practices in the commercial market, and price transparency. Dan has also worked as a senior vice president with Change Healthcare and as an advisor to venture-stage healthcare services and technology firms. At Pine Park, Dan is responsible for risk-based contracting with IPAs and insurers and for the group's participation in CMS value-based care models, including direct contracting. Dan's research is available in NEJM Catalyst and on the Health Affairs blog, and he holds graduate degrees from Johns Hopkins University and Stanford University.   05:06 What is the spectrum of value-based contracts? 07:24 Why don't value-based contracts at the organizational level always trickle down to the provider level? 11:25 What are the two things that need to happen to drive outcomes in value-based healthcare? 15:24 How do insurers play into improving value-based contracts? 19:46 “There's a strong case to actually clamp down on prices.” 23:47 “Right now, we're still in a place where if you want to do something other than fee for service … you have to fight like hell.” 24:03 What's the first step to making value-based contracts more accessible? 24:27 What's the second step to making value-based contracts accessible? 25:23 Why are the incentives to change American healthcare pretty weak? 27:10 “Organizational change is just exceedingly difficult.” 28:45 What should you do if you want to start pushing organizations toward value-based contracts? 32:42 EP351 with Eric Bricker, MD.  You can learn more at dponeill.com or connect with Dan on LinkedIn. @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth What is the spectrum of value-based contracts? @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth Why don't value-based contracts at the organizational level always trickle down to the provider level? @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth What are the two things that need to happen to drive outcomes in value-based healthcare? @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth How do insurers play into improving value-based contracts? @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth “There's a strong case to actually clamp down on prices.” @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth “Right now, we're still in a place where if you want to do something other than fee for service … you have to fight like hell.” @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth What's the first step to making value-based contracts more accessible? @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth What's the second step to making value-based contracts accessible? @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth Why are the incentives to change American healthcare pretty weak? @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth “Organizational change is just exceedingly difficult.” @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth What should you do if you want to start pushing organizations toward value-based contracts? @dp_oneill discusses #vbc on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #valuebasedpayments #digitalhealth   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Dr Wayne Jenkins, Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes, Paul Simms, Dr Steven Quimby, Dr David Carmouche (EP343), Christin Deacon, Gary Campbell, Kristin Begley, David Contorno (AEE17), David Contorno (EP339), Nikki King, Olivia Webb, Brandon Weber  

First of all, anybody who thinks that your average citizen in the United States today is unaware of the financial double jeopardy of going to a doctor, going to an emergency room, getting a procedure is sorely mistaken. Americans today are well aware of the financial risk that they are taking by seeking healthcare in this country. To illustrate this point, let me read the first couple of sentences from a New York Times best-selling book review: “The illness narrative, ending in financial ruin and decreased quality of life, has become one of the classic 21st-century American stories. In her debut essay collection, Emily Maloney documents the … intersections of money, illness and medicine. For Maloney, the primary experience of receiving health care is not merely a bodily or spiritual event but always … a financial one. She understands … the relationship of money to being ill, … to managing an unfathomable amount of debt.” This is a New York Times best-selling book in the beginning of 2022.  Add to this something I saw Pete Scruggs write on LinkedIn a while back, which I found actionable. He said:   “Patients selling personal items or taking on credit card debt after medical procedures is a failure of creativity in providing healthcare. It is possible to build creative health plans that reduce costs for patients with expensive procedures by giving wise guidance at the time patients need it the most. “It is not enough for insurance to provide access to a wide range of health providers but effectively leave the patient in debt … after the procedures are done. It is possible to buy healthcare so well in the local community that employers can reduce cost dramatically at the time most needed by those using health services.” And lastly, let me quote from a recent article in JAMA by David Scheinker, PhD; Arnold Milstein, MD; and Kevin Schulman, MD, which says, “The financial consequences of an underperforming health insurance market (one that is not holding down … cost … ) diminishes the quality of life affordable to US employees and their families and the financial viability of employers not in the health care industry.”  So, in this healthcare podcast, I am speaking with Wayne Jenkins, MD, who is chief medical officer over at Centivo. Before his move into value-based healthcare about 10 years ago, Dr. Jenkins started his career as a radiation oncologist. He has also served as the chief clinician at a bunch of large health systems. I wanted to have Dr. Jenkins on the show to discuss a recent report which was published by Centivo that methodically dissects how financial toxicity is affecting patients. This includes how it affects choices that employees/patients/members are making both in terms of the care they decide they are willing to pay for or, more likely, the financial risks they're willing to take.  In short, the three key findings of the report are as follows: Workers face mounting healthcare affordability issues, and health plan cost sharing features such as high deductibles are an underlying cause. Just a quick spoiler here: Do you know the percentage of employees who are forgoing buying groceries in order to afford medical expenses left on their shoulders by their high-deductible health plan or by their health plan with excessive premiums? Going hungry isn't just for minimum wage workers. Medical expenses are a significant cause of mental health and well-being issues for both individuals and also families. The conventional wisdom that health plan members will never “trade off” certain offerings for greater savings is simply false. The big takeaway here, though, is that the situation that we have in this country today is not a secret among your average regular American civilian. They do fully understand that by entering a healthcare setting, they are very well trading off, in their attempt to be healthy and going to the doctor in pursuit of that aim, they are trading off their financial well-being. And that financial toxicity actually has health implications. If you can't afford groceries, for example, or your mental health suffers, we get ourselves rather rapidly into a downward spiral, as you may be able to see. Other episodes dedicated to the impact of financial toxicity and possible solutions are in the show notes. I'm just gonna mention here quickly, we talked to Marty Makary, MD, about his book called The Price We Pay (EP242). There's an interview with Marshall Allen (EP328) and then also a very interesting conversation with Mark Fendrick, MD (EP308).   You can learn more at centivo.com.   Wayne Jenkins, MD, is the chief medical officer at Centivo. He is an accomplished physician and executive with a proven track record of patient-centered, revenue-driven results. Over the course of his career, he has consistently transformed large, complex healthcare systems into market leaders that deliver quality and value in a dynamically changing environment. Prior to Centivo, he was the chief clinical officer for population health at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, where he provided clinical oversight of value-based care delivery and completed the formation of Medicare accountable care organizations (ACOs). Before his time at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, he served as the senior vice president and chief strategy officer of Orlando Health, as well as president of Orlando Health Physician Partners. Previously, Wayne was the chief of radiation oncology and then subsequently the medical director for the Florida affiliate of M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, a subsidiary of Orlando Health, Inc. Wayne holds a bachelor's degree from the University of Tennessee, an MD from Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, and a master's of health policy and administration from Johns Hopkins University. He is board certified in radiation oncology and was recognized in Best Doctors in America annually from 1994 to 2015. He has published 18 scientific articles and is often sought out to speak at state and national conferences. 05:23 How is financial toxicity in healthcare affecting patients? 07:02 How do we define a “normal” deductible in today's healthcare? 08:14 What's the point of having a deductible? What does a plan gain from a high deductible? 10:43 How does the cost of a patient's deductible correlate with their use of their health insurance? 12:51 EP308 with Mark Fendrick, MD.15:18 How is health insurance actually sometimes reducing patients' health? 16:24 What is the defining characteristic of those who are more adversely affected by high deductibles? 17:04 Why should CFOs consider plans with lower deductibles for their employees? 18:26 “Are there other ways to approach this in a marketplace, to get more value for what you're paying for so this problem can be addressed?” 21:56 How should employers contemplate health plans moving forward? 22:24 “Having the health plan choice gives more financial viability in addition to that open access.” 22:58 “In some sense, [that] can be a zero-sum game. Do you get it in the premium, or is it paid in the higher deductible?” 23:45 “I think there are value choices in the market that may help negate some of the problems that we were just discussing.” 25:33 “I think conventional wisdom may be left over from the '90s.” 26:49 Why does building these narrow networks have to be a science? 28:38 Does a narrow network adversely affect mental health? 32:20 “Narrow and excellent is not a bad choice for people.” You can learn more at centivo.com.  Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses health insurance plan design on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts How is financial toxicity in healthcare affecting patients? Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts How do we define a “normal” deductible in today's healthcare? Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts What's the point of having a deductible? What does a plan gain from a high deductible? Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts How does the cost of a patient's deductible correlate with their use of their health insurance? Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts How is health insurance actually sometimes reducing patients' health? Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts What is the defining characteristic of those who are more adversely affected by high deductibles? Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts Why should CFOs consider plans with lower deductibles for their employees? Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts “Are there other ways to approach this in a marketplace, to get more value for what you're paying for so this problem can be addressed?” Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts How should employers contemplate health plans moving forward? Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts “Having the health plan choice gives more financial viability in addition to that open access.” Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts “In some sense, [that] can be a zero-sum game. Do you get it in the premium, or is it paid in the higher deductible?” Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts “I think there are value choices in the market that may help negate some of the problems that we were just discussing.” Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts “I think conventional wisdom may be left over from the '90s.” Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts Why does building these narrow networks have to be a science? Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts Does a narrow network adversely affect mental health? Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts “Narrow and excellent is not a bad choice for people.” Wayne Jenkins, MD, of @Centivo_Health discusses on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #digitalhealth #healthcarecosts Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Liliana Petrova, Ge Bai, Nikhil Krishnan, Shawn Rhodes, Pramod John (EP353), Pramod John (EP352), Dr Eric Bricker, Katy Talento, Stacey Richter (INBW33), Stacey Richter (INBW32), Dr Steve Schutzer (Encore! EP294), Lisa Trumble, Jeb Dunkelberger, Dr Ian Tong, Mike Schneider, Peter Hayes, Paul Simms, Dr Steven Quimby, Dr David Carmouche (EP343), Christin Deacon, Gary Campbell, Kristin Begley, David Contorno (AEE17), David Contorno (EP339), Nikki King, Olivia Webb, Brandon Weber, Stacey Richter (INBW30)  

Wayne Jenkins lideró una brigada de policías corruptos en la ciudad de Baltimore que terminaron en la cárcel por una larga serie de crímenes.

Wayne Jenkins, now serving 25 years in prison, tells his side of the story. What do the crimes of the Gun Trace Task Force reveal about the city of Baltimore?

Message from Dr. Wayne Jenkins on July 4, 2021

CulturalDC presents the second video installation in partnership with Baltimore-based curator Teri Henderson. The exhibit, “SUBVERSIONS,” will be projected onto the windows of CulturalDC’s Source Theatre in the historic 14th and U Street Corridor in Northwest Washington, D.C. “As An Enemy” is a multichannel video installation showing the corruption of the Baltimore City Police Department. Curated in collaboration with Baltimore based writer Brandon Soderberg, “As An Enemy” offers a stark microcosm of corrupt police forces across the country. The exhibition creates space for the victims of police brutality by telling the unique story of Black men and women victimized by the Gun Trace Task Force (GTTF)—a plainclothes police squad, led by the diabolical Wayne Jenkins, established to maintain the racist legacy of “law and order” in Baltimore City, following the 2015 murder of Freddie Gray. In response to Gray’s murder—during which Baltimore Police officers broke his spine and crushed his throat—the city erupted in weeks of proper protest and righteous outrage. In response to that outrage from citizens, the GTTF terrorized Baltimoreans—stealing money and drugs, while causing violence, terror and death. They often targeted known drug dealers, knowing their cries of injustice would be ignored by the judicial system.

Wayne Jenkins, owner of SOB MMA in Cape Breton and one of the driving forces of growing the sport on the island!  A talented and proven black belt in Judo, training for 18 years in many martial arts, it was great to finally sit down and chat about the history of his club and how it came to be.  Working in Health Care, we spoke about the pandemic and how things are a bit different in every area and the results of covid fatigue.  We covered SOB and other gyms in Cape Breton and spoke about his current students and how the dedication is proving successful.  Lots of talk about future FLA cards in Cape Breton and the crowds we can expect!  A wonderful chat about some good old memories about Martial Arts in Cape Breton.  A great listen, thanks for tuning in, enjoy!  

Jake Cunningham, a super nice heavyweight out of Fredericton, NB!  Lots of experience as an amateur at 3-1 and just turning 25, this guy has a bright future.  A heart of gold, the right attitude and lots of support around him makes this guy a dangerous opponent for anybody!  A really candid conversation about life and why he decided to get back into Martial Arts after taking five or six years away from the sport!  Justin MacKenzie also joined us, one of Cape Breton's rising stars!  An athlete under Wayne Jenkins and crew out of SOB MMA, a purple belt who has alot to prove in 2020 and beyond.  Cape Breton is a beautiful island connected to the mainland of Nova Scotia that has produced a tonne of top boxing, fighting, sports, musicians and talents from across the board.  We chatted about life on the island, the benefits and how big an event will be when FLA makes it way to the island! Enjoy

Judge rejects Baltimore Police's bid to dismiss lawsuit in drug planting case involving GTTF and Det. Suiter Attorney David Irwin and retired Baltimore City Police Sgt. Keith Gladstone walk outside the Federal Courthouse after Gladstone pleaded guilty earlier this year. He was accused in of planting a toy gun to justify Sgt. Wayne Jenkins of running down a man with his vehicle, an incident at the heart of a lawsuit against the police department. (Kim Hairston / Baltimore Sun) https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/bs-md-ci-cr-burley-order-20190912-p5cl5tevpbahbhsbinpfddr6s4-story.html --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/king-emjay/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/king-emjay/support

A handful of criminal cops have been caught and are facing justice, but this is the exception, not the norm. What's in the News with stories on TSA bumbling, cops stealing clothes, Constitutional abuse, Sessions fighting a kid, and education or else. Also, a brand new Ask Me Anything segment with some awesome questions from you guys, and another new trailer for another new podcast from Pax Libertas Productions. This episode is brought to you by Heleum, a long-term savings accelerator allowing you to start investing in cryptos, without you having to do the busy work. Also brought to you by ZenCash, a cryptocurrency that infuses privacy, anonymity, and security done right. WHAT'S RUSTLING MY JIMMIES If you've ever seen the movie Traning Day, there are two things you come away with. Denzel Washington is an amazing actor, and cops are shitheels for the most part. However, who knew that real life cops imitated art as much as they do in this instance? Eight members of Baltimore's elite Gun Trace Task Force have been accused of a range of organized crime-level charges that range from robbery and extortion, to faking evidence, planting drugs, dealing drugs, and other serious crimes. Six of the officers, Sergeants Thomas Allers and Wayne Jenkins, and Detectives Momodu Gondo, Evodio Hendrix, Maurice Ward, and Jemell Rayam, have all pleaded guilty. Two, Detectives Daniel Hersl and Marcus Taylor, are in federal court.  WHAT'S IN THE NEWS In security theater news, a serial stowaway was arrested for slipping past airports security, for the tenth time! The 66-year-old Marilyn Hartman was caught yet again after sneaking through security at Chicago's O'Hare Airport last week without a ticket or passport — but not before she made it all the way to London. In legalized theft news, police in the Dutch city of Rotterdam have launched a new pilot programme which will see them confiscating expensive clothing and jewelry from young people if they look too poor to own them. In unfit to exist news, Joseph Tigana III was arrested in 2008 and charged with running a marijuana-growing operation. Tigano entered a plea of not guilty and insisted that his case move quickly to trial. Instead, he languished in pretrial detention—jail—for nearly seven years before he finally appeared before a jury, which convicted him in 2015. In drug warrior news, Jeff Sessions is in a court battle with a 12-year-old medical marijuana patient with epilepsy, because he's cool like that.   In education or else news, students in New Mexico would have to apply to a college or commit to some other post-graduation plan in order to graduate from high school, under a bill working its way through the state's legislature. ASK ME ANYTHING It's that time again. That time where you get to ask me whatever you want. I will be using this segment every couple of weeks to help this show become more interactive and to talk about the topics that you want to hear about. It's easy to ask me a question for this segment. Just send an email to ama@thelavaflow.com or look out for my periodic post in the Pax Libertas Pro Fans Facebook group. If you're a supporter of this show then you get first dibs! Your questions will always be answered first and you will have a Facebook post in The LAVA Flow Super Secret Supporters group on Facebook and a post in Patreon. Also, for the second time in a row, I've received a lot more questions that I thought I would, so I won't be able to tackle them all in this episode. Hell, I'm still catching up on ones I couldn't get to last time! As always, I'm going to hit my supporters questions first, then the rest. But rest assured if you didn't hear your question answered here yet, I still have it and I will get to it soon. I promise! PAX LIBERTAS TRAILER This is a new record. For back-to-back weeks I have a trailer for a new Pax Libertas Productions podcast for you guys! This is another very unique show that I'm super excited about. It's called AnarchoChristian and it will be evaluating the relationship between the Christian and the state. It's being hosted by Stephen Rose, the guy behind the popular AnarchoChristian website, Facebook page, and Twitter. He reached out to me about helping him put together a podcast, and here we are! You guys know I'm an atheist, but I have really enjoyed the content of his first two episodes. This is great stuff for anyone, but especially if you're a Christian. You can check this podcast out at the website anarchochristian.com. Also, make sure to like the Facebook page and the Twitter account for all of this awesome stuff.