In another great post, Eric Bricker MD outlines the Ochsner success in cost, quality, and outcomes. But is this success about 1. going at risk or value based 2. the benefit of a massive system with a contained population dedicated to disrupting health care 3. investment in primary care and basics 4. or because Louisiana has such poor access and outcomes that the federal plans paying less than cost just made the situation with weakest employers and weakest private plans - much worse Perhaps all of the above ChenMed has demonstrated similar improvements by bringing populations with no or low access (disability, Duals) to superior access. Was it value based/at risk or just the major improved financial design or perhaps the most extreme access improvements, or most and best delivery team members with the ability to integrate, coordinate, and innovate one on one with each patient, Regardless, what CMS has been doing for over 40 years and is still doing, appears to be causing many of our most chronic and challenging health care problems. Transforming the financial design with investments to transform delivery team members and practice environments appears to be important to transform outcomes Many ignore the most important innovation of all - the delivery team member one on one innovation with each patient. Innovative designs that for decades have shaped fewer and lesser delivery team members - are actually the enemy of the only innovation that matters.
3 Secrets to Hospital Financial Success. Ochsner Health in New Orleans... the Hospital of the Future! Ochsner Health headquartered in New Orleans with 40+ facilities across the Gulf South was able to lower healthcare costs by $56M across 500K of their patients. Ochsner then took $45M of those savings and gave it to the doctors and other healthcare providers. Ochsner accomplished these savings by 1) reducing ER visits and hospitalizations via improved outpatient primary care, 2) taking on financial risk for the total cost of care for a patient population and 3) decreasing disease. That's right... Ochsner accomplished these financial savings while IMPROVING patient care: --88 percent of patients with diabetes had their condition well controlled vs. a national average of 50-60 percent. --85% of patients with hypertension had their blood pressure well controlled vs. a national average of 20 percent. Why? Of all the hospital systems in America, why did Ochsner choose to move away from reactive, fee-for-service care? It's because New Orleans and the Gulf South do not have a lot of patients with high-reimbursing commercial insurance through employer-sponsored plans. Most of Ochsner's patients are on much lower-paying Medicare and Medicaid insurance plans--forcing Ochsner to 'move outside their 4 walls', take risk and decrease pathology. This fact illustrates that high employer reimbursements are enabling most hospital systems in America to remain reactive and not focused on preventing disease. Only when those high employer reimbursements are scarce will hospitals change. Sources at AHealthcareZ YouTube Channel.
Thank you for sharing the video.
Faculty member UCLA Fielding School of Public Health : Health, Policy and Management
1wValue based care model with a focus on population health; primary care and prevention exemplifies the capitated delegated risk model that proves it can work to improve outcomes and lower cost ChenMed is similar with Kaiser being a larger and replicative model Similar outcomes by member groups of the American Physicians Group Association ( thousands of medical groups and health systems dedicated to this model shows it can be duplicated) The annual association meeting is May 14-16, in San Diego is the place to come to hear the success stories an challenges of like minded systems National level speakers and workshops covering capitated care; MA, clinical outcomes is the penultimate meeting on the subject