Health for life

Years ago, the Disease Management Care Blog had a pediatrician colleague who was widely admired for his diagnostic acumen, attention to treatment detail and personalized attention. As further testimony to his reputation, every physician wanted him to be their childrens doctor. The DMCB was one of those lucky docs. The luck ran out, however, when the DMCBs spouse quickly realized that she couldnt get any appointments and even if she did, the physicians clinic routinely ran two hours late.

Persons who read this New England Journal Perspective testimonial on the joy and frustrations of a primary care career should keep that physician in mind.   That reality contrasts with Dr. Finegolds fantasy world of dedicated physicians with limitless time where 1) the personal physician individually guides complex patients through a complex health care system and 2) the doctor patient relationship is fountainhead of professional satisfaction and patient well being. Thats why insurers should pay anything and policymakers should do everything they can to support this vision.

The DMCB sadly disagrees.

Primary care physicians are a precious resource. Theyre not only expensive, they are becoming more rare over time. As a result, use of their time and effort has to be restricted to circumstances when there is no one else who can deal with the paper work, make medication adjustments, work to increase treatment compliance, maximize the insurance benefit, deal with the social issues and provide psychological support. The DMCB thinks there are non-physician professionals who are better at these activities and do can do it far more cheaply. The solution is not more primary care physicians but more primary care physician support.

The DMCB physician colleagues may argue that the doctor-patient relationship is truly Holy Ground. Unfortunately, it is becoming increasingly apparent that there at too many patients and too few physicians to allow Dr. Finegolds indulgence of being so immersed in their patients lives. The degree of personalized involvement described in this article may be a luxury - like open access to brand drugs, the latest technologies, the priciest specialists or a few extra days in the hospital - that society can no longer afford.

The stats guys go to work

The Disease Management Care Blog continues to welcome blog posts from outside authors. This is another one, courtesy of Erik Tollefson, who works in the health policy field. He can be reached at erikDOTmDOTtollefsonATgmailDOTcom

As payers increasingly pursue reimbursement strategies that share risk with health care providers, risk adjustment is emerging as an important topic in health policy research.  Indeed, for providers, the ability to properly identify the underlying health risks of a specific population could mean the difference between earning savings rather than paying penalties.  As the importance of risk adjustment ascends grows, increasing attention is being given to the robustness sophistication of adjustment methodologies. That includes including the data used to estimate the risk of a covered population risk. 

In a recent study published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), John Wennberg and co-authors explore how under-recognized “patient observation bias” can contaminate risk adjustment results.

Previous studies have identified many pitfalls of using observational data as a proxy of a population’s true disease burden. One common example is the phenomenon of “upcoding.” This practice not only adjusts diagnostic codes to maximize reimbursement, it is a well-documented source of bias that spuriously increases variation between geographical regions and complicates risk adjustment.

Wennberg and colleagues show that patient observation bias is another potential pitfall in the science of risk adjustment that has not received such attention. The phenomenon can be quantified by using numerous proxies such as frequency of visits by physicians and the intensity of diagnostic tests (both laboratory and imaging) ordered. Previous research has shown that geographical areas with higher patient observation bias independently correlate with higher rates of comorbidity after being adjusted for all the other relevant patient factors that underlie true risk.

Using a sample of Medicare claims data, the authors computed two different risk adjustment measures: 1) using standard methods; 2) adjusting for potential observation bias.  Overall, the adjusted method (using visit intensity) emerged as a more accurate predictor of the population’s underlying burden of illness. Thanks to their ability to identify a source of bias that explained a greater portion of variation in important categories such as sex, age, and race, but was the authors were able, compared to the usual risk adjustment methods, to reduce the variation levels between different geographic regions.

The importance of accurate risk adjustment is not just limited to its potential impact on increasingly high financial stakes in the health care sector. The ability of policy makers to understand why variation occurs in health care costs and utilization across geographical areas has emerged as one of the key questions that may ultimately improve delivery and cut costs in a bloated health care system. This study offers important evidence that part of the answer may indeed lay in the supply-inducing doctors self-erring patients for unnecessary diagnostic procedures that littered Atul Gawande’s account of rising health care costs in McAllen, Texas.

Another important take home lesson, however, also applies: the quality of underlying data. With continued histrionics surrounding access to ever greater amounts of health care data, it helps to remember that qualitatively understanding what one is actually measuring is still as important as the accuracy of the underlying statistical methods.

As diabetes advocates, we spend an awful lot of time writing about our challenges, our frustrations, and the misinformation that is so rampant out there in the media, internet, and medical professions.

It is with great JOY that I write my first post of the year, giving a STANDING OVATION, and a very much heartfelt thanks, to the Mary Greeley Medical Center, in Ames, Iowa, (just a few blocks from where I live) for taking the time to create an innovate way of FIGHTING misconceptions and stereotypes among medical professionals, and giving them an idea of what its like to live with this crappy ass disease, even if its just for one day. While some of us may not be on insulin, diabetes still demands many changes, vigilance, and eternal food obsessive thoughts... (What to eat, how many carbs does that have, whats in that dish, I am too high right now to eat, I need to stop right now, and eat... etc, etc.)

It is, for all of us, so very "damned inconvenient," as was put by Dr. Timothy Leeds, an obstetrician that participated in this exercise.

Basically, June Heiden, a registered nurse and certified diabetic educator, came up with this plan... to assign "Diabetes for a day" to several medical professionals, and to have to go through the inconvenience of stopping their day, and everything they are doing, to treat lows, highs, focus on meals, and count carbs... and everything that goes along with it... well, except the actual feeling of the lows and highs (cus well, they dont actually have diabetes)... To help create a 10 minute educational video for medical staff, and the public.

I am, to say the least, more than a little impressed with this idea. Ive always daydreamed of my medical staff knowing what its like to live this obsessive/compulsive roller coaster for just one day.

While I am sure there is much, much to be done in our community to IMPROVE how we approach persons with Diabetes, of all types... I have to say KUDOS, MGMC. Youve done a job WELL DONE.

Please, take a moment... to leave a comment, either on our towns feature story, or write a letter to the MGMC staff THANKING them for this creative enterprise.

As reported by the Ames Tribue: "A day with diabetes: Medical center films education video".

And here it is...  "24 Hours: A Day With Diabetes"