Health for life

Check out Troeltschs perspicacious response to the Disease Management Care Blog assertion in yesterdays posting that a New York City ban on the sale of 16 oz. calorie dense beverages would "work":

What evidence do you have for the comment "it works?" particularly in light of the fact that soda is simply banned in restaurants, and not any where else in the city?

Troeltsch has both right. 

The proposal, as it now stands, would limit the ban to restaurants, street vendors and concession stands and spares grocery stores. So while New Yorkers couldnt buy that "Big Gulp" to-go, theyd still be able to buy that liter of fructose corn syrup-loaded soda and continue their gluttonous ways in the privacy of their own homes.

And whats more, the DMCB did a literature search and can find no published evidence that a calorie-dense beverage ban reduces the prevalence of obesity. Yesterdays claim that "it works" was simply overzealous. DMCB readers can not only spot non-scientific puffery at meetings, in news reports and in marketing materials, but also in the DMCBs weaker-moment writings.

Well done.

That being said, the DMCB still gives the Big Apple some credit. If you go to the original proposal, youll see that the ban is only one of 26 initiatives that seek to improve nutrition and increase exercise in the citys public schools, alter sidewalk and building codes to promote physical activity, require hospitals to offer healthy menus, increase the availability and appeal of tap water and promote wellness, especially among public employees. This is commercial population health management writ large.

And the DMCB still stands by its original assertions. Mayor Bloombergs attack on obesity in the name of public health should remind health care providers that a similar fate awaits their costly ways if shared savings, accountability, bundling, electronic records, the demos and ACOs fail to bend the curve. Instead of trimming excess calories, our politicians will trim excess costs by proclamation.

The DMCB offers three additional observations:

1) Peter Orzag, one of Mr. Obamas health orm architects, famously asserted that the Affordable Care Acts health mandate provision would increase a collective expectation that we should all buy health insurance, much like seat belt laws prompted most of us to buckle up. There may be something to that in the anti-obesity fight, says the DMCB, and Mayor Bloombergs very public attack on sugary drinks may prompt his city to shift to a new cultural norm

2) The DMCB hopes NYCs Department of Health and Mental Hygiene devotes the resources it takes to adequately measure the impact of the ban. The rest of the country needs to know if this works.

3) Last but not least, if nothing comes of this, this is one more warning to a largely uncooperative and unrepentant food industry.

When accountability fails

"Accountability."  Everyone wants it, right?

While its one thing for health care providers to be "accountable" for costs, its another for them to actually make money at it.  The Disease Management Care Blog is continuously amazed at how many physicians and administrators believe that dollops of "primary care," "prevention" and "wellness" will empty hospital beds and cause insurance money to appear like the morning dew on a windshield of a physician specialists BMW. 

Believe that and the DMCB has an ORD-SFO United Airlines upgrade "departure management card" it would like to sell you.

If the DMCB could do only one thing to reduce costs within one fiscal year for a health care system , it wouldnt be PCPs, wellness or prevention. Instead, it would place one vastly overpaid case manager in every emergency room in the network.  His or her job would be to find alternative levels of care for persons that dont really need to be in the hospital and begin discharge planning for those who do.

The second thing the DMCB would do is implement predictive modeling.  Thats why its immodestly tooting its horn and suggesting research like this is so important.  In this web first publication, Chris Hollenbeak, Mark Chirumbole, Benjamin Novinger, Frank Din and your humble DMCB examined the baseline demographic data and medical conditions that can predict the likelihood of a future high cost hospitalization within a Medicaid population.  Armed with knowing which of its patients are at risk ahead of time is a critical level of intelligence for any newly "accountable" hospital, clinic, IPA, PHO or IDN.  By reaching out to high risk individuals prior to any crisis, physicians and administrators can engage these patients in outpatient settings and keep them away from the emergency room.

The good news is that the art and science of predictive modeling is within reach of most data bases, desk-top computers, statistical software packages and trained analysts.  The bad news is that interpreting and executing on that information remains a daunting challenge. 

Health systems like HealthCare Partners is a good example of how it can work well.  As this "accountability" movement in health care evolves, the DMCB will undoubtedly learn about other good examples. 

The systems that rely on vague notions about primary care, fail to understand the role of case management and ignore the business case for predictive modeling will form the bad examples.

If New York Citys Mayor Michael Bloomberg has his anti-obesity way, the Big Apple will begin banning the restaurant and concession sale of sugary beverages that exceed a volume 16 fluid ounces as early as March of 2013.  The Disease Management Care Blog suspects there is one big reason why Hizonner is deploying brute force in this battle of the bulge, this confrontation of the calories, this attack on adiposity:

It works.

Contrast the approach of simply outlawing obesogenic drinks with kinder and gentler approaches, like those based on education (food labeling and warnings), economic incentives (fat taxes), appeals to self-interest ("youll look and feel better!") or enculturation (starting with food choices in our schools cafeterias).  They all have their role, but lets face it: we dont heed labels, hate taxes, find life-style changes difficult, are suckers for the food industrys marketing and ultimately like the taste rush of corn syrup.  Take a stroll through Manhattan and its pretty obvious we have a problem.

The Big Apple is doing this for our own public health good.

This lesson prompts the Disease Management Care Blog to ponder the largest threat to the success of the "accountability" movement in health care.  By "aligning" economic interests, offering savings-based "gain-sharing," leveraging decision support and enculturating physicians into "systems" of care imbued with best practices championed by physician leadership, we believe our collective taste for high cost testing, technology and pharmaceuticals will fade faster than the flab on The Biggest Loser.

Is that so?  Maybe not, and so the DMCB offers up two observations:

1. Assuming physicians are people and patients have their self-interest at heart, the likelihood that our appetitite for over-testing, the latest tech and brand name drugs will be blunted by electronic health record decision-support warnings, the promise of some savings-based future bonus, appeals at staff meetings to do the right thing or an expectation that physician culture will change is about as realistic as a successful John Edwards White House run in 2016.

2. And assuming that none of that works, the likelihood that future local and national politicians will use the same public health logic and announce a Bloomberg-esque "ban" of some high cost low value tests, technology and drugs is almost certain.

You read it here first.

Image from Wikipedia