Gail J. Dudley, DO

A physician argues that the health care system cannot be truly reformed unless enrollees open their eyes to the facts of healthy living

Gail J. Dudley, DO

As I read health management and health policy articles and listen to politicians do what they do best (talk out of both sides of their mouths), it amazes me that no one includes the patient in solving the health care crisis. I keep saying that this is the one part of the equation that must be included before we can solve the cost problems. However, since it is politically unpopular, it doesn’t get done.

I have a noncompliant, overweight, diabetic, hypertensive female patient who works in the cafeteria of a local school. For three years, I have been working with her, trying to get her to understand her predicament. Along comes this new plan by her insurance company. She has to undergo “education” and evaluation by the “educators” and staff of a nearby hospital. They will do all the tests I have already done, will force her to go to all the education seminars I have already sent her to, and say they will copy me on everything (they haven’t yet). In exchange they would give her all her supplies and medications.

Here is the result: Her HbA1c is worse, her BP is worse, and she is still giving me the same excuses. She is a prime example of a patient who will not take responsibility for her health — period. How much did the insurance company spend? What made it not work is simply her apathy coupled with the lack of emotional attachment between her and the company plan. She at least had a connection with me, but I was taken out of the equation.

I am no longer shocked by the patient who can’t afford medical insurance, medications, or office visit fees but has ample funds for beautiful fingernails and expensive hair care, gold and diamond-studded teeth, expensive cars, and tobacco and alcohol habits.

Patients with diabetes and/or hyperlipidemia regularly tell me that they “cheat” on their diet, or it was a holiday, or they were traveling, or didn’t take their medicine (for a variety of reasons) and so why can’t I just give them another pill, and “oh, by the way, make it a generic that I can get at Wal-Mart for $4.” I’m left wondering if they want the money for cigarettes, beer, or whatever.

I find myself trying to convince a patient with three weeks of back pain and no neurological deficit that he doesn’t need a lumbar MRI. Patients don’t want to hear that they can’t have or don’t need the latest, most expensive test.

When I ask about quitting, smokers tell me, “I don’t want to quit,” “I like it,” “I’ll quit when I die,” “It doesn’t cause the problems you say it does.” What are the costs to our employers, our public health, our insurance system?

So while it is not a popular idea, or one insurers want to tackle, it is time to include the patient in the equation. The fat has mostly been cut from the provider end. Hospitals are cutting costs at the wrong end by always cutting nursing staff by way of the “acuity level” system, which ultimately adversely affects care.

Insurers can help

Employers have suffered economically by providing health care to employees at an ever-increasing cost. While it is true that insurers have recently begun to step into the area of patient responsibility with programs designed to include them in their care, such as the diabetes program I mentioned above, it’s not enough and it’s done incorrectly.

Under our insurance system today, the patient has become financially separate from his health care. That’s good and bad. The good is obvious. What’s bad is that this has created a country of patients who want top-shelf care without having any responsibility for adopting good health habits. The insurers must make patients feel that sense of responsibility.

Gail J. Dudley, DO, operates Lake Primary Care Associates in Tavares, Fla.

Managed Care’s Top Ten Articles of 2016

There’s a lot more going on in health care than mergers (Aetna-Humana, Anthem-Cigna) creating huge players. Hundreds of insurers operate in 50 different states. Self-insured employers, ACA public exchanges, Medicare Advantage, and Medicaid managed care plans crowd an increasingly complex market.

Major health care players are determined to make health information exchanges (HIEs) work. The push toward value-based payment alone almost guarantees that HIEs will be tweaked, poked, prodded, and overhauled until they deliver on their promise. The goal: straight talk from and among tech systems.

They bring a different mindset. They’re willing to work in teams and focus on the sort of evidence-based medicine that can guide health care’s transformation into a system based on value. One question: How well will this new generation of data-driven MDs deal with patients?

The surge of new MS treatments have been for the relapsing-remitting form of the disease. There’s hope for sufferers of a different form of MS. By homing in on CD20-positive B cells, ocrelizumab is able to knock them out and other aberrant B cells circulating in the bloodstream.

A flood of tests have insurers ramping up prior authorization and utilization review. Information overload is a problem. As doctors struggle to keep up, health plans need to get ahead of the development of the technology in order to successfully manage genetic testing appropriately.

Having the data is one thing. Knowing how to use it is another. Applying its computational power to the data, a company called RowdMap puts providers into high-, medium-, and low-value buckets compared with peers in their markets, using specific benchmarks to show why outliers differ from the norm.
Competition among manufacturers, industry consolidation, and capitalization on me-too drugs are cranking up generic and branded drug prices. This increase has compelled PBMs, health plan sponsors, and retail pharmacies to find novel ways to turn a profit, often at the expense of the consumer.
The development of recombinant DNA and other technologies has added a new dimension to care. These medications have revolutionized the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and many of the other 80 or so autoimmune diseases. But they can be budget busters and have a tricky side effect profile.

Shelley Slade
Vogel, Slade & Goldstein

Hub programs have emerged as a profitable new line of business in the sales and distribution side of the pharmaceutical industry that has got more than its fair share of wheeling and dealing. But they spell trouble if they spark collusion, threaten patients, or waste federal dollars.

More companies are self-insuring—and it’s not just large employers that are striking out on their own. The percentage of employers who fully self-insure increased by 44% in 1999 to 63% in 2015. Self-insurance may give employers more control over benefit packages, and stop-loss protects them against uncapped liability.