Why Not, Certainly? – The Well being Care Weblog

By KIM BELLARD

Just lately in The Washington Submit, writer Daniel Pink initiated a collection of columns he and WaPo are calling “Why Not?” He believes “American creativeness wants an creativeness shot.” As he describes the plan for the columns: “In every installment, I’ll supply a single concept — daring, shocking, possibly a bit jarring — for enhancing our nation, our organizations or our lives.”

I like it. I’m all in. I’m a “why not?” man from method again, significantly on the subject of well being care.

Mr. Pink describes three core values (within the curiosity of house, I’m excerpting his descriptions):

• Curiosity over certainty. The world is unsure. Curiosity and mental humility are the simplest solvents for unsticking society’s gears.
• Openness over cynicism: Cynicism is straightforward however hole; openness is tough however wealthy.
• Dialog over conversion: The last word dream? That you simply’ll learn what I’ve written and say, “Wait, I’ve obtained a good higher concept,” after which share it.

Once more, kudos. One would possibly even say “transfer quick and break issues,” however the bloom has come off that individual rose, so one would possibly simply say “take possibilities” or “assume completely different.” Possibly even “dream massive.”

Across the identical time I noticed Mr. Pink’s column I occurred to be studying Adam Nagourney’s The Occasions: How the Newspaper of Document Survived Scandal, Scorn, and the Transformation of Journalism. Within the early 1990’s The Occasions (and the remainder of the world) was struggling to determine if and the way the Web was going to alter issues. Mr., Nagourney reviews how writer Arthur Sulzberger (Jr) realized the impression can be profound:

One doesn’t need to be a rocket scientist to acknowledge that ink on wooden delivered by vehicles is a time consuming and costly course of.

I.e., opposite to what many individuals at The Occasions, and plenty of of its readers, thought on the time, the newspaper wasn’t the bodily object they have been used to; it was the data it delivers. That will appear apparent now however was in no way then.  

Which brings me to well being care. Opposite to what many individuals working in healthcare, and many individuals getting care from it, would possibly assume, healthcare isn’t medical doctors, hospitals, prescriptions, and insurance coverage corporations. These are merely the ink on wooden delivered by vehicles that we’re used to, to make use of the metaphor.

And it doesn’t take a rocket science to acknowledge that what we name well being care at this time is a time consuming and costly course of – to not point out usually irritating and ineffective.

Why not do higher?

I additionally considered well being care when studying Mr. Nagourney’s e-book when he described the battle between the journalism aspect of the corporate versus the enterprise aspect: was the newspaper concerning the articles it revealed, with the promoting simply there to help them, or was it actually an promoting platform that wanted the content material the journalists created to carry eyeballs to it? In healthcare, is it about serving to sufferers with their well being, or is it a method to supply earnings to the folks and organizations concerned of their care?

I.e., is it concerning the mission or the margins?

For those who assume that’s too cynical, I’ll level to Matthew Holt’s nice article in The Well being Care Weblog arguing that many hospitals techniques at the moment are basically hedge funds that occur to supply some care, whereas additionally creating scads of wealthy executives. Or to how an precise hedge fund is shopping for a hospital. Or to how, certainly, personal fairness corporations are shopping for up well being care organizations of all sorts, regardless that many consultants warn the primary impression is to lift prices and adversely impression care. Or to how Medicare Benefit plans could also be higher at delivering insurer earnings than high quality care.

I might go on and on, but it surely appears clear to me that healthcare has misplaced its method, mistaking the way it does issues from what it’s presupposed to be for. If healthcare has turn into extra about making a small variety of folks wealthy than about making lots of people more healthy, then I say let’s blow it up and begin from first rules.

There’s a “Why Not?”

Mr. Holt’s “Why Not?” is to take a measly $38b from the $300b he estimates these hospitals are sitting on, and make investments it in main care, such because the Federally Certified Well being Facilities (FQHCs). Major care wants the cash; the hospitals/hedge funds, not a lot. Amen to that.

A pair years in the past I proposed a good wilder concept: let’s give each doctor $2 million – possibly even $2.5 million – yearly. We are saying we worth them, so let’s reward them accordingly. The caveat: from that they’d need to pay for all of their sufferers’ well being care wants – referrals, prescriptions, hospital stays, and so on. I posited that they’d negotiate significantly better offers with their compatriots than we appear to have the ability to do. Plenty of particulars to be labored out, but it surely falls into the “Why Not?” class.

Right here’s one other audacious Why Not: it’s pretty well-known that CEO to employee pay ratios have skyrocketed from a modest 20-1 within the 1960’s to one thing like 344-1 now. There’s no proof I’ve seen that the ratios are any higher in healthcare. Since no career in healthcare is extra revered and relied on than nurses, I suggest – possibly making it a situation for receiving any federal funds — that no healthcare group ought to have an government compensation  to nurse compensation ratio that exceeds 20 (and I do imply compensation fairly than wage, to keep away from the bonus/inventory shenanigans that executives have relied on). 

If that sounds low, I’d pity the chief who needs to argue with straight face that he/she is greater than twenty occasions extra vital than nurses. I guess they couldn’t discover many sufferers who’d agree, or any nurses.

———–

For those who work in healthcare, you must ask your self: is what I do the ink, the wooden, or the supply truck, or is it actually integral to what healthcare needs to be in 2024?  For those who assume your job needs to be extra about well being and fewer concerning the enterprise of well being, why not make it so?

And the remainder of us needs to be asking ourselves: is the healthcare we get nonetheless the equal of a print newspaper? We don’t need to be rocket scientists to acknowledge that, in 2024, we needs to be anticipating one thing higher – cheaper, quicker, extra interactive, extra private, and far more impactful.

Why not, certainly?

Kim is a former emarketing exec at a serious Blues plan, editor of the late & lamented Tincture.io, and now common THCB contributor