Coordination of care = cost savings?

[Stim4me]

Doubt it....
More like "less care" saves medical expenditures. "Tales" of cost savings with ACOs are unfounded and likely targeted to highly wasteful systems, which were the main problem in the first place .

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1610821

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[drusso]

Doubt it....
More like "less care" saves medical expenditures. "Tales" of cost savings with ACOs are unfounded and likely targeted to highly wasteful systems, which were the main problem in the first place .

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1610821

"Exaggerating the efficiencies from care coordination lends unjustified credibility to providers’ arguments that establishing ownership over the continuum of care through mergers and acquisitions will produce efficiencies under new payment models that should allay concerns about price increases from market power. In fact, independent physician groups in ACO programs have achieved savings as great as or greater than those of larger hospital-integrated ACOs.3,4 For all we know, provider competition may be critical in spawning more effective ways to coordinate care and reduce overuse in response to incentives to reduce spending and improve quality."

Thank God someone else finally said it! I've been pounding away on this issue in my state ever since the roll-out of disastrous Obamacare. Our state has instituted a behemoth of a coordinated care system, based upon ill-conceived population health principles, that has done little to increase patient access to care and more to feather the nests of large health systems and federally-subsidized health centers.

 

[Ducttape]

this article and the one you posted on a different thread give significant focus to rationing healthcare.

More direct, less costly strategies for reducing overuse would instead focus on getting providers to do less. Limiting provision of low-value services such as imaging for low back pain, for example, typically doesn’t require coordinating care or modifying patient behavior.

The answer to the first question is political expediency. Though nobody likes waste, nobody likes rationing either. The idea that less is more is a tough sell.

how likely is the country as a whole willing to start rationing healthcare? deny expensive low yield treatment to all? or only to the poor?

it seems Americans are not willing to ration healthcare if it does not affect them...

 

[Stim4me]

this article and the one you posted on a different thread give significant focus to rationing healthcare.



how likely is the country as a whole willing to start rationing healthcare? deny expensive low yield treatment to all? or only to the poor?

it seems Americans are not willing to ration healthcare if it does not affect them...

It's a double edged sword. We can't continue the lie that ACOs save money. But we can't deny that some healthcare systems/providers and patients are literally reeming the system and costs.... how do we promote cutting edge efficient private practices, and elimate the fraud/waste and greed of the past ??

 

[hyperalgesia]

The idea that less is more is an EXPENSIVE sell. More expensive than unnecessary care.

 

[Stim4me]

The idea that less is more is an EXPENSIVE sell. More expensive than unnecessary care.

Patient-centered necessary expensive care ...