Friday, July 1, 2011

The 80/20 Rule? How about 50/5?

While many are familiar with the "80/20 Rule" and its various application in organizations, a new report from the National Institute for Health Care Management Foundation highlights a new axiom in health care, the "50/5 Rule". According to the report, a mere five percent of healthcare patients generated half of all U.S. medical expenses in 2009, hence, the "50/5 Rule".
Furthermore, when the top 10 percent of healthcare utilizers are considered, the percentage of cost utilization rises to an astounding 63.6%. Interestingly, the top one percent of patients accounted for 20% of healthcare spending.
The study found that, to no surprise, people over 55 years old made up a large proportion of the high spending groups, while those who were much younger had lower medical spending.
In addition, people with at least one chronic condition were two to four times more likely to end up in the top 5 percent of spending, with the risk increasing as the number of chronic conditions rose.
This is consistent with Institute of Medicine data released Wednesday, which showed that chronic pain affects 116 million Americans and results in healthcare and economic costs of $560 billion to $635 billion a year.
According to the study, there is a correlation between obesity-related conditions and the small percentage of very sick patients racking up big medical bills. Nearly half of all patients in the top 5 percent of spending had hypertension, one-third had lipid disorders (high cholesterol), and more than one-quarter had diabetes.
These results are significant on a national scale as we attempt to address seemingly unrelated financial issues of the debt ceiling, huge ongoing budget deficits and the affect of entitlements on spending.
Healthcare accounts for over 2 trillion dollars or 1/6 of the U.S. economy. The statistics highlighted in the report allow us to conclude that healthcare costs, and the associated huge government spending, can be controlled best, not by regulation and the nationalization of healthcare (think Obamacare), but, rather, by a more holistic approach to funding and support for disease prevention, patient education and medical management as is found in managed care provided by the private U.S. healthcare system for many years.
How do we reduce the Federal budget deficit and improve quality of life at the same time?
  1. Stop the nationalization of healthcare via Medicare and Medicaid (i.e., move toward the concepts promoted by the Paul Ryan plan and away from the regulation and government control being implemented by the Obama administration).
  2. Fund private managed care systems and solutions
  3. Measure results and reward positive outcomes

So, the 50/5 Rule can help us to navigate a new, more appropriate path to achieve cost savings and improved health outcomes.
For more:
- check out the report (.pdf)
- read the H&HN Daily article

Thursday, May 19, 2011

2011 Priorities for Predictive Analytics Initiatives

Where are we going with predictive analytics? Based on the responses of 80+ attendees of a recent web conference on the topic, here are the top 10 priorities:
  1. Identification of High-Risk Patients for Care Management
  2. Treatment Guideline Development
  3. Plan Design Development
  4. Provider Profiling for Network Development
  5. Provider Payment Rate and Restructuring
  6. Medicare / Medicaid Population Financial Modeling
  7. Target Marketing Based on Customer / Prospect Risk Scores
  8. Premium Rate Development
  9. Fraud Prevention
  10. Formulary Development
Notes: Priorities based on survey respondent rankings of items when asked to prioritize how an organization could spend its funds on predictive modeling initiatives involving health benefits. N=81, with respondents including web summit attendees and other health care professionals
Source: Predictive Modeling Web Summit e-Poll 2011
Source URL:
http://www.healthwebsummit.com/pm2011.htm

Monday, May 2, 2011

Top 5 Medical Conditions by Healthcare Setting

Here are the five most prevalent medical conditions in 2008, reported by healthcare setting:


Office-Based
Hypertension (8.5%)
Mental Disorders (6.8%)
Trauma (6.7%)
COPD, Asthma (6.5%)
Cancer (6.1%)


Hospital Outpatient Department
Mental Disorders (14.7%)
Cancer (13.2%)
Trauma (7.7%)
Kidney Disease (4.5%)
Other Heart Conditions (4.3%)


Hospital Emergency Department
Trauma (27.2%)
COPD, Asthma (7.5%)
Other Heart Conditions (5.2%)
Acute Bronchitis & URI (3.5%)
Intestinal Infection (3.2%)

Surprised?



Data Source: Center for Financing, Access, and Cost Trends, AHRQ, Household Component of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, 2008.
Publication: AHRQ's Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, Statistical Brief #318. Expenses and Characteristics of Physician Visits in Different Ambulatory Care Settings, 2008. http://www.meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/data_files/publications/st318/stat318.pdf

Monday, April 4, 2011

Costs of Implementing Electronic Health Records in Primary Care Practices


The March 2011 issue of Health Affairs reported on the cost of implementing an electronic health record system in 26 primary care practices in a physician network in north Texas. Taking into account hardware and software costs, as well as the time and effort invested in implementation, an average five-physician practice experienced estimated implementation costs of $162,000, with $85,500 in maintenance expenses during the first year.

The study estimates that the HealthTexas network implementation and practice implementation teams needed 611 hours, on average, to prepare for and implement the electronic health record system, and that “end users” (physicians, other clinical staff, and nonclinical staff) needed 134 hours per physician, on average, to prepare for use of the record system in clinical encounters.
Source: Neil S. Fleming1, Steven D. Culler, Russell McCorkle, Edmund R. Becker and David J. Ballard. "The Financial And Nonfinancial Costs Of Implementing Electronic Health Records In Primary Care Practices." Health Affairs, Vol. 30., No 3. March 2011. 481-489. Abstract only. http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/30/3/481.abstract