Y Combinators Vitable Health is bringing basic healthcare to underserved populations – TechCrunch

Joseph Kitonga, the 23-year-old entrepreneur behind Vitable Health, first saw the need for a new kind of healthcare service growing up in Philadelphia and seeing the experience of the home healthcare workers who worked at his parents business.

The Kitongas immigrated to the United States a decade ago and settled down in Philadelphia, where they started a home-care business matching workers with patients in need. What was surprising to the younger Kitonga was that the people who worked for his parents taking care of others couldnt afford basic healthcare coverage themselves.

It was that observation that provided the seed for the business idea that would become Vitable Health, Kitongas first business and a recent member of Y Combinators latest summer cohort.

The company provides affordable acute healthcare coverage to underinsured or un-insured populations and was born out of his experience watching employees of his parents home healthcare agency struggle to receive basic healthcare coverage.

A lot of caregivers make $10 per hour, which is too much to qualify for Medicaid and too little to afford health insurance, Kitonga says.

Even with the Affordable Care Act, many workers in the home-care business that Kitongas parents ran in Philadelphia were unable to receive care.

So Kitonga built a service that could cover everything but catastrophic coverage for lower costs than the companys customers would have to pay if they went to an urgent care facility.

Vitable is able to lower the cost of care through its use of nurse practitioners instead of doctors to provide the care. For a small monthly fee, the company will send providers to make house calls or customers can receive a consultation over the phone.

We focus on acute and preventive coverage, says Kitonga. Most high deductible plans are geared toward providing catastrophic coverage.

What Kitonga saw with his parents employees was that they would wind up going to the emergency room and put $1,300 in charges on their credit cards rather than pay for insurance per month.

Vitables lowest plan levels start at $15 per month and the co-payment is $30, according to Kitonga. Vitables technicians will do in-home lab tests.

Theres just no low-cost care option available for the population that Kitonga wants to serve, he said. These are people who will be referred to emergency rooms by nearby care providers because they lack the necessary insurance. The population that we service has been ignored by healthcare providers, said Kitonga.

For now, the service is only available in Philadelphia, but Kitonga says there are already 1,000 people who receive care through Vitable. We work with a lot of small businesses that might have 10 or 20 employees, Kitonga said.

Excerpt from:

Y Combinators Vitable Health is bringing basic healthcare to underserved populations - TechCrunch

This isnt Nazi Germany: NM health care prover lets patients choose whether to wear masks – ABC27

by: Brady Wakayama, KRQE and Nexstar Media Wire

(Credit: Courtesy of Andre Hunter)

ROSWELL, N.M. (KRQE) In shocking defiance of a statewide mandate, a New Mexico health care provider has posted a sign outside his clinic saying patients do not have to wear a mask.

Krasimir Hristov, a nurse practitioner who owns and runs Reinecke Medical and Chiropractic in Roswell, compared the current public health order to Nazi Germany and said he believes masks are useless against the virus.

The sign outside the clinic reads, This isnt Nazi Germany and we arent the Gestapo. If you do or do not want to wear a mask you are still welcome here.

When we enforce our rule on people, that is a dictatorship, said Hristov. When we have the freedom to inform people so they can make an educated decision, thats democracy.

Hristov, who has owned the medical center since 2013, said his own research shows masks are proven useless against airborne viruses.

Your eyes are very much exposed regardless of what kind of mask you have, said Hristov. So when people come in and they have a mask and their eyes are exposed, basically what that means they still have an open portal of entry where the virus could get in.

That advice goes against the guidance from the World Health Organization,the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and New Mexicos top doctor, Dr. David Scrase.

Scrase, New Mexicos human services secretary,said wearing a mask both protects people and helps prevent the spread of COVID-19.

If you had to have an upcoming surgery, how comfortable would you feel with your operating team not wearing masks or not wearing gloves, said Scrase. I havent run into anybody yet who would feel comfortable with that kind of scenario.

The New Mexico Human Services Department responded to Hirstovs sign by email, saying in part:All New Mexicans are required to wear masks at this time, especially when visiting medical clinics. It is shocking that a medical provider would encourage their patients not to wear masks and blatantly put them at risk of contracting COVID-19.

The department said violators could face criminal and/or civil penalties.

Hristov still doesnt think masks should be a requirement. People are exposed to the virus or to peoples germs no matter where they go, he said.

Last week, the city of Roswell voted not to enforce the states mask requirement. However, the New Mexico Department of Health and the State Police are still enforcing the mandate.

Top Stories:

Read more here:

This isnt Nazi Germany: NM health care prover lets patients choose whether to wear masks - ABC27

DAL Law Firm: The importance of a Healthcare Power of Attorney – The B-Town (Burien) Blog – The B-Town Blog

SPONSORED:

A Healthcare Power of Attorney allows you to appoint a person or persons to make healthcare decisions if you cannot act for yourself. A Healthcare Power of Attorney only comes into effect when you are deemed incapacitated by a doctor by written confirmation of your incompetence and in most cases, two physicians are required to make this determination.

Life is very unpredictable. What if you had a major medical issue that left you physically and/or mentally incapable of taking care of yourself? Who would make your healthcare decisions on your behalf while you were incapacitated? It is also important that healthcare providers are able to contact someone during a medical emergency. At DAL Law Firm, we have helped many people who needed to complete a Health Care Power of Attorney for themselves so that their loved ones can make decisions on their behalf if needed.

What can the person you appoint do on your behalf?

You do not have to allow your power of attorney to make every decision listed above; you can control what decisions they are allowed to make while you are incapacitated.

If you have questions about the process or would like to have a Healthcare Power of Attorney prepared for you, please contact our office at (206) 408-8158, or visit our website at: http://www.dallawfirm.com.

Contact us:

19803 1st Avenue S.Suite 200Normandy Park, WA 98148

T(206) 408-8158F(206) 374-2810

EDITORS NOTE: Sponsored Posts like this are paid, Native Advertisements that help businesses improve their internetpresence and all-important SEO. To learn more about how your business can directly reach our expanding, engaged audience in South King County, please email Theresa Schaefer at[emailprotected].

Follow this link:

DAL Law Firm: The importance of a Healthcare Power of Attorney - The B-Town (Burien) Blog - The B-Town Blog

Family of 86-year-old COVID-19 victim suing the healthcare center he passed away in – YourCentralValley.com

VISALIA, California (KSEE/KGPE) Family members of a man who died from COVID-19 are taking a Tulare County healthcare center to court for what they allege is their role in his passing.

The family of Santiago Gonzalez a resident at the Redwood Springs Healthcare Center in Visalia is suing the facility for elder abuse, wilful misconduct, and wrongful death, after the 86-year-old died from COVID-19 in April.

In the lawsuit filed earlier this month, the Gonzalez family claims the health care center failed to protect staff and residents from the virus after an outbreak began at the facility in March.

YourCentralValley.com has reached out to Redwood Springs Healthcare Center for a response to the lawsuit.

For local, national, and breaking news, and to get weather alerts, download our FREE mobile app from theApple App Storeor the Google Play Store.

Visit link:

Family of 86-year-old COVID-19 victim suing the healthcare center he passed away in - YourCentralValley.com

Democratic Leaders Have Blocked Real Healthcare Reform for Decades. Time to Give ‘Em Hell. – CounterPunch

In 1948, Harry Truman pushed for a national nonprofit health insurance program in his successful, come-from-behind presidential campaign. When Trumans plan was denounced as socialized medicine and un-American by the powerful American Medical Association, Give Em Hell Harrystood his ground,defending his proposal as simple Christianity.

In 1965, when President Lyndon Johnson secured passage of Medicare (and Medicaid), he traveled to Missouri to formally sign it into lawin Trumans presence declaring that the real daddy of Medicare was Truman. Medicare was federal health insurance for those 65 and older, but proponents hoped it was step one on the way to Medicare for all.

In the 1970s, it remained the Democratic Partys official position to support a federally-provided health insurance program for all (single payer) and its strongest advocate was the chair of the Senate Health subcommittee, Ted Kennedy. Supported by unions and seniors,Kennedy introduceda Medicare for all proposal in 1971: the Health Security Act. Worried about the plans popularity, President Nixon countered with a supposed reform that would preserve for-profit, private insurance: the Health Insurance Partnership Act. Kennedy declared, Its really a partnership between the administration and insurance companies. Its not a partnership between patients and doctors of this nation.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter promised a national health insurance plan in his victorious campaign for the presidency. Kennedy later called it a missing promise and their discord over healthcare continued through Kennedys failed challenge of Carter for the 1980 Democratic presidential nomination.

As harsh neoliberal capitalism dawned in the Reagan 80s there was a sea change in the country and within the Democratic Party. Democratic leaders calling themselves New Democrats scarcely even pretended to resist greedy corporate interests. Those interests were invited into the party and into policy formulation.

Enter Bill Clinton.

By the 1990s, as day-to-day healthcare decision-making shifted from patients and their doctors to insurers and for-profit corporations,many physicianshad joined the call for all Americans to get their insurance from a single federal plan.

But none of these physicians were invited to the table as the Clinton administration developed its healthcare reform policy under the leadership of first lady Hillary Clinton. The policy was largely created by corporate healthcare lobbyists and lawyers known as theJackson Hole Study Group. The February 28, 1993New York Timeshad a photo of the group beneath this headline: Hillary Clintons Potent Brain Trust On Health Reform.

In 1993, aMother Joneswriter accurately described the impossible task Hillary Clinton had been handed by the White House:Build a better, leaner, cheaper mousetrap (healthcare system) but include a player piano (private insurance industry) in the middle of your contraption.

The goal of the Jackson Hole group was to devise a reform that kept the healthcare system in the hands of for-profit corporations. The plan that was ultimately developed called Managed Competition was so bureaucratic and complicated that the Clintons 1,342 page bill never got off the ground.

At the time, Norman Solomon and I were the only nationally-syndicated columnists critically examining the corporate greed and elite policy-making that was dooming healthcare reform. In onecolumn, we wrote:The imprint of the insurance industry is all over the managed competition idea. The Jackson Hole study group that originated the scheme is made up of big insurance companies like Prudential, Metropolitan Life, Aetna and Cigna, plus hospital and pharmaceutical interests.

Wecitedan article in which Jackson Hole leaders bluntly argued that managed competition is the only way to avert a government takeover of health care financing and the elimination of a multiple-payer private insurance industry.

Wecomplainedthat the Clinton administration and mainstream media were sidelining a nonprofit single-payer insurance bill endorsed by 95 members of Congress plus groups like Consumers Union and Public Citizen. At the same time the Clinton bill went nowhere, the White House made sure that real reform a streamlined plan not devised by Aetna, Cigna or Big Pharma never got voted on.

What was true in 1993 is true today: Health insurance companies do not heal anyone. All theycontribute to healthcareis excess bureaucracy for medical professionals, devious advertising, sales commissions plus exorbitant profits ($10 billion in one quarter last yearfor the Big 8 insurers) and lavish executive salaries. Compensation for healthcare CEOsaveraged $18 million in 2018.

Single payer doesnt justcut costsby eliminating the waste caused by a multiplicity of for-profit insurers but also because the purchasing power of a federal plan can rein in pharmaceutical and other exploding costs.

Jump forward from the Clinton to the Obama years, and we saw a similar dynamic from Democratic leaders. Powerful healthcare lobbyists made sure that cost-effective Medicare for All would not even be considered, while these same lobbyists wereat the tablehelping todevisereform. Who was at the table explains why giant insurance and pharma companies have been so enriched in the last decade.

Dont get me wrong: Its a good thing that people with pre-existing conditions could get coverage under Obamacare (although too expensive) and that Medicaid was expanded (in the states where the GOP didnt block it).Itsnota good thing that roughly 30 million people were left without health insurance BEFORE the jobless crisis caused by Covid-19, and that millions more were under-insured. And not a good thing that healthcare costs were hardly contained.

History teaches a clear lesson: The fact that our nation is the only advanced industrial country without universal healthcare cannot be blamed on Republican obstruction alone. It was also caused by Democratic leaders whove spent decades catering to corporate interests (while collecting their campaign donations) and refusing to fight for universal coverage.

This history of Democratic obstruction and vacillation is whyhundreds of elected delegatesto next months Democratic convention haveput their foot down. Theyve signed apetitionpledging to vote down the party platform if it does not include a plank supporting universal, single-payer Medicare for All. The petitions initiator is Judith Whitmer, chair of the conventions Nevada delegation. She toldPolitico:This pandemic has shown us that our private health insurance system does not work for the American people. Millions of people have lost their jobs and their healthcare at the same time.

By demanding of the party leadership what Harry Truman called for 72 years ago, Whitmer and other Democratic activists are indeed giving em hell.

Read the rest here:

Democratic Leaders Have Blocked Real Healthcare Reform for Decades. Time to Give 'Em Hell. - CounterPunch

Getting the health care you need during COVID-19 – The Suburban Times

Submitted by Richard Smith, MD, Intermountain Medical Director for Humana.

Pierce County residents have been turning to medical virtual visits, also known as telemedicine, more than ever during the coronavirus pandemic. While telemedicine companies have been around for years, the pandemic has led to a dramatic increase in virtual visits as primary care doctors, specialists and hospitals began offering the service as a way to help keep patients safe.

Now that medical offices and hospitals are accepting patients again for in-person visits and elective procedures, you may be wondering if you should return to your doctors office or stick to a virtual visit. Rest assured, your health care providers can help you decide whats best as they work to ensure safe care for patients and staff. This includes changing the ways they deliver care like screening patients ahead of time to help determine if its best to go to a medical office or stay at home.

In-person VisitsIf its determined that an in-person visit is best for you, youll find that to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission, many facilities are taking the following steps:

Virtual VisitsIf you dont require in-person attention, a virtual visit is still a good option. Many people are choosing virtual visits in non-emergency situations for routine follow-ups and non-life-threatening conditions. This option allows you to consult your doctor or other health care providers in your network via a secure video or phone appointment, all in the comfort of your home. Before your telehealth visits:

Whether you choose a virtual or in-person visit, check with your health insurance provider to see if theyve taken steps to help ease the burden during the health crisis. For example, Humana is waiving cost sharing (including copays, coinsurance and deductibles) for in-network primary care, outpatient behavioral health and virtual visits for our Medicare Advantage members for the remainder of the calendar year.

Getting the care you need is always important. Consider these options to stay safe and healthy. And remember, for life-threatening emergencies, such as chest pain, difficulty breathing, or suicidal thoughts, always call 9-1-1 or go to the nearest emergency room.

Bottom line, dont delay care because you are worried about contracting COVID-19.

Related

Originally posted here:

Getting the health care you need during COVID-19 - The Suburban Times

Orcas Island Health Care District and Hospital negotiations |… – Islands’ Sounder

It appears that the board is attempting to reinvent the wheel by considering bringing in Island Hospital again. Didnt we have them running the clinic for two different five year periods, already? UW was another disaster. We need a locally run-clinic that offers a wide range of services, including alternative modalities (ie chiropractic, nutritional education, acupuncture, and movement classes [which are especially good for the elderly.])

Throwing tax dollars at a decision does not solve the problem. We can achieve a healthy community by running the clinic ourselves.

With Island Hospital at the helm, we will likely have as many or more unnecessary airlift flights for people with chest pain. Unnecessary, because we have a cardiologist on Island will all of the equipment needed to diagnose whether or not a particular patients pain is due to a heart attack, or one of six other conditions all for which they do not need to be flown off-island. Currently, when the EMTs are called for chest pain the only thing they can do is to fly people off the island, for they dont have a cardiologist on staff, nor the equipment necessary.

It seems to me that although the board is, Im sure, hardworking, putting islanders health and care in the hands of Island Hospital again is going back to something that didnt work before. Perhaps, its time for the board to rethink what is cost-effective and viable for our island community.

It would be more work, yes, but putting together and funding a coalition of local health care providers, including alternative health care providers, would be the healthier and most cost-effective option for the island. There is even federal funding if this Health Care District and prove that it is serving the low-income community and limiting off island emergency room visits that cost Medicare a lot of money by providing preventative healthcare such as nutritional education, massage, in-home care, acupuncture, chiropractic, movement therapy, etc.

If we can reduce hospital visits by implementing preventative medicine on the island, we will have a healthier population and potential funding from federal grant programs. This seems like the right road to peruse. It may be more work for the board, but it will be worth it, and it will make us all healthier.

Spirit Eagle

Orcas Island

Read the rest here:

Orcas Island Health Care District and Hospital negotiations |... - Islands' Sounder

Health Care Comes to Us – The New York Times

This article is part of the On Tech newsletter. You can sign up here to receive it weekdays.

The pandemic, an unemployment surge and unrest over racial inequality have made more Americans feel isolated, anxious or depressed. Psychological distress could prove temporary, but the hurt and the ripple effects are serious nevertheless.

Now heres some good news. Benjamin F. Miller, a psychologist and chief strategy officer for Well Being Trust, a national foundation focusing on mental and spiritual health, told me something hopeful: In part because of technology, this moment in history contains the makings of more accessible and effective mental health care for everyone.

Probably one of the most profound impacts that technology had in the pandemic is that the care now comes to the patients, Dr. Miller said.

Hes talking about the many physicians, therapists and clinicians shifting to seeing patients by web video or over the telephone. Not everyone loves health care through a computer screen, but Dr. Miller said it has removed barriers that prevented many people from accessing mental health services.

Care can now be just a FaceTime call away, and U.S. insurers quickly made changes that allowed more people to get help on their terms.

Ive been thinking about how peripheral technology has felt these last few months. Sure, weve relied on technology for work, school and staying in touch, but brave essential workers, capable political and public health leaders and effective institutions matter more than anything else.

Dr. Miller reminded me that technology doesnt have to cure the coronavirus to be an enabler for good. He said he believed that technology has an important role to play in what he hoped would become a larger restructuring of American health care.

But first, some capable people and institutions had to cut red tape to let technology in.

Since the start of the pandemic, Medicare and many private health insurers have changed policies to reimburse practitioners for patient visits by phone or web video at somewhere close to the payment rate of in-person visits.

Privacy rules were relaxed to let people use familiar web video services like Skype and not only medical-specific video sites. (Yes, this comes with a possible risk to patient information.)

Telemedicine for all types of health care remains a tiny fraction of patient care, but many more people and providers have tried and liked it. Nearly every major mental health organization is pressing policymakers to make those temporary changes permanent, Dr. Miller said.

Technology is not a panacea, Dr. Miller stressed. (Reader: May you remember this sentence always, about everything in tech.) Lack of internet access or discomfort with technology still holds some people back from telemedicine, Dr. Miller said. And tech doesnt resolve the stigma that can be associated with mental health services or close gaps in health insurance coverage.

But Dr. Miller said technologys role in mental health during the pandemic is a gift that he hoped would be the start of work to better structure mental health services, integrate them into the rest of health care and ensure they get enough resources to help everyone.

Dr. Millers essential message wasnt about technology at all. Because so many of us have felt stress and isolation recently, he hoped that we can now talk openly about the importance of healthy minds and bodies, and better understand people who live with mental distress.

Now that we know how hard this is, I hope we have empathy, he said.

If you dont already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

If you want one statistic that shows technology companies maturation from iconoclastic underdogs to the mainstream, look at advertising.

Amazon now spends more money on promoting itself in television commercials, internet ads and other spots than any company in the United States, according to an analysis of 2019 advertising trends by the publication AdAge. Google was No. 6. (I first read about this in the Axios Media Trends newsletter.)

Companies that make physical devices, like Apple, used advertising for years to shape our perceptions. But until quite recently, Amazon and many of Americas upstart internet companies thought advertising was kinda tacky.

Advertising is the price you pay for having an unremarkable product or service, the Amazon chief executive Jeff Bezos quipped more than 10 years ago. Last year, Bezos said that he had changed his mind.

Why the change? Well, technology is becoming just like every other product. Theres not much difference between a Ford and Toyota pickup truck, so those companies know they must persuade you to feel warm and fuzzy about their model. Picking an app or an online shopping company likewise has become a lot about picking one that makes you feel good.

And as tech companies wanted us to turn over more of our habits and lives to them, they needed to pitch themselves harder. Amazon, for example, spends a lot of money advertising its movies, internet TV gadgets and voice assistants to turn our homes into all-Amazon zones.

Theres a similar pattern to tech companies spending on policy persuasion. They used to consider lobbying unseemly or unimportant, and now Americas tech powers are among the countrys biggest lobbyists.

There you go. Tech is not a special species anymore. It is big and everywhere, and that means the industrys leading lights spend a lot of money to stay on top.

Our newsletter cousins at DealBook are hosting a reader conference call featuring David E. Sanger, The New York Timess national security correspondent, discussing the tug of war over technology between the United States and China. To hear from David and ask him your questions, you can R.S.V.P. here. The call is tomorrow (July 23) at 11 a.m. Eastern.

Tackling a dangerous conspiracy: Twitter announced a series of sweeping actions intended to remove or hide more accounts and material related to QAnon, a movement promoting baseless conspiracies that has proliferated on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter, my colleague Kate Conger reported. People who believe in QAnons intricate and false theories have committed violence and harassed people online, and internet companies have been under pressure to do more to combat the spread of this and other harmful material. Facebook is also preparing to take similar steps to limit the reach of QAnon content, Kate wrote.

The criticism is coming from inside the house: The Times tech reporter Karen Weise writes about Tim Bray, a respected technologist and Amazon executive who recently quit the company and became one of its highest-profile critics. Bray is using the mind-set and tools of Amazon including the intense, six-page internal memos called PRFAQs to articulate how and why he believes Amazon hurts competition and should be broken apart.

Big tech versus the big scourge of climate change: Somini Sengupta and Veronica Penney of The New York Times walk through what Apple, Microsoft and other large tech companies are doing to combat planet-warming carbon emissions, and where their rhetoric might fall short of their actions. (Ill have more in tomorrows newsletter about technology and climate change.)

These six ducklings bobbing in the water are giving me joyWe want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else youd like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you dont already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Continue reading here:

Health Care Comes to Us - The New York Times

How a seismic shift to telemedicine is changing mental health care for the better – Fast Company

By Dr. Mimi Winsberg6 minute Read

Theres a growing mental health crisis brought on by COVID-19. A third of Americans are showing signs of clinical anxiety or depressiona startling increase from roughly one in 10 people last year.

As a psychiatrist, I am not surprised by this data. Since the onset of the pandemic, my schedule has been full. Ive been seeing 14 patients a day, most of whom are struggling with anxiety and depression. At Brightside, the telemedicine service I cofounded, weve seen approximately a 50% surge in new members seeking mental health support. The pandemic has led to a demand for mental health services that exceeds what existing systems can handle, triggering an acceleration in telemedicine adoption, as well as some long overdue policy changes.

Five months in, we are beginning to see radical changes in the mental health and telemedicine landscape. So, its time to ask critical questions about the future: How will technology rise to the occasion to facilitate treatment for those in need? How will larger health systems adopt telemedicine and the tools that have been promoted by startup companies for years? What policy changes have been implemented to address mental health access issues? And are these changes here to stay?

One of the few silver linings of the COVID-19 pandemic is that the social stigmas associated with mental health have begun to erode. Historically, fewer than half of people who need care end up getting it, and the cultural perception of mental health issues is one of the many reasons why.

Related: How COVID-19 is normalizing telehealth

Patients suffering from depression and anxiety often express feelings of loneliness or isolationthat no one understands what theyre going through. In a COVID-19 world, this point of view has shifted, and having anxious thoughts under these circumstances is viewed by many as commonplace. People who never vocalized struggles before are now openly expressing their anxiety. This has equipped those who have always been suffering with a forum to discuss their feelings and connect with others more easily than they did in the pastdespite geographic separation.

At the organizational level, employers, academic institutions, and consulting groups have embraced topics related to mental health more than Ive seen in my 25-year career. Its been a dramatic shift. More people struggling is bad, but facilitating space to talk about those struggles without fear of judgement is good.

I was recently asked if I could remember a moment in my career when it felt like this many Americans were suffering from mental health issues in response to a specific incident or event. Both the terrorist attacks on 9/11 and the economic recession of 2008 came to mind.. What is different about this mental health crisis is that the technological advancements of the last decade have had an enormous impact on the way healthcare can be delivered.

The last 10 years have been a formative period in the healthcare industry due to the slow but growing adoption of telemedicine. Even in a pre COVID-19 world, most healthcare stakeholders agreed that safe and effective care could be delivered remotely. But as telemedicine has emerged, its primarily been implemented for single encounters, such as in primary and urgent care when physicians are able to make a swift decision on what needs to be done, rather than to manage chronic conditions.

The pandemic has brought into focus the fact that some of the largest health systems either waited too long to implement telemedicine or did so in a way that failed to optimize the quality of care for patients. When telemedicine was suddenly the only option to manage anything deemed non-essential, there was a rush to implement solutions that actually work. Telemedicine, which had been viewed as a lower priority solution, second-best to in-person care, was suddenly the only game in town. This has provided a chance for telemedicine to step out of the shadows and shine.

The result? Health systems are quickly catching on to whats been obvious to those of us in the field for years: telemedicine is the most efficient way to treat conditions that do not require a physical exam. And even for conditions that may require a physical examination up front, many of them can be managed via telemedicine thereafter.

But its a bit more complicated than just putting a doctor and patient behind a video camera. At Brightside, weve spent years perfecting our approach to deliver sophisticated tools that lead to the best outcomes. It requires more than just steady video qualityeffective remote care for chronic conditions requires synchronous (real-time) conversations, as well as remote monitoring, asynchronous evaluation, and ongoing messaging, all powered by complex rules and logic that help doctors stay one step ahead of a patients needs. It isnt easy or simple, and the right solution is different for each condition. Many startups have been working on specialized solutions for some time now, but have become leaders in telemedicine overnightI hear from healthcare consultants every week who are scrambling to help the largest health systems figure out telemedicine solutions that dont feel like a B-grade experience.

One key benefit of telemedicine to treat and manage chronic conditions is that it changes the nature of the relationship between the patient and doctor. Whereas traditional care has almost always been defined as, come back and check in with me in 8 weeks, newer telemedicine approaches allow for responsive, and even proactive, intervention by a doctor when a patient really needs it. This helps doctors quickly address issues and optimize treatment, plus it makes patients feel really cared for. Health systems are beginning to realize that this also supports better outcomes. Getting patients on the right treatment and quickly addressing any issues that come up drives better treatment adherence and avoids adverse events. Plus, the efficiencies of telemedicine often mean that this better care can be delivered for similar or lower costs than the traditional model.

Related: Your pandemic blues have a name: adjustment disorder

Would it have been nice to see this emerge sooner? Of course. But the adoption of telemedicine as a best-in-class solution is welcome, even if overdue. It is unfortunate that it takes a global pandemic to bring about these changes. But I believe both the positive perception of telemedicine and adoption of tools to remotely monitor chronic conditions are here to stay. Yet another silver lining of the pandemic.

Its hard to think of an industry with more complicated and entrenched regulation than healthcare. Innovative health-related solutions are often held back from growing at the rate they otherwise could due to strict policies that, in some cases, predate half the American population.

Once shelter-in-place orders were broadly issued in March, the federal government relaxed some policies so that telehealth services could reach broader audiences, including millions of Medicare patients. This came in many forms, including temporarily facilitating cross-state licensure so that doctors could cross state lines virtually to treat patients in need. This allowed for the redistribution of physician resources in a time of crisis, which is of paramount importance.

And then theres the topic of insurance and reimbursement. Telemedicine has historically been viewed as a second best compromise, rather than reimbursed at parity with in-person services. Doctors are often paid less for virtual patient visits compared to in-person ones, and reimbursement for tele-services has lagged. With the pandemic, we have seen this change. Telemedicine is a service patients clearly want. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, for example, recently announced that the number of telehealth claims rose from 200 per day in February 2020 to 38,000 per day in May 2020, with the majority of those in mental health services

So what does post-pandemic policy look like? Its not yet clear. As the Editorial Board at Bloomberg News recently pointed out, some of these shifts could be reversed by the federal government as the pandemic subsides. That would be a mistakea sentiment shared by telehealth experts who recently implored a Senate health panel not to undo such significant medical progress once the country gets a handle on the virus. The relaxation of policies during the pandemic has sent a clear message: telemedicine is a best-in-class solution thats as good as it gets and will only get better. Its hard to legitimize undoing that.

Dr. Mimi Winsberg is cofounder and chief medical officer of Brightside, a mental health telemedicine service.

The rest is here:

How a seismic shift to telemedicine is changing mental health care for the better - Fast Company

Must health care workers risk their lives to treat Covid-19 patients? – STAT

The sweep of Covid-19 across the globe has raised a fundamental question about medical ethics: Do physicians, nurses, EMTs, and other health care workers have moral and legal obligations to risk their health and lives to treat patients during a pandemic?

Its an important question, given the toll that Covid-19 is taking on medical professionals. As we write this, more than 100,000 health care workers have been infected in the United States alone and nearly 550 have died from Covid-19. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that health care workers accounted for 11% to 16% of Covid-19 infections during the first wave.

To answer this fundamental question, we first need to define the ethical and legal duties of physicians during a pandemic or a war or a bioterrorist attack and these arent necessarily clear. It is quite revealing that when students graduate from medical school, they all take various oaths modeled on the World Medical Associations Declaration of Geneva. None of these include any statement that physicians must risk their lives in caring for patients.

advertisement

There are conflicting perspectives on defining the responsibilities of medical professionals during an epidemic. Some have taken the position that medical professionals who refuse to work in hospitals during this pandemic should lose their jobs or even their licenses. This perspective is based on the idea that medicine is a humanitarian profession that requires health care workers to care for the sick under all conditions. By freely entering into this profession, so the thinking goes, physicians and other health care professionals have implicitly agreed to accept all dangers and risks.

This view is consistent with that of the General Medical Council in the United Kingdom, which asserts that physicians have an obligation to provide urgent medical care during disasters, even when there is a significant health risk to providing that care.

advertisement

The American Medical Association takes a different position. Its 2020 update of Opinion 8.3 sets out physicians obligations in this pandemic to provide urgent medical care during disasters even in the face of greater than usual risk to physicians own safety, health or life. Opinion 8.3 also recognizes that if the risks of providing care to individual patients are too dangerous, then physicians can refrain from treating Covid-19 patients because doing so may hinder their ability to provide care in the future.

The American Nurses Association offers similar advice, stating that during pandemics, nurses must decide how much care they can provide while also taking care of themselves. Nurses may refrain from working when they feel physically unsafe due to a lack of personal protective equipment or inadequate testing for infections.

Many ethicists believe that physicians and health care professionals may, at times, refuse to care for patients when their service conflicts with their own moral views. For example, physicians do not have to comply with a patients wish to terminate a pregnancy, or assist in euthanasia, if that conflicts with their moral framework. These ethicists recognize that emotions and motivations are integral parts of any moral decision-making process. There are no rigid rules. Choices must be adapted to the particulars of each given situation. For example, the moral duty not to harm or kill another person includes self-care for the clinician who is providing care to these highly infectious patients. It is akin to not requiring paramedics to enter a building on the verge of collapse to aid someone inside.

A health care professionals specialty may also influence his or her moral obligation to treat a patient or refuse to do so. One who specializes in infectious diseases may not have the moral autonomy to refuse to treat Covid-19 patients, while one whose specialty is ophthalmology, cosmetic surgery, or dermatology can reasonably maintain a moral obligation to serve as a medical consultant or serve in some other capacity in the hospital, but not take on the risks of treating Covid-19 patients.

Physicians and other health care professionals must also balance their obligations as professionals with their duties as husbands, wives, parents, and children. The risk to personal health from the coronavirus is alarming enough, but the risk of infecting family members, especially those with a higher risk of infection, may be ethically and morally unacceptable. Health care professionals refusal to work in a state of emergency may be justified if their health or well-being is endangered because of medical susceptibilities such as heart problems, diabetes, pregnancy, and the like that place them at a high risk of contracting and dying from the virus, or if they reasonably believe that their work environment creates an unacceptable hazard by not providing them with essential personal protective equipment.

Historical lessons offer insight into this ethical conundrum. For example, the history of secular medical ethics reveals that the medical community has never come to a consensus on the nature and scope of its responsibilities during an epidemic. The lack of consensus may be due in part to the fact that medical ethics are embedded in various broader social and cultural fabrics.

Jewish law supports the view that a person is obligated to save another, though there are situations in which the dangers or risks are so high that these moral obligations are not mandatory. Rabbinical scholars have concluded that physicians have an extra obligation to heal the sick and are expected to accept a greater degree of risk than nonphysicians, due to their training and nature of their work. Yet they must also be prudent in their obligation to protect their families. Interestingly, rabbinical scholars maintain that treating Covid-19 patients is not mandatory but is considered to be a great act of compassionate professionalism and is highly praiseworthy.

We believe that the question of whether health care workers must risk their lives to treat Covid-19 patients does not have one uniform answer. We do believe that health care workers who specialize in infectious disease or respiratory medicine have a greater responsibility to treat Covid-19 patients than health care workers in other subspecialties of medicine. Moreover, most, but not all, health care workers have a professional obligation to provide some medical service during this pandemic. Society, however, should be understanding of those health care workers who may defer their medical responsibilities because of their own personal health risks or extenuating family responsibilities.

While it is important for physicians and other health care workers to explore and come to terms with their moral and legal obligations to care for patients with Covid-19, this will not be our last pandemic. That is why it is essential to incorporate these issues into the medical and health science educational curricula and get students thinking about them early. Professional education should help students and practicing health care workers learn how to balance their health risks with the immediate benefits to individual patients and the capacity to care for patients in the future.

The moral obligation, the courage, the compassion, and even the heroism of millions of clinicians on the front lines are what professionalism is all about.

Alan Kadish is a cardiologist, researcher, and president of the Touro College and University System. John Loike is a professor of biology at the Touro College and University System and writes a regular column on bioethics for The Scientist.

Read the rest here:

Must health care workers risk their lives to treat Covid-19 patients? - STAT

Health care professionals urge public to be ready for potential second wave | News, Sports, Jobs – Williamsport Sun-Gazette

The second act is coming, but what would you want to do in the second that you werent able to do in the first? asked Dr. Gerald Maloney, Geisinger chief medical officer of hospital services. We dont know exactly what is going to happen. Preparing for a second wave is prudent at this time.

Maloney, alongside Dr. Rutul Dalal, UPMC medical director of infectious diseases, and Steve Leauber, Red Cross senior disaster program manager, are urging people to prepare by buying necessities without overbuying, maintaining social distancing and hygiene recommendations, avoiding contact with large masses of people and staying home whenever able to especially when sick.

Being prepared means keeping enough food, supplies and medicine for 72 hours, Leauber said. With COVID, we have learned a lot. A lot of people have learned about preparedness because things got shut down and we didnt know that they were going to get shut down.

He encourages locals to prepare before a possible second wave actually hits our area.

A lot of people went and stocked up during the pandemic instead of before, he said.

He added that having enough supplies of your favorite things, canned foods and shelf-stable meals, batteries, a radio, phone and laptop chargers, medicine and even a generator can be helpful in the case of being quarantined or stuck at home during a national disaster for a long period of time.

Be prepared for it because we dont know, and COVID showed that to us, he said. Dont over buy, make sure there are things for the next person. If we dont overbuy there will be things for the next person.

There is enough to go around, Maloney added. We can get through this together if we all cooperate.

Maloney and Dalal agree that preventative measures like regular hand-washing and sanitizing, universal masking when not able to distance, practicing social distancing measures and not leaving the house when feeling ill, are just some of the measures that have been proven to help fight against the spread of the virus.

We should use them (masks), Maloney said. If we are learning anything, its that we do have proof that masks and distancing are effective. It is a really important message to get out. We dont have a cure but we do know how to prevent it, so lets do that.

At Geisinger, testing capabilities and telemedicine have been ramped up over the course of the virus and will continue to grow.

Geisinger has also learned how to better care for patients and how to fully monitor their personal protective equipment.

We are making sure of our supplies and taking PPE inventory daily, Maloney said. We know that we are in much better shape. We know that our internal infrastructures work. We are doing the things that we need to do. We are making sure that we are as prepared as we can be.

UPMC has taken similar approaches by maximizing their testing potential by opening up testing sites at their outpatient clinics in the surrounding areas.

Our job across all the communities we serve is to be ready for the worst and respond to what the realities are. That means we have to have aggressive well thought through testing and surveillance programs. We need to know about hot spots before they become overwhelming, Dalal said.

Dalal alongside his colleagues agree that the focus should remain on the most vulnerable.

Despite more people testing positive, often younger adults, we are not seeing the same pattern of increase in severe cases, he said. And I believe we can keep it that way if we focus our efforts on protecting the frail elderly and immunocompromised. We dont want any avoidable infections, but we must stay especially focused on doing the things that keep those vulnerable people from infection. This is not one-size-fits-all, we must tailor our interventions to match the risk level of who were addressing.

Masking and the same precautions Maloney discussed were also urged by Dalal.

While facemasks alone cant prevent COVID-19, they are a key factor in prevention. If you wear a facemask, it can help prevent you from spreading the disease to others. If others wear a facemask, it can help to prevent them from spreading COVID-19 to you, he said. Safety is the number one priority at UPMC. To ensure safety, preventative protocols, which include controlled entrances; screening of all staff, patients, and visitors; masking of all staff, patients, and visitors; and visitor restrictions, remain in effect at our facilities.

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

Read more:

Health care professionals urge public to be ready for potential second wave | News, Sports, Jobs - Williamsport Sun-Gazette

For the higher calling of health care | Opinion | thecabin.net – Log Cabin Democrat

Last week, I met with doctors, nurses, and respiratory therapists at Washington Regional Medical Center in Fayetteville who have been on the front line of saving lives during thiscoronavirus pandemic. They were tired and stressed, but their work makes me grateful for their services and sacrifice. Now, Id like to talk about the need to find more people such as those to enter the field. I am hopeful that the sight of their heroic service will inspire others to choose a career in health care.

The numbers of those in the health care profession nationally and in Arkansas have been declining for years. This worldwide health crisis has highlighted the shortfall and the urgent need to correct it. There never has been a greater need for young people to enter the health care profession.

The reasons for the decline are many, but the result is that as health care professionals retire, there arent enough people to replace them. Americans are living longer, which means the number of people in need of medical care is growing as the number of providers shrinks. In the rural areas of Arkansas, the situation is even more challenging.

As the coronavirus has billowed across our nation like a toxic fog, the illness has illustrated the complicated nature of our health care system. We have seen how various medical specialties intersect, and that each is essential: Medical doctors and doctors of osteopathic medicine. Paramedics. Emergency room doctors and registered nurses. Respiratory therapists and licensed practical nurses. Home health caregivers. Researchers. Medical technicians. That is a very short list of the many important jobs in the health care field.

A health care career offers many benefits. You can find a job almost anywhere you want to live, and the jobs pay well.

But there is more to it than the personal benefit. Health care is a higher calling, much like any other public service. Those who choose that path often are called upon to put the good of others before personal comfort and convenience, as thousands have done during the pandemic. The hours are long, the work can be difficult. But there are the bright moments when someone saves a life or a homebound patient rewards a health aide with a smile of gratitude.

Arkansas is growing and in need of more people who are willing to commit to that level of service. Our state needs young professionals with fresh perspectives to help us figure out new and better ways to deliver health care. We need tech-savvy professionals who elevate our health care system, which benefits all Arkansans: A tech-savvy health care system attracts high-quality business and industry and enhances Arkansass general quality of life.

COVID-19 has changed everything about our lives. We have no idea how long we will be fighting the current battle, but the health care professionals who are guiding us through this time inspire confidence and hope. My hope is that their inspiration will attract a new generation of professionals to accept the call.

Read more:

For the higher calling of health care | Opinion | thecabin.net - Log Cabin Democrat

Healthcare investment flowed freely in Q2, reaching $18B – Healthcare Dive

Dive Brief:

The pandemic has all but crippled the economies in the United States and elsewhere. Numerous retailers have filed for bankruptcy, countless small business have gone under and it's anybody's guess as to when a recovery will occur. Mergers and acquisitions among healthcare companies fell to a five-year low last quarter.

Yet for startup and intermediate-stage healthcare companies, the situation in brighter.

According to the CB Insights survey, there were nearly 1,300 equity investments in healthcare companies during the second quarter of 2020. The numbers tend to reinforce a prior survey concluding that digital health had a record first-half raising funds.

Tech-intensive startups are drawing more capital than others. Telehealth deals exploded, with 154 deals taking place in the second quarter a 23% increase compared to the first quarter and a record number, according to CB Insights. However, funding dropped 18% quarter over quarter, and there were 22 mergers and acquisitions, which also set a record high.

Investments in firms specializing in artificial intelligence grew by 14% during the quarter, to $1.1 billion, although the volume of deals was relatively flat compared to the first quarter.

Investments in women's health ventures declined precipitously, down 47% in dollar volume compared to the first quarter. But the number of deals increased 20%, to 52 in total.

Meanwhile, the focus of many venture capital firms is shifting overseas. Asia, for example, saw nearly $5 billion invested during the quarter a 98% increase from the first quarter of 2020. Funding in Europe also grew, to $2.3 billion from $1.5 billion. In North America, the number was flat, declining to $10.5 billion compared to $10.6 billion.

And while California remains the center of healthcare equity investments in the United States with 66 deals taking place during the second quarter, that number declined 14% compared to the first quarter. Meanwhile, deals in the New York City area were stable at 47 for the quarter.

See more here:

Healthcare investment flowed freely in Q2, reaching $18B - Healthcare Dive

6 months in: What will the new normal look like for hospitals? – Healthcare Dive

This story is part of a series examining the state of healthcare six months into the public health emergency declared for COVID-19.

The first U.S. hospital to knowingly treat a COVID-19 patient was Providence Regional Medical Center in Everett, Washington, on Jan. 20. Since then, every aspect of healthcare has been upended,and it's becoming increasingly clear all parts of society will have to adapt to a new baseline for the foreseeable future.

For hospitals and doctors' offices, that means building on a major shift to telemedicine, new workflows to allow for more infection control and revamping the supply chain for pharmaceuticals, personal protective equipment and other supplies. That's on top of ongoing challenges of burned out workers and staff shortages further exacerbated by the pandemic.

Looking out even further, the industry will have to figure out how to treat potential chronic conditions in COVID-19 survivors and, until an effective vaccine is developed, how to manage new outbreaks of the disease.

Experts say U.S. hospitals are generally in a much better position for dealing with COVID-19 now than they were in March, and providers are learning more every week about the best treatments and care practices.

A June survey of healthcare executives conducted by consultancy firm Advis found that 65% of respondents said the industry is prepared for a fall or winter surge, about the inverse of what an earlier survey with that question showed.

"We've evolved. We're in a much better state now than we were in the beginning of the pandemic," Michael Calderwood, associate chief quality officer at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, told Healthcare Dive. "There's been a lot of learning."

But the number of positively identified cases has now topped 4million, and little political will exists to reinstitute widespread shutdowns even in areas where surges have filled ICUs to capacity. No treatment or vaccine for the disease exists or appears imminent. Testing and contract tracing efforts are too few and remain scattered and uncoordinated.

Whether there is a clear nationwide second wave or smaller surges in various parts of the country at different times, hospitals will need to remain in an effective state of emergency that requires constant vigilance until there is a cure or vaccine.

"Until we're armed with that, we're always going to have to be working like this. I don't see any other way," Diane Alonso, director of Intermountain Healthcare's abdominal transplant program, told Healthcare Dive.

The fall will bring additional challenges. Flu season usually begins to ramp up in October, and if the strains in wide circulation this year are severe, that will further stress the health system. While some schools have announced they will be virtual-only for the rest of 2020, others are committed to in-person classes. That could mean increased community spread, especially in college towns. Colder weather that forces people indoors where the novel coronavirus is far more likely to spread will also be a complicating factor.

So far, hospitals have been reluctant to once again halt elective procedures, though some have had to, arguing that the care is still necessary and can be done safely when the proper protections are in place. But that doesn't mean volume will rebound to pre-pandemic levels.

"While we think demand will come back, we've seen some flattening on demand in certain aspects that may be the new indicator of the new norm in terms of how people seek care," Dion Sheidy, a partner and healthcare advisory leader at advisory firm KPMG, told Healthcare Dive.

% of healthcare executives who said the following are a big concern for the industry

When the number of COVID-19 cases first surged in the U.S. and stay-at-home orders were implemented nationwide, telehealth became a necessary way for urgent care to continue.

Virtual visits skyrocketed in March and April as CMS and private payers relaxed regulations and expanded coverage. Some of that will be rolled back, but much may persist as patients and providers grow more used to using telehealth and platforms become smoother.

Virtual care can't replace in-person care, of course, and some patients and doctors will prefer face-to-face visits. The middle- to long-term result is likely to be that telehealth thrives for some specialties like psychiatry, but drops substantially from the highest levels during shutdowns throughout the country.

Other care settings outside of the hospital may see upticks as well, including at-home and retail-based primary and urgent care.

Renee Dua, the CMO of home healthcare and telemedicine startup Heal, said the company has seen virtual visits increase eight fold since the pandemic began in the U.S. and a 33% increase in home visits as people seek to continue care while reducing their risk of exposure to the coronavirus.

"The idea that you do not use an office building to get care that's why we started Heal we bet on the fact that the best doctors come to you," Dua told Healthcare Dive.

And care does need to continue, particularly vital services like vaccinations and pediatric checkups.

"You cannot ignore preventive screenings and primary care because you can get sick with cancer or with infectious diseases that are treatable and preventable," Dua said.

Movements toward non-traditional settings existed before anyone had heard of COVID-19, but the realities of the pandemic have shifted resources and spurred investment that will have lasting effects, Ross Nelson, healthcare strategy leader at KPMG, told Healthcare Dive.

"What we're going to see is there going to be an acceleration of the underlying trends toward home and away from the hospital," he said.

Some of this was already underway. Multiple large health systems have established programs to provide hospital-level care at home and major employers have inked contracts to have primary care delivered to employees at on-site clinics.

A key problem for hospitals in the first COVID-19 hotspots, such as Washington state and New York City, was a lack of necessary personal protective equipment, including N95 masks, gowns, face shields and gloves.

Also running low were supplies like ventilators and some drugs necessary for putting people on those machines.

While advances have certainly been made, the country did not have enough time to build up those supply stores before new surges in the South and West. The result has been renewed worries that not enough PPE is available to keep healthcare workers safe.

Chaun Powell, group vice president of strategic supplier engagement at group purchasing organization Premier, said "conservation practices continue to be the key to this" as COVID-19 surges roll through the country. The longer those dire situations continue, the more stress is put on the supply chain before it has a chance to recover.

Premier's most recent hospital survey found that more than half of respondents said N95s were heavily backordered. Almost half reported the same for isolation gowns and shoe covers.

of healthcare executives are reporting that N95 masks are heavily backordered

Calderwood said there has been improvement, however. "We have a much longer days-on-hand PPE supply at this point and the other thing is, we've begun to manufacture some of our own PPE," he said. "That's something a number of hospitals have done in working with local companies."

But the ability to manufacture new PPE in the U.S. also depends on the availability of raw materials, which are limited. That means significant advancements in domestic production are likely several months away, Powell said.

Health systems have stepped up the ability to coordinate and attempt to get equipment where it's needed most, especially for big-ticket items like ventilators. Providers are more hesitant, however, to let go of PPE without the virus being better contained.

The backstop supposed to help hospitals during a crisis is the national stockpile, which the federal government is attempting to resupply. It doesn't appear to be enough, though, at least not yet, Calderwood said.

"One thing that concerns me is we did have a national stockpile of PPE, and I get the sense that we've kind of burned through that supply," he said. "And now we're relying on private industry to meet the need."

Another problem hospitals face as the pandemic drags on is maintaining adequate staffing levels. Doctors, nurses and other front-line employees are in incredibly stressful work environments. The great potential for burnout will exacerbate existing shortages, just as medical schools are still trying to figure out how to continue with training and education.

"Those areas are concerning to our hospitals because our hospitals depend on a whole myriad of medical staff," Advis CEO Lyndean Brick said. "Whether it's physicians, nurses, technicians, housekeepers that whole staff complement is what's at the core of healthcare. You can have all the technology in the world but if you don't have somebody to run it that whole system falls apart."

On top of that is the increase in labor strife as working conditions have deteriorated in some cases. Nurses have reported fearing for their safety among PPE shortages and alleged lapses in protocol. Brick said she expects strike threats and other actions to continue.

When COVID-19 cases started ramping up for the first time in the U.S., hospitals throughout the country, acting on CMS advice, shut down elective procedures to prepare their facilities for a potential influx of critical patients with the disease. In some areas, hospitals did have to activate surge plans at that time. Others have done so more recently as the result of increases in the South and West.

But few have resorted to once again halting electives. Brick told Healthcare Dive she doesn't expect that to change, mostly because hospitals have by and large figured out how to properly continue that care.

She trusts any that can't do so safely, won't try.

"For the majority of our providers, except in the occasional state where they're having a real problem right now, I think that we're going to see elective surgeries still continue," Brick said. "Because most of our hospitals have capacity right now. They're able to do this successfully and securely, and it's really detrimental to patients to not get the care that they need."

Hospitals rely on elective procedures to drive their revenue, an added motivation to find ways to keep them running even when COVID-19 is detected at greater levels in the community.

Intermountain, based in Salt Lake City, recently performed its 100th organ transplant of the year, ahead of last year's pace despite the disruption of the COVID-19 crisis.

Alonso, the program director for abdominal transplants, said that while transplants are considered essential services, staff did pause some procedures when electives were halted and have re-evaluated workflow to be as safe as possible to patients, who are at higher risk after surgery because they are immunocompromised.

The hospital developed a triage system to help evaluate what services are necessary based on what level of COVID-19 spread is present in the community and how many beds and staffers are available to treat them.

The system's main hospital has certain floors and employees designated for COVID-19 treatment. Staff have been reallocated for certain needs like testing and there are plans available if doctors and surgeons need to be deployed to the ICU.

As many outpatient visits as possible are being changed to virtual, but in the building, patients are screened for symptoms and required to wear masks and follow distancing protocols.

At the transplant center, doctors were at one point divided into teams in case someone got sick and coworkers had to self-isolate.

"We went through a dry run where, at the beginning, we shut down incredibly hard to see how we could do it operationally," Alonso said. Intermountain hasn't had to do that again, but is ready if such measures become necessary, she said.

Brick and others said that despite the genuinely frightening circumstance brought by the pandemic, hospitals' responses have been admirable and providers have been quick to adapt. Slow or nonexistent leadership at the federal level, especially in sourcing and obtaining PPE, has been the bigger roadblock.

"Across the board, the whole healthcare industry has responded beautifully to this," Brick said. "Where our country has fallen down is we don't have a master plan to deal with this. Our federal leadership is reactionary, and we are not coordinating a master plan to deal with this in the long term. That's where my concerns are at. My concerns are not at our local hospitals. They have their acts together."

Follow this link:

6 months in: What will the new normal look like for hospitals? - Healthcare Dive

Healthcare Enforcement Mid-Year Roundup: 2020 | McDermott Will & Emery – JD Supra

In this installment of the Healthcare Enforcement Roundup we cover new and longstanding issues impacting the healthcare enforcement landscape. First, we explore the impact of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) on the healthcare industry, and the heightened risk of enforcement actions, whistleblower complaints and litigation that arise in times of crisis. We also address differing falsity standards that have emerged under the False Claims Act (FCA), the Department of Justices (DOJ) FCA enforcement priorities including an overview of the DOJs updated guidance on corporate compliance and new developments on the enforceability of sub-regulatory guidance that should all be watched by hospitals, health systems and other industry stakeholders. Finally, this issue features updates on key healthcare enforcement issues to watch from past Healthcare Enforcement Roundup reports.

PREPARING FOR THE AFTERMATH OF COVID-19: THE INVESTIGATIONS -

In recent months, the federal government has dedicated trillions of dollars to containing and treating the Coronavirus (COVID-19) and stimulating the economy in response to the pandemic. It has also waived many federal health program requirements to grant providers greater flexibility in combatting the virus. During these challenging times, healthcare providers should remember to practice good compliance hygiene to avoid heightened scrutiny and potential allegations of false claims lobbed by governmental actors and whistleblowers...

Please see full Newsletter below for more information.

View original post here:

Healthcare Enforcement Mid-Year Roundup: 2020 | McDermott Will & Emery - JD Supra

Sherpa Healthcare Partners Announces Close of Oversubscribed Fund – PRNewswire

BEIJING, July 27, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Sherpa Healthcare Partners is pleased to announce the final closing of the oversubscribed Sherpa Healthcare Fund I, L.P. The fund focuses on early- to growth-stage investment in the healthcare sector to cover companies in biotech, biopharma, medical devices and medical services. The Fund's LPs include public pension plans, family offices, fund of funds, asset management companies, and other institutional investors.

Distinguished portfolio companies of Sherpa Healthcare Fund I, L.P. include Cytek Biosciences, New Horizon Health, Singleron, Epimab, NanoVision, Belief Biomed, Neurotronic, Blissbio, and etc.

We at Sherpa Healthcare Partners greatly appreciate the trust of our LPs and the support from our portfolio companies as well as our friends and partners.

Sherpa will continue to execute our mission of investing in high quality healthcare enterprises delivering products and services to improve human health. Be Great, Make Others Great!

SOURCE Sherpa Healthcare Partners

More:

Sherpa Healthcare Partners Announces Close of Oversubscribed Fund - PRNewswire

Home healthcare patients, providers here in Michigan need federal support to overcome pandemic – Lansing State Journal

Barry Cargill, guest writer Published 10:03 a.m. ET July 27, 2020

Barry Cargill(Photo: Courtesy photo)

More than two months into the unprecedented health crisis brought on by COVID-19, Michigan has been among the hardest hit states. With more than 6,000 total deaths across our state and over 80,000 cases, our states fight against the virus is far from over but there are glimmers of hope. Death rates have declined over the last four weeks, a sign that weve successfully flattened the curve and saved lives.

This development is a testament to the resilient spirit of Michiganders across our state. From business owners who have made difficult decisions to close their doors to front-line healthcare providers who have fought tirelessly against a virus whose pathology is still little understood, all have made important and indispensable sacrifices.

As the president and CEO of the Michigan HomeCare & Hospice Association, Im also proud of the critical role the home health community has played in supporting patients, front-line home health workers, and the communities we serve across Michigan.

Since COVID-19 began rapidly spreading across our state earlier this year, home healthcare providers have worked to protect the vulnerable patient populations who rely on our services namely those who are elderly, suffer from disabilities, or cope with multiple chronic conditions. Since the coronavirus poses severe risks to our patients, weve taken unprecedented steps to protect them and their families from the virus including increased testing, expansion of personal protective equipment (PPE) utilization, and infection control measures which can reduce the possibility of viral transmission.

While we have taken pivotal steps to protect our patients and deliver care in the comfort and safety of the home setting, we continue to encounter barriers to care that often prevent us from reaching our patients at a time when they need home health the most.

For starters, it is essential that the federal government stabilize the home healthcare delivery system, which currently faces existential financial difficulties caused by COVID-19. Since the start of this pandemic, home healthcare agencies have experienced precipitous revenue declines as exceeding 20 percent.

Although this enormous loss was mitigated by emergency funds allocated by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act and the suspension of a twopercent sequestration cut, more help is needed.

To ensure home health agencies can survive the duration of the present health emergency, additional federal funds would prevent agency closures and staff layoffs while supporting continuity of care for patients.

Along with providing the financial resources necessary to maintain our operations, Medicare regulators and federal lawmakers must also move to ensure home health patients can receive care without risking potentially deadly exposure to COVID-19. This is where telehealth and telephonic virtual visits can play a vital role.

By allowing flexibility for certified home health clinicians to provide care through virtual visits, person-to-person contact can be reduced, allowing providers to better and more safely monitor patients without risking potential viral spread. Moreover, the expansion of Medicare coverage for telehealth-based home care can also alleviate much of the pressure currently being placed on other areas of our healthcare system, such as hospitals and physician offices.

Finally, another, perhaps more important way federal officials can help safeguard home health providers and our patients is to increase access to PPE. As mentioned earlier, home health agencies have expanded the use of PPE, especially in the patient home setting where person-to-person contact is difficult to avoid.

Given the demand across all healthcare sectors, it is unrealistic to expect massive influxes of protective equipment in the near-term. However, Medicare regulators and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) can aid the situation by providing guidance on how best to utilize PPE and ways to access needed equipment in a timely manner.

Taking the steps outlined above will be paramount towards stabilizing the home healthcare sector and ensuring our providers can continue playing a key role in our response to COVID-19. As Michiganders and Americans across the country begin to emerge from isolation and accustom themselves to the new normal, our leaders in Washington must continue shoring up U.S. healthcare infrastructure and help reduce the possible impact of a resurgent virus.

Barry Cargill is president andCEO of the Michigan HomeCare & Hospice Association.

Read or Share this story: https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/opinion/contributors/viewpoints/2020/07/27/federal-aid-can-help-michigan-home-healthcare-patients-survive-covid-19/5478614002/

Go here to read the rest:

Home healthcare patients, providers here in Michigan need federal support to overcome pandemic - Lansing State Journal

COVID-19 ‘Has Turned The Healthcare Industry Upside Down,’ Survey Finds – HealthLeaders Media

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a profound impact on the healthcare sector, a recent LocumTenens.com survey shows.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted healthcare organizations and their employees across several dimensions, earlier research has found. For example, the American Hospital Association estimates health systems and hospital lost $202.6 billion from March through June. And the healthcare workforce decreased 9.5% from February through April, with 1.5 million healthcare workers losing their jobs, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

The LocumTenens.com survey was conducted in June and highlights information collected from 940 healthcare professionals in 35 medical specialties. The survey features several key data points:

LocumTenens.com President Chris Franklin told HealthLeaders that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a dramatic impact on the clinician job market.

"The coronavirus pandemic has turned the healthcare industry upside down; and now more than ever, the job market for clinicians is in a constant state of flux. For example, an increased number of critical care and hospital medicine clinicians have been a necessary part of the response in various hotspots across the country ever since the pandemic began. Clinicians in other specialtiesmany associated with elective surgeriessaw a dramatic drop in demand for their services due to patients either having to delay care, whether it was due to financial concerns or loss of health insurance, or choosing to delay care out of fear of contracting the virus."

The clinician job market is rebounding, he said. "As we begin to see an uptick in elective procedures, or as procedures that were once considered elective are now becoming urgent due to a delay in care, we are seeing demand for clinicians across all specialties increase. More patients are beginning to resume in-person primary care visits, too."

Burnout was a major issue affecting clinicians well before the pandemic struck, but the pandemic has exacerbated the problem, Franklin said. "The pandemic has highlighted not only the significant work our clinicians do to care for our patients, but also the work we need to do to ensure we take care of our clinicians."

A hospitalist who participated in the LocumTenens.com survey said clinician burnout and mental health problems are a primary concern during the pandemic. "We all have a universal stress as healthcare practitioners with the rise of a pandemic. I am concerned for patients. I am concerned for myself. I am concerned for my neighbors. It will be important to incorporate stress management for our providers, including protected time off, stress outlets, and mental health counseling."

The survey shows telemedicine has expanded broadly during the pandemic, said Kevin Thill, executive vice president of LocumTenens.com.

"Almost three-quarters (74%) of respondents say their organization has increased their use of telehealth services due to COVID-19, and almost half (44%) say they have invested in new technology solutions to be able to communicate with patients remotely. The pandemic has shown clinicians and healthcare administrators the value telehealth adds to their practice, as it was the only way many practices were able to continue to care for patients at the height of the pandemic," Thill said.

Christopher Cheney is the senior clinical care editor at HealthLeaders.

View original post here:

COVID-19 'Has Turned The Healthcare Industry Upside Down,' Survey Finds - HealthLeaders Media

Beyond Covid-19: 5 opportunities for startups to reshape the future healthcare landscape – MedCity News

The novel coronavirus pandemic has upended the world as we know it, taking an unprecedented toll on health and human life. The healthcare ecosystem has quickly mobilized to mitigate the crisis modifying care access points and modalities while producing financing mechanisms to sustain patient care amidst dire circumstances.

As the scale of the pandemic grows and downstream impacts persist, healthcare organizations are recognizing they must shift from a reactive stance to a more proactive new normal. Operating in this environment will require new capabilities, forcing many organizations to look externally for innovative solutions to guide this transformation.

In this piece, we examine macro ramifications of the pandemic and potential reverberations across the healthcare industry. Through this analysis, weve identified five opportunities that harness these disruptive forces into tailwinds, and we cite examples of venture and PE-backed companies getting traction. We believe nimble, fast-moving early-stage companies are best positioned to maneuver and create lasting impact in these unprecedented and challenging times.

Jump to analysis of the Five Emerging Opportunities for Innovation

Increased Role of Government in HealthcareAt a time when federal spending on healthcare is already on an unsustainable pace, the pandemic response suggests the governments responsibilities are expected to grow. The federal government has authorized nearly $3T and counting in general economic relief measures. Further, federal agencies have earmarked $175B to aid healthcare providers whose revenue streams have been disrupted. The surge in federal spending indicates that federal debt is likely to exceed 100% of gross domestic product (GDP) by years end. This will pressure near-term healthcare spending and impact critical programs already on tenuous footing.

In addition to immediate one-time commitments, the governments enduring responsibilities are also likely to grow. Amidst record unemployment of 11% (17.8 million), Medicaid enrollment could swell by 17 million, a potential 24% increase compared to pre-pandemic levels. Furthermore, as the pandemic penetrates regions of the nation in variable intensity, states with some of the highest uninsured rates are being disproportionately impacted. This will create new, longer-term responsibilities for both state and federal governments.

Financial and operational pressure on HospitalsHealth systems, which have been the last line of defense against Covid-19 infection, have been among the hardest hit healthcare sectors economically. The gross reallocation of resources to caring for coronavirus patients on inpatient units and concern for the spread of infection have led to periodic cancellation of lucrative elective procedures and services. Additionally, other non-urgent admission volumes have decreased given patient fear of contracting COVID-19 in acute care settings. As a result, health systems have lost an estimated $200B in income over the last four months, highlighting some of the challenges of the current fee-for-service paradigm that rewards volume over value.

Hospitals, which already have high fixed costs and thin operating margins, were in a precarious financial position prior to the pandemic. Looking ahead, many will also have to contend with uncertainty in future elective procedure volume, volatility in investment income and lower reimbursements as a result of treating more Medicaid and uninsured patients. This will create margin pressure and a subset of hospitals may also have a harder time borrowing capital for immediate needs. As a result, operational cost reduction is elevating as a priority for many.

Increasing Flexibility of the Healthcare WorkforceThe pandemic has magnified the historically inflexible nature of our healthcare system. Data suggests that up until recently, roughly 80-90% of care was still being delivered in-person by a workforce organized to support care in brick and mortar facilities. The pandemic has exposed some of the shortcomings of this model, particularly an imbalanced and inelastic workforce unable to connect with patients where and when they need care. Although virtual and distributed care models have long had tremendous potential as solutions to this problem, regulatory and financial barriers have hindered broader adoption.

In response to the pandemic, regulatory agencies have stepped in to dramatically unlock clinician supply and capacity by both removing barriers and creating incentives. State and federal governments have unanimously eased constraints by liberalizing licensing, reciprocity and credentialing. In addition, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has decided to reimburse over 80 telehealth services at parity with in-person care, a critical incentive for more physicians to offer the service to their patients.

The Changing Behavior and Mental Health of Patients in the PandemicAs traditional sites of care have become risk prone and largely unavailable, patients have been forced to access new modalities to address their medical needs. Patients with low acuity conditions have quickly become comfortable with virtual care services. An estimated 16.5M Americans have started using telehealth since the onset of the COVID19 pandemic and 88% say they would use it again. As a result, telehealth adoption amongst traditional providers and direct-to-consumer telehealth platform sales have skyrocketed.

For patients with more chronically serious medical conditions, appropriate care has been less accessible, leading to a hidden crisis with catastrophic complications. These medically complex populations, whose care is often managed by numerous specialists, have been less certain about where to turn for their care. Hospitals nationwide have seen dramatically reduced admissions for heart attacks and strokes during the pandemic, with some states reporting a 2 to 3-fold increase in deaths from heart disease and diabetes. Notably, Michigan recently reported a 62% increase in out-of-hospital deaths, as many of these patients have forgone basic care needs due to a perceived risk of infection.

Prior to the pandemic, our healthcare system was already grappling with a behavioral health crisis. In the midst of persistent access challenges, the pandemic has produced unprecedented levels of social isolation, financial distress, and domestic instability. These stressors, combined with the increasing turmoil of social injustice and political debate, have led to an astounding 300% increase in the reported rates of depression and anxiety. As the pandemic and economic shutdowns persist, it is evident the increased demand for behavioral healthcare will only intensify.

The simultaneous convergence of these macro forces has significantly disrupted normal operations in our healthcare industry. Stakeholders who aim to survive and potentially thrive amidst this disruption must innovate and navigate real-time transformation. We have highlighted five key areas of emerging need where early stage healthcare companies can create high-value, enduring impact for customers, partners, and the industry at-large.

#1 Support the Provider Value-Based Care JourneyMacro forces suggest we are at a unique moment in the history of value-based care (VBC) adoption. The downstream impacts of the pandemic have created new incentives for payers and providers to align on value-based payment arrangements as an alternative to the fee-for-service status quo. This has the potential to catalyze new payment model innovation and broader adoption of VBC.

Over the last decade, the federal governments efforts to advance VBC adoption have spurred commercial health plans efforts to innovate their own payment models. As the governments near-term role as a healthcare payer grows, it is likely to push for VBC as a cost control mechanism across the payer and employer landscape. In fact, some commercial health plans are already beginning to offer prospective payments to providers in return for their commitment to participate in future value-based care programs.

In addition to payer efforts to advance value-based care, data suggests healthcare providers in alternative payment arrangements have fared better than their peers in fee-for-service arrangements. This reality is re-shaping how providers think about their future business models, spurring new dialogue about the merits of prospective payment arrangements, which can offer steadier and predictable cash flow to providers.

While providers may have more financial incentive to adopt a value-based business model, the complexity and cost of building a VBC infrastructure will remain as barriers to adoption. Many providers will, therefore, seek experienced partners to help guide their VBC journeys. This presents a unique opportunity for VBC enablement vendors, who offer the technology, operating capabilities and staffing support critical to developing a value-based care infrastructure.

VillageMDAgilon Health, Privia and Aledade are leading the pack in delivering suites of value-based enablement services to risk-bearing provider groups. Their value-add includes care management capabilities to augment population health, analytics to support clinical decision-making and administrative capabilities to help providers track their performance. Stellar Health is an earlier stage company whose technology recognizes the critical role primary care providers play in value-based care models by prompting them to complete value-based care workflows incentivizing completed actions with financial rewards.

#2 Automate the Healthcare EnterpriseIt is well-documented that repetitive manual processes and human inefficiency are drivers of unnecessary hospital administrative spend. Yet these challenges persist due to low adoption of automation technology. As health systems seek operating efficiency and quick value creation, they are likely to embrace enterprise automation strategies like robotic process automation (RPA) and artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance productivity and free staff up to practice at the top of their license.

Across industries, these technologies have demonstrated the most value automating repetitive, high-volume and rules-based activities such as scraping web data and filling in forms. There are a number of similar automation opportunities scattered across the hospital enterprise, such as claim status checks during the revenue cycle process, insurance verification efforts in the contact center or inventory management as part of supply chain and ordering. While implementing automation seems prudent, scalability and enduring ROI have been elusive for some hospitals. This is due to the challenge of finding alignment between these technologies, the nuanced and unstructured nature of hospital processes and the staff supporting these processes. Therefore, automation platforms capable of facilitating process discovery and standardization, supporting human-in-the-loop synchronization and enabling self-governance have the most utility.

Several companies are helping hospitals automate enterprise processes, targeting the end-to-end automation of specific functional areas as part of a broader enterprise automation strategy. Syllable AI is an intelligent automation platform for the healthcare contact center, capable of processing live web, mobile and phone requests from patients and either resolving them or triaging to human staff appropriately. Suki AI, a Flare Capital portfolio company, and Alpha Health are focused on automating revenue cycle processes. Suki offers a voice-enabled and AI-powered platform that automates clinical note documentation as well as coding and billing related administrative tasks, while Alpha Health leverages people, data and machine learning technology to automate reimbursement tasks.

#3 Synchronize Virtual Primary Care through a Longitudinal OfferingThe in-person nature of primary care, rooted in the relationship between patient and PCP, has been hallowed ground. Despite this tradition, studies suggest as many as 80% of primary care services (validating symptoms, triaging care, and developing treatment plans) can be delivered virtually. The fallout from the pandemic has created a unique opportunity to realize this potential as patients have gravitated to virtual solutions to access care. However, the rapid surge in virtual care options has been overwhelming for some patients, leading to mixed experiences. This suggests an opportunity to streamline the virtual care experience through a longitudinal offering to support the continuous patient journey.

In order to create a longitudinal virtual primary care offering, risk-bearing entities (payers, employers and provider groups) have experimented with aggregating point solutions into a cohesive offering. As new solutions rapidly come to market and delegated entities include virtual care as a medical benefit, the challenge of aggregating these offerings will grow. Therefore, there is a growing need for natively integrated products that leverage provider scale and power longitudinal (engage, treat and close) care experiences.

Three companies that are innovating the longitudinal, virtual primary care experience are 98point6, K Health and Eden Health, a Flare Capital portfolio company. 98point6 offers an on-demand, virtual care experience that resolves basic care needs by sequencing both technology and chat-based primary care consults to screen and treat patients. K Health has quickly evolved from a symptom-checking solution to a platform capable of connecting members directly to a range of contracted physicians for electronic live chat-based care for as low as $9/month. Meanwhile, Eden Health has built a virtual-first NCQA accredited patient-centered medical home model for employers that virtualizes the experience of a best practice traditional primary care clinic. Eden deploys multidisciplinary care teams including behavioral health and navigation assistance interconnected with the healthcare system to help employees navigate their healthcare journey at their office work site or virtually.

#4 Develop Dynamic, Community-Centered Home Care Models for Vulnerable PopulationsThe pandemic is hastening the ongoing transition of care away from acute care settings (ED, inpatient) to the lowest cost, and now safest site of care, the home. Medically complex patients, many of whom are particularly vulnerable to coronavirus, unable to leave home and in need of higher-touch care, are accelerating this transition. Healthcare claims outcomes data suggests providing care in the home for certain populations is worth the required upfront investment for additional services. Recognizing these benefits, payors are incentivizing home and community-based care, taking a lead in catalyzing this shift. As this shift accelerates, however, health systems risk falling behind unless they actively participate in shaping the change.

The inpatient model has been designed and staffed to accommodate high capacity and treat broad care needs at a central site. As care grows decentralized, this model will have to be reconstructed. Health systems will need to ensure that their workforces and equipment are mobile, dynamic and organized around individual patient needs. For higher-acuity patients, hospital-at-home models will also need to package care delivery, remote monitoring and supply chain into a more cohesive and flexible offering.

Several companies are assisting health plan and health system efforts to extend their care reach into the home, allowing providers to treat a wide range of clinical needs. Dispatch Health and Ready Responders are two on-demand and mobile care providers. Both companies partner with health plans and health systems by bringing on-demand, mobile care teams to patients homes and providing in-home care for non-emergency needs. Contessa Health, meanwhile, helps health systems deliver hospital-at-home programs and enables health plans to effectively contract for this new model of care.

For higher-need patients, home-based primary care as well as Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) models have proven to be uniquely effective at improving outcomes and reducing costs. Concerto Health and Landmark Health are two home-based primary care providers that contract with health plans to address more complex member needs, by providing longitudinal home-based primary care and care coordination amongst multiple specialist clinicians. PACE models, characterized by their interdisciplinary staffing, dynamic site-of-care synchronization and community orientation, have been particularly adaptive and effective at caring for elderly and complex patients during the pandemic. WelbeHealths recent expansion and remote home-based care innovations lend further credence to the adaptive nature of this model of care.

#5 Integrate Primary Medical and Behavioral Healthcare

If the first mile in fixing the Behavioral Health system in the U.S. was increasing access to care, the last mile will surely be improving outcomes of that care. A critical next step in improving treatment efficacy involves better integrating behavioral health with the rest of the patients medical journey. Integrated models have demonstrated better outcomes for both adult and adolescent populations.

An emerging class of companies is developing solutions to better enable integrated care for adult populations, including Quartet Health, Concert Health, and Mindoula. Quartet Health offers healthcare providers both technology and access to a network of behavioral health providers to facilitate better collaborative care and has most recently signed a large national collaboration with Centene. Concert Health works closely with primary care providers and deploys a full-stack collaborative care solution including remotely delivered behavioral health care. Finally, Mindoula partners with both health systems and health plans, providing virtual care teams and technology-enabled support services to help its partners engage and treat their patients acute needs.

The unique needs of the adolescent and pediatric populations are often overlooked in the broader discussion about behavioral health. As rates of anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation and autism spectrum disorder rise, so does the need for better care options. Effectively managing the behavioral health needs of this population requires integrated care with additional wraparound capabilities, especially family-centered engagement, but also school and community-based support. Brightline and Opya are two companies that have set out to address this need, creating collaborative, multi-specialty clinics that engage care teams, families and communities in providing care while leveraging a digital platform to ensure overall continuity.

ConclusionAs the Covid-19 pandemic rages on, its clear the ramifications of the pandemic are likely to permanently reshape the healthcare industry. Targeted evolution around key areas of change will be required to successfully navigate the healthcare world beyond Covid-19. We believe the areas that will require the most adaptation are in value-based care payment models, digitally integrated and tailored care delivery and automation. As the healthcare industry begins this dynamic journey, we believe early-stage companies have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to shape the future ahead.

Photo: Feodora Chiosea, Getty Images

View original post here:

Beyond Covid-19: 5 opportunities for startups to reshape the future healthcare landscape - MedCity News

Has the C-Suite Gotten Too Big? – Managed Healthcare Executive

The alphabet soup of healthcare C-suite titles seems to be in constant flux, with new titles popping up as part of the leadership. Some of the titles chief people officer, chief wellness officer may induce eye rolls because of the touchy-feely factor. But in many cases, they reflect new priorities and cultural shifts. The CEO and healthcare systems boards of directors are adding to the C-suite or renaming old positions as a response to competition and the need for greater accountability.

Determining the size of the C-suite and the titles within it is a case-by-case proposition.

The C-suite should only be as big as it needs to be to be responsive to the needs of that business, says Joseph Fournier, J.D., M.H.A., president of InveniasPartners, a healthcare executive search and strategy company in Chicago. The core leadership almost always includes the CEO, chief financial officer (CFO), chief operating officer (COO) and, for healthcare systems, chief nursing and physician executives, he says.

Then we need to start filling in around that, Fournier says.

Trending titles

Trendy titles may be relevant even if they sound less traditional. They often represent new challenges or a focus affecting the culture and bottom line.

CDOWith the growth in electronic health records and other digital initiatives, the chief digital officer(CDO) role is gaining prominence, according to Fournier. The chief information security role is also picking up steam because of cyberattacks and the risks posed by health and financial information data breaches. The CDO might also oversee the chief analytics officer (CAO), who is responsible for sifting through the terabytes of healthcare data that many healthcare organizations have at their disposal because of EHRs and that old mainstay, claims databases. Theres a need for usable data that tells real stories about patients and can connect to health information, Fournier says.

The CAOs position also is climbing up the organizational charts of payers, notes Thomas Quinn, senior partner and managed care practice leader at WittKieffer, an executive search firm in Boston. Harnessing data to make quick decisions is critical when a member is at high risk of hospital admission or is a high utilizer. Identifying and sharing that information with the care management team can affect the patients health and care, as well as associated costs and revenue. Were seeing that role being elevated, put under the CFO or sometimes the COO, Quinn says.

CWOIn 2017, Californias Stanford Medicine became the first academic center to add a chief wellness officer (CWO). Since then, at least a dozen more centers have added a CWO, sometimes called chief well-being officer. The focus has been on helping physicians and other caregivers with burnout and making sure they have appropriate services to deliver safe and effective care, according to Fournier. But the position and the person in it have a broader role, he says.

A chief well-being officer can really understand the goals of the business and the needs of the patients and (can) integrate well-being into the culture and DNA of the organization, Fournier says. The position may not succeed in all healthcare organizations leaders who stick to traditional thinking may not be receptive to a role that can be thought of as coddling, he notes.

CGOAmong payers, the chief growth officer (CGO) is catching on, says Quinn. He differentiates the role of CGOs from traditional sales because CGOs are supposed to think and act more strategically. Its the CGOs job to scout out potential partners and alliances to grow membership and suss out new market segments. The role uses a different skill set than a traditional sales guy who works the brokers, says Quinn. Whereas the marketing staff may have undergraduate degrees, a CGO probably has a masters degree or at least that skill set.

CGPAnother hot title is chief of government programs (CGP)or government markets, says Quinn. Margins have been better in Medicare and Medicaid dual programs in the past four to five years, he says, and the role, which spearheads federal solutions, reflects that.

Size matters

Adding C-suite titles can help solve real problems as well as give an organization additional cachet. But the titles also can be a luxury. Smaller and midsize hospitals are not typically adding the management titles seen elsewhere, with the exception being some academic institutions that are more willing to invest at the C-suite level, says Brandt Jewell, senior vice president at Coker Group, a national healthcare advisory firm in Alpharetta, Georgia. Smaller and midsize hospitals dont have that bandwidth, Jewell says.

Physician leadership positions lag in systems with fewer than hundred providers, observes Jewell. Partly its because the systems may not have enough doctors to invest in the chief medical officer role. But Jewell says hes observed that doctors tend to be less interested in working with the profit-and-loss statements and more interested in value-based care. Thats an area where physicians can be more easily recruited for leadership development.

Which titles are needed?

Boards and organizational leaders use titles to delegate accountability for things they consider important. When I see C-suite invest in a new C role around something like value-based care, its saying, This is important to us, and we need someone with the highest level of expertise to focus on it, says Jewell.

Fournier says organizational leaders often the governance committee of the board and the executive committee need to hash out what they are trying to accomplish. In a highly competitive environment, executives should look at the factors that make their organization stand out. If a certain factor or experience is critical to success, the organization can signal that strength with a position and a title and with putting a strong leader in that role, says Fournier. This doesnt mean the position needs to be at the C-suite level, but the person needs to have the operational abilities and budget to succeed. The executive team needs to think about how to attach people and strategy and look at the critical bodies of work to see where that role needs to sit, Fournier says.

Payers and providers used to live in their own bubbles, but healthcare systems are expanding how they do business, including entering into joint ventures. A person running a joint venture may have the title of president without having many executives reporting to them, says Jewell.

Changing with the times

The CEO, the CFO, the COO, the CIO those are C-suite constants that arent going away. But Fournier says C-suite organization and titles should be viewed as dynamic, notstatic. Roles may emerge and then fade away. Or they may decide after a while that its not a role that matters, because the C-suite roles become synthesizers of information. Theyre really there to tie together workstreams for leaders, Fournier says. A chief experience officer might, for example, oversee the work of those responsible for both the employee experience and patient experience. The chief legal officer may oversee the risk portfolio, including the chief compliance officer and general counsel.

Mergers are another time to reconsider the structure of the C-suite. In general, consolidations have taken away more executive jobs than theyve created, notes Quinn. Many of these deals are set up to allow the local hospitals to continue running themselves, at least for a few years, says Jewell. Every local hospital has their own C-suite to go along with the regional and national C-suites. A lot of systems are hesitant to blow that up locally, he says.

Often the layoffs occur at the operational level, affecting employees in human resources, revenue cycle management and technology as those functions get pulled into a centralized operation in the name of efficiency and standardization. With many acquisitions, the C-suite stays put for two to four years, and then changes may be made.

C-suite roles will continue to change with healthcare trends. Roles may disappear when a particular person leaves; the executive committee and board may use the departure as an opportunity to tweak a role and title or abandon it because more pressing issues have arisen.

It would not be surprising to see positions added related to emergency preparedness, diversity and inequity if not to the C-suite, at least to the level in the organizational chart that reports to the C-suite. As different needs emerge in the organization and at different times, some roles become more prominent or get more attention than others, Fournier says.

Deborah Abrams Kaplan covers medical and practice management topics.

See the original post here:

Has the C-Suite Gotten Too Big? - Managed Healthcare Executive