Healthcare delivery firms are increasingly owned by private equity, venture capital, and public ... [+] markets. Ethical operations of these firms will require new guardrails.
In the last decade, there has been a remarkable shift in ownership of healthcare delivery.Previously independent, physician-owned medical practices have been acquired by private equity firms and publicly traded corporations.The rationale for these acquisitions istypically two-fold.First, the acquiring entity can streamline cost structures and implement management practices to lower the overall cost of delivering care.Second, these firms can use their consolidated position in the marketplace to extract more favorable rates from third-party payers. In addition to private equity and publicly traded companies, venture capital firms have invested heavily in healthcare hoping to reap rewards from new models of care delivery.
Contrary to others observers of these trends, I believe thischange in ownership of healthcare is not intrinsically good or bad.There are countless examples of not-for-profit healthcare organizations behaving in predatory ways, just as there are examples of for-profit healthcare organizations operating altruistically.In addition, private capital does create opportunities to transform care delivery at scalein meaningful ways that otherwise might not otherwise receive investment.
This change in ownership does, however, create a new operating reality where the previous central tenet of healthcare deliverydoing what is best for the patientnow has a competing imperative: doing what is best for shareholders and investors.The code of professionalism taught in medical schools butts up against the fiduciary responsibility taught in business schools.I believe that publicly traded healthcare firms and their private equity counterparts must must proactively build ethical frameworks that ensure that these two imperatives conflict do not conflict.
In the past several months, I have observed several cases where these competing priorities were handled poorly.A hiring freeze was implemented in a clinical care company because of potential earnings shortfalls by its publicly-traded parentdespite clear patient need for clinical services.In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, a private equity owned home-based assessments company continued to perform non-clinical coding visits to capture more Medicare Advantage revenue.Entering a new funding cycle, a venture-backed healthcare company pushed its physicians for schedule follow-up visits earlier than needed to improve revenue and enhance the companys valuation.In each of these cases, a business imperative trumped a clinical onein each case introducing potential harm to patients for the benefit of shareholders and investors.
I believe that shareholders and investors have a longer-term interest in preserving the clinical ethics of the healthcare organizations in which they invest.There is growing momentum to limit the influence of private capital in healthcare.In California, for example, lawmakers introduced legislation requiring the State to approve any transaction in which a healthcare provider organization is being acquired by private equity.To be sure, this is a reaction to to the belief that private enterprise can not be trusted to do what is in the public interestin the way the medical profession historically has been trusted. The need for investor-backed healthcare to adopt a clear and defensible ethical framework has never been greater.I believe this framework has four parts: 1) board obligations and composition; 2) organizational structure; 3) clinical decision-making governance; and 4) compensation design.
Boards of private equity and public traded firms owning healthcare delivery assets must commit to a dual obligation to investors and shareholders and patients; and commit to the idea that when these interests are in conflict, the obligation to patients trumps others interests.Many decisions are made in organizations without adequate consideration of clinical impact because boards are not expected or empowered to consider these impacts.The monocular focus on creating shareholder value or long-term returns frees them from considering deleterious clinical impact.Enlightened boards and board members will often implicitly consider patient impactbut this is by no means an industry standard.Companies operating in healthcare must visibly and meaningfully acknowledge at the highest level that when human interests and financial interests collide, human interests will supersede financial interest in decision-making.This is a controversial notion to some who believe corporations need a single organizing objective.However, the only way investor-back healthcare will sustainably earn and maintain the public trust is to embrace this dual obligation and hierarchy.
To enable this dual obligation, companies should adopt an organizational structure in which the the chief clinical executive (often the chief medical officer) has dual reporting to the chief executive and the board.I have observed a deleterious trend where chief clinical executives are not reporting directly to the chief executives, sometimes reporting to chief operating officers or chief financial officers.I believe the enhanced primacy of clinical decision-making in these organizations demands a seat at two tablesthe organizational executive committee, leveling the chief medical officer equivalent to other corporate officers, but also a direct line to the board of directors.This structure is similar to the dual reporting many publicly traded companies adopt with other high priority areas such as compliance.The board must have direct visibility into clinical care operations in order to take responsibility for its ethical administration.This structure is not to absolve chief executive officers of their responsibilitybut to create a necessary counterbalance to the profit motive.
To further enhance the clinical sophistication of boards, organizations should consider a dedicated board position of an independent clinical director, a full-time practicing clinician or patient whose job it is to enhance the clinical perspective and decision-making of the boardand constantly ask the question how will the affect the patient. Too often, the physician voices (if any) on boards are physicians whose days in full-time clinical practice are far in the past and whose perspectives are more dominated by business considerations than clinical ones.Boards must be vigilant and thoughtful about installing a thoughtful clinical conscience in the form of a practicing physician or patient.
Clinical organizations must further adopt a governance norm that any decision that is clearly clinical in nature will ultimately be made by clinicians.To be sure, operations and finance leaders can and should provide input into clinical decisions.However, I havetoo often observed non-clinicians providing input into clinical decisions without adequate consideration of the consequences.The staffing example provided earlier is emblematic.Clinical decisions should ultimately be made by people expert in clinical care who are ultimately most capable of balancing trade-offs between business and clinical imperatives..
Finally, there must be vigilance around the design of incentives to ensure that clinical incentives payments of any kind are not tied to any potential source of harm to patientsoveruse, under-use, or misuse of clinical servicesor any imperative to enhance billing documentation (I.e. HCC coding).This may be the trickiest to implement, as companies typically use a combination of incentive payments and stock to reward performanceeach of which may be tied indirectly to decisions made by clinicians on a daily basis.Where possible,incentives must be tied most closely to clinical outcomes.
The incursion of private equity and publicly traded firms into healthcare delivery has grown increasingly controversialespecially as these firms grow in number and an increasing share of US healthcare is being delivered by entities whose stated primary obligation is to investors, not patients and communities.Private equity and public markets are not incompatible with ethical medical practice, but they do require enhanced ethical safeguards; the same might be said for large integrated delivery systems whose behaviors and business practices increasingly resemble for-profit companies more than community-based non-profits..The time is now for all types of organizations to proactively adopt frameworks to ensure that in the rush to create value our care and concern for the patient is not lostand that the ethical mores underlying the practice of medicine are not permanently compromised.
Visit link:
Practicing Medicine In The Era Of Private Equity, Venture Capital And Public Markets - Forbes
- Yes, But. The Annotated Atlantic. - November 7th, 2009 [November 7th, 2009]
- Health Insurance Benefit Costs by Region - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- For an Operator, Please Press... - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Pollyanna With a Pen: Maine Governor Signs 18 New Health Care Bills into Law - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- AMA Sounds the Alarm, Medicare Making Yet Another Attempt to Cut Reimbursement - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Mass Governor Asks Blue Cross to Keep Higher Employer Contribution - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Lifespan and Care New England Plan Monopoly (Again) - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Dirigo Health: Con Artists, Liars, and Thieves? - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- New Orleans: Health Challenges - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- August a Flurry of Activity - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Maine's Dirigo Health Savings One-Third of Original Estimate - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- “Methodolatry”: My new favorite term for one of the shortcomings of evidence-based medicine - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Suzanne Somers’ Knockout: Dangerous misinformation about cancer (part 1) - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- A science-based blog about GMO - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- A Not-So-Split Decision - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Military Medicine in Iraq - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- The effective wordsmithing of Amy Wallace - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- A Science Lesson from a Homeopath and Behavioral Optometrist - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Join CFI in opposing funding mandates for quackery in health care reform - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Mainstreaming Science-Based Medicine: A Novel Approach - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Those who live in glass houses… - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- J.B. Handley of the anti-vaccine group Generation Rescue: Misogynistic attacks on journalists who champion science - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- When homeopaths attack medicine and physics - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- The cancer screening kerfuffle erupts again: “Rethinking” screening for breast and prostate cancer - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- All Medicines Are Poison! - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- When Loud Wins: Will Your Tax Dollars Pay For Prayer? - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- It’s All in Your Head - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- The Skeptical O.B. joins the Science-Based Medicine crew - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- The Tragic Death Toll of Homebirth - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- What’s the right C-section rate? Higher than you think. - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Recombinant Human Antithrombin – Milking Nanny Goats for Big Bucks - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Does C-section increase the rate of neonatal death? - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Man in Coma 23 Years – Is He Really Conscious? - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Why Universal Hepatitis B Vaccination Isn’t Quite Universal - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Ontario naturopathic prescribing proposal is bad medicine - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Naturopaths and the anti-vaccine movement: Hijacking the law in service of pseudoscience - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- The Institute for Science in Medicine enters the health care reform fray - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Neti pots – Ancient Ayurvedic Treatment Validated by Scientific Evidence - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Early Intervention for Autism - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- A temporary reprieve from legislative madness - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- A critique of the leading study of American homebirth - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Lose those holiday pounds - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Endocrine disruptors—the one true cause? - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Acupuncture for Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Evidence in Medicine: Experimental Studies - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Midwives and the assault on scientific evidence - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- The Mammogram Post-Mortem - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- An Influenza Recap: The End of the Second Wave - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- The End of Chiropractic - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Cell phones and cancer again, or: Oh, no! My cell phone’s going to give me cancer! (revisited) - December 20th, 2009 [December 20th, 2009]
- Another wrinkle to the USPSTF mammogram guidelines kerfuffle: What about African-American women? - December 20th, 2009 [December 20th, 2009]
- Acupuncture, the P-Value Fallacy, and Honesty - December 20th, 2009 [December 20th, 2009]
- The One True Cause of All Disease - December 20th, 2009 [December 20th, 2009]
- Communicating with the Locked-In - December 20th, 2009 [December 20th, 2009]
- Are the benefits of breastfeeding oversold? - December 20th, 2009 [December 20th, 2009]
- Measles - December 20th, 2009 [December 20th, 2009]
- Radiation from medical imaging and cancer risk - December 21st, 2009 [December 21st, 2009]
- Multiple Sclerosis and Irrational Exuberance - December 21st, 2009 [December 21st, 2009]
- Medical Fun with Christmas Carols - December 22nd, 2009 [December 22nd, 2009]
- Lithium for ALS – Angioplasty for MS - December 23rd, 2009 [December 23rd, 2009]
- “Toxins”: the new evil humours - December 24th, 2009 [December 24th, 2009]
- 2009’s Top 5 Threats To Science In Medicine - December 24th, 2009 [December 24th, 2009]
- Buteyko Breathing Technique – Nothing to Hyperventilate About - December 26th, 2009 [December 26th, 2009]
- The Graston Technique – Inducing Microtrauma with Instruments - December 29th, 2009 [December 29th, 2009]
- The “pharma shill” gambit - December 29th, 2009 [December 29th, 2009]
- Ginkgo biloba – No Effect - December 30th, 2009 [December 30th, 2009]
- Oppose “Big Floss”; practice alternative dentistry - January 1st, 2010 [January 1st, 2010]
- Causation and Hill’s Criteria - January 3rd, 2010 [January 3rd, 2010]
- The life cycle of translational research - January 10th, 2010 [January 10th, 2010]
- The anti-vaccine movement strikes back against Dr. Paul Offit - January 10th, 2010 [January 10th, 2010]
- Osteoporosis Drugs: Good Medicine or Big Pharma Scam? - January 10th, 2010 [January 10th, 2010]
- Acupuncture for Hot Flashes - January 10th, 2010 [January 10th, 2010]
- The case for neonatal circumcision - January 10th, 2010 [January 10th, 2010]
- A victory for science-based medicine - January 10th, 2010 [January 10th, 2010]
- James Ray and testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) - January 10th, 2010 [January 10th, 2010]
- The Water Cure: Another Example of Self Deception and the “Lone Genius” - January 12th, 2010 [January 12th, 2010]
- Be careful what you wish for, Dr. Dossey, you just might get it - January 13th, 2010 [January 13th, 2010]
- You. You. Who are you calling a You You? - January 15th, 2010 [January 15th, 2010]
- The War on Salt - January 16th, 2010 [January 16th, 2010]
- Is breech vaginal delivery safe? - January 16th, 2010 [January 16th, 2010]