New Marketplace

The Road to the New Health Care Marketplace

Article · November 25, 2015

Health care is in turmoil. But it’s not chaos — it’s change. Irresistible market forces, disruptive as they may be, could mean change for the better — a better health care marketplace.

Most people accept the need for a higher-value health care system with a price tag our society can afford. But many health care stakeholders are straddling two worlds, unsure when (or even whether) to exit the old and enter the new.

We believe that the stakeholders who cross the threshold quickly will find business success and professional pride on the other side. That bold move involves four key steps.

  1. Make value for patients the overarching goal. The new marketplace must focus on meeting patients’ needs, and it must be affordable. Putting patients at the center doesn’t mean they alone determine what care they should get — it means that providers organize themselves to optimize patients’ care plans, reduce suffering, and earn patients’ trust with compassionate, coordinated care. That’s what it will take to play the game; to succeed at it will mean excelling at meeting the needs of particular patient segments efficiently.
  2. Welcome competition. Competition drives innovation, improvement, and efficiency. It creates fear of losing, which is often what motivates individuals and organizations to contemplate change. Like any incentive, though, competition can be a blunt instrument that produces unintended effects. But we think that the alternatives to competition, such as shifting costs to patients or regulatory actions, are less desirable. Cost-shifting can make patients forgo care that might help prevent illness and disability, and it often breeds resentment. Regulation creates a floor below which performance should not go, but competition is likely to improve performance above that floor.
  3. Create social capital. Providers should respond to competition by developing relationships that increase the value of their care. Many providers are wondering whether they should merge or form other kinds of partnerships. Payers are asking the same questions. What matters in the end is not how organizations are structured, but the results they achieve through their collaborations. In short, do they increase the value of care? The London Stroke Initiative, which has concentrated acute-stroke care at just eight of London’s 34 hospitals, is a clear example of how social capital can lead to productive collaboration. The result: a 25% reduction in mortality and 6% lower costs.
  4. Encourage insurance choice. Every consumer should be able to pick his or her own insurance product. Insurance options used to be limited to something like vanilla versus French vanilla. Employers offered products that pretty much let patients go anywhere, thereby giving providers tremendous negotiating power if they just managed to get patients in the door. On today’s public and private exchanges, by contrast, many people with limited or no subsidies are selecting products with narrow networks for a powerful reason — they can afford those products. If more people choose insurance according to what they value and can afford, providers will be under great pressure to lower their costs and improve their services so that those services are included in the products that people are buying. They will compete to attract and retain patients by actually meeting their needs.

Value. Competition. Social capital. Insurance choice. These are the likely pillars of the new health care marketplace — one where people get care they want and can afford.

New call for submissions ­to NEJM Catalyst

Now inviting longform articles

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

More From New Marketplace
Three-Part Pricing of PCSK9 Inhibitors

A New Model for Pricing Drugs of Uncertain Efficacy

Are we paying too much for new drugs before we know how well they work? This innovative pricing model proposes postponing major rewards until efficacy is established — which could help both patients and payers while still paying back investments on the most effective drugs.

what does quality measurement in health care mean

Buzz Survey Report: Addressing the Problems of Quality Measurement

An independent NEJM Catalyst report sponsored by University of Utah Health on patient involvement in quality measurement.

Average HOOS and Average KOOS for patients undergoing hip and knee replacement at CJRI

Building a “Hospital-within-Hospital” Model for Joint Replacements

The Connecticut Joint Replacement Institute has demonstrated that formerly competing independent providers can unite on a common vision to yield drastic improvements in quality, safety, and costs.

Discharge Rates and Follow-Up Internval Dashboard for One Provider at MGH Dermatology

A Successful Pilot to Improve Access by Adjusting Discharge and Follow-Up Rates

Actionable data and modest financial incentives can help motivate clinicians to adjust their behavior around scheduling follow-up appointments.

Cautious Optimism That Value-Based Reimbursement Will Become Primary Revenue Model

Survey Snapshot: What Would Accelerate the Adoption of Value-Based Care?

NEJM Catalyst Insights Council members weigh in on the barriers and path forward to value-based health care.

Strongwater08_pullquote primary care value proposition and disruptive innovation

The Evolution of Primary Care: Embracing Innovation While Protecting the Core Value

Primary care must leverage disruptive innovations to ensure that patients receive first-access, comprehensive, coordinated, continuous care that is woven into a seamlessly integrated system.

Berns01_pullquote nephrologists dialysis facility joint venture conflicts of interest

Dialysis-Facility Joint-Venture Ownership — Hidden Conflicts of Interest

Despite potential benefits, joint ventures between nephrologists and dialysis companies raise legal and ethical concerns because of participants’ conflicts of interest and lack of transparency.

Fee-for-Service Continues to Account for the Majority of Revenue

New Marketplace Survey: Transitioning Payment Models: Fee-for-Service to Value-Based Care

In a survey of the NEJM Catalyst Insights Council sponsored by Optum, respondents express enthusiasm for value-based care but have conflicting opinions about just how far along that path they should go.

Sample Report Comparing Individual Patient-Reported Outcome Measures with FORCE-TJR National Norms

The Essential Role of Patient-Centered Registries in an Era of Electronic Health Records

Smartly designed patient-centered registries capture longitudinal data to augment EHRs and enhance quality improvement, policy, and research efforts.

Murray02_pullquote surgical care bundled payments accountable care organizations

Surgical Value — Beyond Bundled Payments

The surgeon has a crucial role in defining value for patients in a population — and not just when that patient is in need of the surgeon’s knife.

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

Topics

Value Based Care

194 Articles

A New Model for Pricing Drugs…

Are we paying too much for new drugs before we know how well they work?…

A Venn Diagram for Health Care…

A simple road map for health care organizations to follow when working through integration, which…

A Venn Diagram for Health Care…

A simple road map for health care organizations to follow when working through integration, which…

Insights Council

Have a voice. Join other health care leaders effecting change, shaping tomorrow.

Apply Now