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

Connect

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

Learn More »

More From New Marketplace
Robert Gavin head shot

Amazon and CVS: Short-Lived Unicorns in Health Care, or Healers of the “Tapeworm”?

Will Amazon–Berkshire Hathaway–JP Morgan and CVS-Aetna change the health care game? To one health care employer purchaser, these announcements feel a lot like Groundhog Day.

Fiona Scott Morton head shot

We Can’t Spend All Our Money on Health Care

We have to think about how much we want to spend on health according to how much it’s worth to us at the margin.

Simplified Chain of Production for Primary Care Services Generating Retail Prescriptions. Solid arrows indicate contractual relationships or ownership, and the dashed arrow indicates referral for prescription.

Does CVS–Aetna Spell the End of Business as Usual?

What might one of the largest mergers in history mean for the health care delivery system?

Lack of Incentive Is Top Barrier to Implementing Value-Based Payment

Survey Snapshot: Payer-Provider Alignment Is Difficult Even for Integrated Organizations

NEJM Catalyst Insights Council members say stronger incentives and better use of analytics could improve alignment.

Kaplan04_pullquote Time to Sink Two Canoe Payment Models Argument

Time to Sink the Two-Canoe Argument

Although the transition from fee-for-service to quality-based payment can leave physicians feeling trapped “with a foot in two canoes” while straddling the two payment methods, there are compelling ethical, professional, and business reasons against rationalizing continued support of fee-for-service medicine.

Mostashari01_pullquote - Medicare Advantage Holds the Key to Reforming the ACO Program

Medicare Advantage Holds the Key to Reforming the ACO Program

Value-based care continues to be the emphasis of federal policymakers, as well as many providers. Aligning Medicare Advantage with ACOs would boost both programs.

Physician Group Practices BPCI Classic Success and Looking Ahead to BPCI Advanced Bundled Payments

Physician Group Practices: Succeeding in Bundled Payments

Physician groups are demonstrating their ability to deliver care in new and innovative ways as part of the nationwide effort to transform health care delivery through value-based payment models. The physician experience and perspective is invaluable and should remain an important component of any shift to value-based care.

How Aligned Are Payers and Providers in Working Together to Achieve Value-Based Care

New Marketplace Survey: Payers and Providers Remain Far Apart

Health care stakeholders are not aligned in important goals and in large part are not working together to achieve value-based care, according to the NEJM Catalyst Insights Council. They are waiting on government regulators to change the payment model — including, possibly, single-payer health care.

Comparison of Select Characteristics of the Sample and Shared Savings Program - MMSP ACO - Physician-Led ACOs

Do Independent Physician-Led ACOs Have a Future?

While some of these smaller organizations are succeeding, they do face numerous challenges, and there is a need for both regulatory change as well as greater sharing of peer-based resources and best practices.

Disruption of Innovative Mergers in Health Care Industry - BDO graphic

Innovative Mergers Will Disrupt Health Care

The NEJM Catalyst Insights Council expects outside players to have a major impact on the industry over the next three years.

Connect

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

Learn More »

Topics

We Can’t Spend All Our Money…

We have to think about how much we want to spend on health according to…

Primary Care ACO Models: Way of…

Evidence shows that primary care–led, risk-bearing, ACO-like practices and independent physician group models generate more…

Amazon and CVS: Short-Lived Unicorns in…

Will Amazon–Berkshire Hathaway–JP Morgan and CVS-Aetna change the health care game? To one health care…

Insights Council

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

Apply Now