New Marketplace
Talk
Getting Out of the Health Care Graveyard (09:37)

Have you visited the health care graveyard? It’s where good intentions and innovations go to die, according to Bob Galvin, Chief Executive Officer for Equity Healthcare. He points out tombstones such as health maintenance organizations and comparative effectiveness.

“We know that good ideas in health care don’t always work,” says Galvin. “A lot is happening in payment reform, and the basic mantra is, how do we move from paying for volume — fee-for-service —  to value, and how do we make that idea happen and keep it out of that graveyard?”

Health care loves great new ideas but isn’t known for executing them. “We don’t as much like to do the painful operational work of going ready, aim, fire,” says Galvin. “Where we are today so far is doing a lot of work, but I think we’re missing the bullseye.” Early evidence about savings from payment reform is weak, and clinician satisfaction is low.

Galvin asks payers to fix two fundamental flaws, the first of which is lack of simplicity. He describes the elevator pitch in its early days, and how in 1990 he worked with Jack Welch, who would ask employees to explain their big idea for the next year and how they were going to accomplish it — while traveling with him in an elevator, in a building only three floors high. “We got very good at speaking concisely,” says Galvin. He quotes Albert Einstein: “If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough,” adding, “if you don’t understand it, you can’t really accomplish it.”

“Imagine a clinician getting on an elevator with a payer. I’ll give you 30 floors. And the clinician says to the payer, ‘What’s all this payment reform stuff? Tell me what’s going on.’” Galvin asks how many acronyms the clinician would glaze over — ACOs, PCMHs, MIPS, MACRA, APMs, PQRS, etc. “I don’t believe there’s face validity to thinking that you’re going to have successful payment reform if the clinician who is at the bedside with the patient [doesn’t think] all this payment reform stuff is understandable, is going to create more time for him or her with the patient, and is going to help their professionalism.”

So what can payers do? They can commit to simplicity, and stop the arms race toward arrangements they’ve made and practices they’ve penetrated.  Galvin suggests the Six Sigma outside-in approach to customers or stakeholders: before payers go to a practice or system and talk about their payment reform scheme, they should ask what the organization is already doing, what reforms they’ve already implemented, and then retrofit the payer’s scheme if it will fit — or simply not institute it if it won’t.

“That is what we can hope for,” says Galvin. He was involved in the quality measurement movement for a couple of decades and says they “made a mess out of it,” wanting to start with a small number of measures and ending up with thousands. He doesn’t want payment reform to make the same mistake.

The second flaw Galvin wants payers to fix is more important: how we value physician or clinician services. “Any system that is going to pay twice as much for a clinician to take off two moles than it does for another clinician to take care of a really sick patient is kidding itself if it thinks it’s going to get to a value-based system,” says Galvin. Payers frequently tell him that’s fee-for-service, and not to worry because they’re moving away from fee-for-service — that “fee-for-service is dead.”

“I would say on behalf of fee-for-service that the reports of its death have been greatly exaggerated for two reasons,” says Galvin:

  • The majority of payment reforms over the next 5 years will be fee-for-service based, and 5 years in health care equals is $15 or $20 trillion, according to Galvin.
  • “The fee see schedule that I talked about with those valuations is still at the basis of the advanced payment reforms.” A group might get capitated, or get a bundled payment, but when it trickles down to individual clinicians it still uses those valuations.

“A system that uses that as its valuations is in trouble,” says Galvin. So what can we do? Without going into the sausage-making of payment, Galvin explains briefly that the American Medical Association sponsors a committee called the RUC [Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee], which surveys doctors, reports its findings to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS), and CMS takes its recommendations. Despite the fact that 23 minutes is still given for the removal of a mole when it only now takes 3 minutes, despite MedPAC recommending something more quantitative, and despite the Affordable Care Act including quantitative language, we haven’t done anything to change it, says Galvin.

“Payers, please lead the effort, and we [the employers] will join you in trying to put resources into trying to rebalance these valuations,” says Galvin.

Strategic planning at Galvin’s company comes in the form of “writing the history of the future,” where senior staff write two histories: one where everything goes well over the next 10 years, and the decisions that were made to achieve that success, and one where everything goes terribly, and what decisions led to that failure. “Why I do that is for two reasons,” says Galvin. “The decisions we make today matter, and we have free will — we don’t have to make the wrong decisions.”

“So my elevator speech to payers is: commit to simplicity, adopt outside-in, and please help us rebalance the RUC.”

From the NEJM Catalyst event Navigating Payment Reform for Providers, Payers, and Pharma, held at Harvard Business School, November 2, 2017.

More From New Marketplace
Conceptual Framework for Evaluating Specialty Care Partnerships

How to Engage Specialists in Accountable Care Organizations

Should an ACO insource or outsource specialty care? Here’s a framework to help leadership decide.

Illustrative Examples of Health Policies, Possible Goals, and Relevant Evidence Base

Evidence-Based Health Policy

Having a clear framework for characterizing what is, and isn’t, evidence-based health policy is a prerequisite for a rational approach to making policy choices.

U.S. and Canadian Prices of Some Generic Drugs with U.S. Prices That Recently Increased by 1000% or More

The Price of Crossing the Border for Medications

The health and safety risks faced by the many Americans who cannot afford medications necessitate consideration of alternative strategies to provide less expensive medications.

Economic Investment and the Journey to Health Care Value — Part III: Health Care Purchasers

Early successes suggest that value-based purchasing programs can both transform employer-based health care and have a powerful and lasting impact on the economic strength of U.S. businesses.

Single-Payer Health Care Is the Favored Outcome of Future Payment Reform

Survey Snapshot: Deep Frustration with the Current Payment System

Many NEJM Catalyst Insights Council members are frustrated with the pace of value-based payments and expect single-payer health care to gain traction — though maybe not soon enough.

Value-Based Payment Models Payer-Provider Contracts Value-Based Arrangements

Economic Investment and the Journey to Health Care Value — Part II: Health Care Payers

Payers’ broad scale of investment in value-based arrangements makes a compelling case for the importance of sustained efforts to identify effective value-based payment models.

Four Principles for Navigating Payment Reform

The changes needed in health care are happening way too slowly. Health care stakeholders must insist on value in what they pay.

Economic Investment and the Journey to Health Care Value — Part I: Health Care Providers

Early evidence suggests that value-based payment and care delivery can transform our health care system, but providers must increase the momentum for this positive change.

Shift Toward Value-Based Payments in the Industry and at Organizations Is Accelerating

New Marketplace Survey: What’s Next for Payment Reform?

As health care reform struggles to gain traction legislatively, health care professionals report that payment reforms continue to move forward at a moderate pace, and indeed are essential to achieving the Triple Aim.

Patrick Conway and David Cutler head shots

The Highest Quality at a Lower Cost? We Don’t Have That Yet

David Cutler asks Patrick Conway what worked and what didn’t at CMS, advice he’d give to the Trump administration, and his predictions on Medicare and Medicaid.

Connect

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

Learn More »

Topics

Value Based Care

141 Articles

MedPAC’s Role in Curtailing Drug Prices

The former Executive Director of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission lays out three recommendations for…

Innovative Mergers Will Disrupt Health Care

The NEJM Catalyst Insights Council expects outside players to have a major impact on the…

Innovative Mergers Will Disrupt Health Care

The NEJM Catalyst Insights Council expects outside players to have a major impact on the…

Insights Council

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

Apply Now