Care Redesign
Clip
Patient-Provider Conflict: The Perfect Environment (03:54)

Those in the provider community might say, we tried to change the game in the ’80s and ’90s, and it didn’t work. So when it comes to balancing payment reform with putting the patient first, why do we play the same game if we get the same results?

There are fundamental differences between then and now, says Patrick Conway. The majority of the transformation that we see now is provider/physician/clinician driven — and the majority is voluntary. But he thinks we have some work to do with patients, adding that he doesn’t think we’ve done a great job of explaining what this actually means for real people.

“But I think our approach is quite different in terms of really having it be driven by the delivery system,” Conway adds. “And this one we’re going to need to continue to monitor, because if we go too far in the other direction, it doesn’t feel driven by the people in the delivery system, including the patients and providers, and it could have a real negative pushback.”

François de Brantes explains that one area where we failed the last time around is that by reforming payment, we failed to reform benefit design at the same time. “We created a perfect environment for conflict between the patient and the provider,” he says. For example, in the old days of “HMO $5 all-you-can-eat buffets,” patients will choose extra medical care, such as lab tests, because it’s no difference to them. But the provider, appropriately, doesn’t want to give that test because it might be unnecessary, says de Brantes.

“So you have a conflict. And this time around, that’s really a big difference because at least in the commercial sector, the volume of co-pays, the cost-sharing that commercially insured client members have to dish out, really does [create], from many perspectives, a better convergence between the patients’ interests and the providers’ interest,” de Brantes says.

But we also see zone detention. “For example, you can emphasize preventative care — that’s fine, because it’s covered in full. Secondary prevention is a big problem, because of course if the providers are held accountable for excessive ED visits or hospitalization of a patient because it’s a complication, then they’re going to want their patients to be more compliant, they’re going to want the lab tests, and the patients have to pay for all of that out of pocket.”

He adds that this is a growing concern in the commercial sector, because if we don’t figure that piece out, then the conflict remains between the provider, who is deliberately trying to deliver better care to the patient, and patients feeling as though they’re getting “sucked in” to doing a test that they don’t need.

To that end, de Brantes agrees with Conway that we have to do a far, far better job at trying to explain to people what all of this means.

 

From the NEJM Catalyst event Care Redesign: Creating the Future of Care Delivery at Kaiser Permanente Center for Total Health, September 30, 2015.

More From Care Redesign
Epic OB Hemorrhage PPH Risk Assessment Tool and Alerts at PSJH - Preventing Maternal Death

Improving Maternal Safety Through an EMR Risk Assessment

After a mother died of postpartum hemorrhage, Providence St. Joseph Health made organization-wide changes to prevent future maternal deaths and injuries.

Most Health Care Organizations Have Palliative or End-of-Life Care Programs

Survey Snapshot: Challenging the Resistance to “Palliative”

NEJM Catalyst Insights Council members agree that palliative care is gaining traction, but one of many barriers is getting providers over their resistance to the word “palliative.”

The Assessment of Care Tool - Consisting of Six Visual Analog Scales Corresponding with the IOM Six Dimensions of Perfect Care

Real-Time Pursuit of Outcomes That Matter to Patients

A simple and affordable tool to use at the point of care to drive value creation within clinical microsystems.

Many Patients Who Would Benefit from Palliative - End-of-Life Care Do Not Receive It

Care Redesign Survey: The Power of Palliative Care

Our NEJM Catalyst Insights Council survey on palliative care reveals an interesting dichotomy: While the great majority of organizations have a palliative or end-of-life care program, 60% of patients who would benefit from such services don’t receive them.

Heart Safe Motherhood and Way to Health Two-Way Texting for Blood Pressure Monitoring for Postpartum Women with Preeclampsia

Heart Safe Motherhood: Applying Innovation Methodology for Improved Maternal Outcomes

At the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, a text message–based blood pressure surveillance program for postpartum women with preeclampsia improved blood pressure management, reduced readmissions, and increased patient and provider satisfaction.

VHA Whole Health System diagram

Finding the Cause of the Crises: Opioids, Pain, Suicide, Obesity, and Other “Epidemics”

Until we redesign our health care system to address our patients’ personal determinants of health, we will continue to inadequately address our multiple chronic disease crises.

Leff06_pullquote home-based medical care for homebound patients

Using Quality to Shine a Light on Homebound Care

How two thought leaders in the fields of home-based medical care, geriatrics, and palliative medicine advanced a quality-of-care agenda for homebound adults.

Charlotte Yeh head shot - hearing aids hearing loss

“You’re Old Without Hearing Aids”— Addressing the Silent Epidemic of Hearing Loss

Hearing loss isn’t a normal consequence of aging. But it is associated with a higher risk of dementia, depression, and falls. The Chief Medical Officer for AARP Services talks about combating this huge but silent epidemic that impacts all ages.

Dentzer01_pullquote - Stone-Age Policies Stifle Modern Virtual Care Solutions

Stone-Age Policies Stifle Modern Solutions

Health care leaders must advocate for regulatory and reimbursement changes to unlock the potential of innovative technology and care team approaches to Parkinson’s and other suitable conditions.

Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis IPF Multidisciplinary Collaborative Care Model

From Consulting to Caring: Care Redesign in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

A multidisciplinary collaborative model to address the palliative care needs of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis resulted in improved end-of-life care and decreased hospital deaths.

Connect

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

Learn More »

Topics

How a State Advances Whole-Person Health…

Pennsylvania addresses social determinants of health by bringing together managed care and social services organizations…

Quality Management

177 Articles

Improving Maternal Safety Through an EMR…

After a mother died of postpartum hemorrhage, Providence St. Joseph Health made organization-wide changes to…

Design Thinking

18 Articles

Heart Safe Motherhood: Applying Innovation Methodology…

At the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, a text message–based blood pressure surveillance program…

Insights Council

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

Apply Now