March 27th, 2009 by Medgadget in Better Health Network
No Comments »
The US Army’s National Museum of Health and Medicine stores a gigantic digitized 
archive of prints and photos from the Civil War to Vietnam. The head archivist of the museum now started a project to make the collection available to the general public through Flickr. The initial set so far contains about 800 images, but thousands more should be coming soon.
More from Wired Science blog…
Link @ Flickr…
Images: Top: Base Hospital #33. Portsmouth, England. Patient with jaw bridgework. Dental laboratory. World War 1.
Side: Soldier and horse with gas mask. World War 1.
**This post was originally published at Medgadget.com**
March 26th, 2009 by Dr. Val Jones in Expert Interviews, Opinion
4 Comments »
When most people think of “cash-only” medical practices, plastic surgery and dermatology procedures are top of mind. But there is a small contingent of primary care physicians who offer low-cost “pay-as-you-go” services. Yearly physicals, well-child visits, screening tests, vaccinations, and chronic disease management are all part of comprehensive primary care options available. And this costs the average patient only $300 a year.
It is estimated that 75% of Americans require an average of 3.5 office visits per year to receive all the medical care they need. If the average office visit is 15-20 minutes in length, then that averages out to 1 hour of a physician’s time each year. How much should that cost? Dr. Alan Dappen (founder of Doctokr Family Medicine, a cash-only primary care practice in Vienna, Virginia) says, “$300.” But insurance premiums are often closer to $300 per month for these Americans, and that doesn’t include co-pays for provider visits.
So why aren’t people buying high deductible insurance plans, saving thousands on premiums per year, and flocking to cash-only primary care practices? Dr. Dappen says it’s a simple matter of mindset – “People have been conditioned to believe that if they pay their insurance premiums, then healthcare is ‘free.’ In reality, their employers are taking out $3600 or more per year from their paychecks for this ‘free’ care. But since employees don’t see that money, they don’t miss it as much.”
A high deductible health insurance plan (where insurance doesn’t kick in until you’ve paid at least $3000 out of pocket in a given year) costs about $110/month for the generally healthy 75% of Americans (you can check rates at eHealthInsurance.com). That’s a savings of at least $2280/year for those who switch from a regular deductible plan to a high deductible plan.
What are the odds that the average, reasonably healthy American will outspend $2280/year? I asked Alan Dappen how many of his 1500 patients spent more than $2000 on his services per year. The answer? Three.
“Most Americans who buy-in to low deductible plans pay a lot more in premiums than they’ll ever use. They’re essentially betting against the casino, and we all know who wins on those bets.”
So I asked Alan Dappen if “the casino” was making most of its money on the “healthy” 75% of its enrollees to subsidize the cost of the sick 25%.
“Sure they are. And I suppose if enough people saw the light and switched to high deductible plans with cash-only physicians, it might force change in the health insurance industry. Perhaps the government would use our taxes to help subsidize the sicker patients.
The bottom line is that at this very moment, 75% of Americans could be saving thousands of dollars per year on their healthcare costs – and have their very own cash-only primary care physician available to them 24-7 by phone, email, home visit, or office visit. The cash-only doc can afford to offer these conveniences because they are paid by the hour to do whatever the patient needs done, without forcing the relationship to conform to insurance billing codes. In fact, the physician saves a bundle on coding and billing fees – and can pass that on to the patients.”
I wondered about the outrageous costs of laboratory fees and radiology charges for people who don’t qualify for the insurance company negotiated rate. Dappen explained:
“My practice has negotiated similar rates with local labs and radiology groups. Screening tests and x-rays are very reasonable.”
I asked Dr. Dappen who uses his services.
“I see both ends of the spectrum. The high-powered executives who don’t have the time to wait in a doctor’s office and enjoy the convenience of handling things with me via phone or house call. For them, time is money, and by losing half a day or more traveling to a doctor’s office and waiting for their 15 minute slot, they might lose $5000 in billable work time. On the other end I see patients with no insurance or high deductible plans. They enjoy the same conveniences, and end up paying an average of $300/year for their healthcare. This is high quality care that they can afford.”
I guess the only thing preventing this model of healthcare from taking off is the courage of individuals to try something new. I myself have switched to a cash-only practice with a high deductible health insurance plan, and have saved myself thousands a year in the process. I love the convenience of knowing that my doctor has all my records in his EMR, I have his cell phone number, and he can renew my prescriptions with a simple email request. I can’t imagine why more people aren’t doing this.
Alan Dappen says, “They just have to wake up out of the Matrix.”
**For more in-depth coverage of the rising trend in cash-only practices, check out MedPage Today’s special report.**
March 26th, 2009 by Stacy Stryer, M.D. in News, Opinion
No Comments »
The number of teens giving birth in the United States has increased for the second year in a row, after a decline for 14 consecutive years. According to a reported recently released by the Centers for Disease Control, the birth rate increased from 41.9 births per 1000 teens in 2006 to 42.5 births in 2007. Not only does becoming pregnant and giving birth as a teen increase the risk of serious medical problems for the newborn, including low birth weight and an increased risk of death, but it also makes it more likely that a mom will have many socioeconomic difficulties, including a greater chance she will end up on welfare, not receive a high school degree, and live below the poverty level (which translates to difficulties for newborns as they get older).
Obviously, teens who become pregnant did not use a condom during intercourse, or at least not correctly. Therefore, these teens are also at risk of developing sexually transmitted diseases, such as Chlamydia, gonorrhea, and AIDS. Unfortunately, some of these infections, such as HIV, can pass through the placenta, and infect the unborn fetus. Given the fact that the risk of developing HIV and AIDS in adults is increasing in some areas of the United States, it also makes it more likely that an infected female will become pregnant. A report recently published stated that the rate of HIV is greater than 3% in Washington DC, which is considered an epidemic.
Although researchers don’t know why the number of babies born to teens has increased for the second year in a row, they speculate that increases may be due to increased risk taking, more relaxed and changing attitudes, portraying sex as OK or even a positive experience on TV, increased risk taking by teens, changing attitudes, and having teen role models who become pregnant (Miley Cirus, Jamie Lynn Spears, Bristol Palin).
How are we going to improve these statistics? We must ensure that sex, STDs, teen pregnancy and contraception is not only taught at school but also discussed in our own home – over and over. Our teens must not only learn our values, but also how to keep themselves healthy. It is fine to teach abstinence at home, but parents should also teach about condoms as a way to protect their teens. Often, we are the last to know that they have become sexually active. (Regular communication and discussion with our teens may give us the privilege of finding out sooner!)
It is also important to teach our teens how to deal with a certain situation before it happens, such as what to do when someone of the opposite sex makes an advance. If your child hasn’t been taught what to do in situations such as a teen making a physical advance, friends trying to increase poor behavior via peer pressure, watching drinks carefully , and others, she will probably be more likely to freeze up when such a situation arises and allow it to get out of hand. My rule of them it to talk about these tough subjects about 2 years before your teens may be in such a situation. This gives them time to think about it and formulate a plan of how to say “no” or how to stay safe. We need to see a reversal of the teen birth rate – in order to do this, we need the community, schools and parents all to work toward a common goal of educating and protecting our teens.
March 25th, 2009 by Dr. Val Jones in Expert Interviews, Health Policy
2 Comments »
Today I participated in a conference call with Billy Tauzin, CEO of PhRMA (the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America). The goal of the call was to let bloggers know about PhRMA’s position on healthcare reform. I counted at least 12 bloggers on the call, and I was the only physician. It pains me to see how few physicians participate in reform discussions and I’d like to get more of us involved.
The salient points, as I understood them, were:
1. PhRMA would like all Americans to have health insurance. They believe that Medicare Part D is a model health insurance program. They do not support a single payer system because it would likely attempt to cut costs by rationing care and denying options to patients. They don’t believe that insurance coverage mandates are a good idea unless the insurance is subsidized to the point of being affordable for all. They favor the current public (Medicare and Medicaid for the elderly, poor, or disabled) private blend of insurance, with roughly 50% of the population in each category.
2. PhRMA would like to support “precision medicine” where treatments are tailored more effectively to the individual. Mr. Tauzin suggested that some FDA-approved drugs are only effective for 30% of the patients in a given disease class. He’d like to see more research devoted to figuring out why that is, and supports comparative clinical effectiveness research insofar as it furthers this agenda.
3. PhRMA wants to preserve the unique features of the American healthcare system – to maintain our leadership in biomedical research and new drug development, and to protect the sacred shared decision-making between physicians and patients (to shield it from government intervention).
4. PhRMA wants to support IT infrastructure that would track patient medication compliance and let physicians know when/if they fill their prescriptions.
Now, the business case for all four of these positions is clear – the pharmaceutical industry benefits from having everyone able to afford medications (i.e. universal coverage), personalized medicine would reward the development of new and innovative drugs and establish a consumer base for many different treatments, protecting the doctor-patient relationship allows for off-label use of medications and a broader array of similar drugs, and IT infrastructure would help to increase drug purchase and compliance with treatment regimens, thus increasing overall sales.
However, the truth is that PhRMA’s positions on healthcare reform – beneficial as they are to themselves – also happen to be beneficial to patients. Increasing the number of insured improves access to medical care, personalized medicine could create more effective treatments with fewer failure rates and side effects, shared-decision making empowers patients to make the right decisions for their circumstances (with their physician’s guidance), and IT solutions that facilitate medication adherence, tracking, and reminder systems could improve patient health outcomes and keep them out of the hospital.
So, in a way pharmaceutical companies, advocacy groups, and physicians are fairly well aligned on many aspects of healthcare reform. Now if certain members of Big Pharma would please give up on those “me-too” drugs, stop creating more expensive medicines by simply combining two perfectly good ones into a new pill, stop hiding negative research studies, and refrain from aggressive direct-to-consumer marketing tactics, we might all really be on the same page.
***
Interesting factoids from call:
- Medicines only account for 10% of total healthcare costs (unchanged from the 1960s), but they “feel” like a larger cost driver because health insurance doesn’t cover their cost as completely as they do hospital fees.
- There are about 750 new cancer drugs in the research pipeline.
- Half of all prescriptions remain unfilled.
- Physicians provide 30 billion dollars a year in free care.
- The United States conducts 70% of the world’s research in biomedicines.
Please check out Billy Tauzin’s amazing story of triumph over cancer.
