In a previous post, I said the CPC Initiative would fail to produce usable results because it sought to test too many vaguely defined variables at once. In this comment I level the same criticism against the MAPCP demonstration.
The Comprehensive Primary Care Initiative, like all tests of the “medical home,” attempts to assess the impact of too many vaguely defined variables at once.
This report by Mathematica analyzes the first year of a four-year experiment being conducted in eight states by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, an agency established within the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) by the Affordable Care Act.
What’s true in medicine is true in health policy: If you don’t diagnose correctly, you can’t prescribe correctly. If you think the primary care sector needs “redesign,” you will prescribe “medical homes” and “breaking down silos” and other nostrums with labels connoting a change in structure. If, on the other hand, you conclude the proper diagnosis is too few resources, then you recommend more resources.
The “medical home” concept has become counterproductive. It is muddling the debate about how to improve medical care without raising costs, and it is punishing primary care clinics. The paper by Mosquera et al. illustrates both problems.
The health-cost slowdown isn’t just about the economy By David Leonhardt New York Times, December 5, 2014 It’s one of the most important economic questions today: Is the snail-like growth of health costs over the last several years a real trend, or is it merely a temporary part of the Great Recession’s aftermath? The data […]
In a comment I posted on this blog last December, I noted that the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) refuses to ask a very obvious question about the two Medicare ACO programs authorized by the Affordable Care Act: Do the administrative costs of running an ACO exceed the savings ACOs allegedly achieve for Medicare?
In case you blinked, big data is the newest new thing in establishment health policy.
We need an analysis of errors in health policy and why those errors go uncorrected long after they have been revealed. I would like to suggest that the IOM undertake this task. I suggest they entitle their report, “To Err is Human, and Health Policy is No Exception.”
Evidence-based medicine: A movement in crisis? By Trisha Greenhalgh, Jeremy Howick, and Neal Maskrey for the Evidence-Based Medicine Renaissance Group BMJ, June 13, 2014 It is more than 20 years since the evidence-based medicine working group announced a “new paradigm” for teaching and practicing clinical medicine. Tradition, anecdote, and theoretical reasoning from basic sciences would […]
Physicians for a National Health Program's blog serves to facilitate communication among physicians and the public. The views presented on this blog are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of PNHP.
PNHP Chapters and Activists are invited to post news of their recent speaking engagements, events, Congressional visits and other activities on PNHP’s blog in the “News from Activists” section.