No phrase has less meaning in our industry right now than “Population Health” – this coming from the guy leading his firm’s practice in … wait for it … Population Health.
Everyone has a different picture in their head when those two words leave their mouth, yet that is the industry-standard term nowadays to convey “what comes after fee-for-service (FFS)”. Here are merely the Top Ten most common meanings in the industry when those words are spoken:
10. Telephoning patients for the purpose of convincing them to consume preventive services
9. Disease Registries embedded in an EMR
8. Convince patients to modify their personal choices (usually via financial-pain or -pleasure)
7. Financial Bonuses to physicians for achieving a numerical score on quality metrics or for following a more complex coding and documentation process
6. Binding together physician practices for the purpose of negotiating higher professional fees (CIN)
5. A software bridge allowing a modicum of data-transfer between different EMRs
4. Buying or building more bricks and mortar to capture more patient care (revenue)
3. Convince patients to undergo biometric testing (patient engagement anyone?)
2. Enforcing the use of Evidence-Based-Protocols for common disease states
1. Providers assuming financial risk or gain for the cost of care provided
Those snapshots represent a small number of available tactics at best, and entirely miss the true meaning of Pop Health at most. Here’s my definition of Population Health – “the manner in which healthcare design necessarily changes, once it is no longer paid for by piece.”
If the healthcare in question uses FFS as the mechanism for payment, by definition it AIN’T Population Health. The purpose of Population Health is to create higher quality care at lower or similar cost (better care experience, less harm, and more reliably favorable outcomes). In my experience, those better outcomes rarely occur and are never sustained over time, if paid for by FFS, particularly in the absence of group physician practice.
In order for care redesign to be funded and implemented by hospitals and physicians, those providers must be paid for what doesn’t happen: the ER visit avoided because the doc stayed late in the office to diagnose and treat the patient’s UTI; the cardiac cath avoided in the 22 year old with a pulled pectoralis muscle because a history and exam pays the same as cath; an admission avoided because the ambulatory physician did a great job of organizing the patient’s care, such that decompensation never occurred. Spending time with patients, thinking about them and with them, and coordinating their care all take time, and as we all know, time is money. FFS can only account for what does happen (the ER visit, the admission, the cardiac cath); it’s non sequitur in the context of Population Health.
So the next time you hear the phrase Population Health, ask two questions: (1) “What the hell do you mean by that?”, and (2) “Before we go on, do we agree FFS payment of any type is NOT involved?”