Free EMR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to EMR and HIPAA for FREE!!

Three Words That Health Care Should Stop Using: Insurance, Market, and Quality (Part 2 of 2)

Posted on August 23, 2016 I Written By

Andy Oram is an editor at O'Reilly Media, a highly respected book publisher and technology information provider. An employee of the company since 1992, Andy currently specializes in open source, software engineering, and health IT, but his editorial output has ranged from a legal guide covering intellectual property to a graphic novel about teenage hackers. His articles have appeared often on EMR & EHR and other blogs in the health IT space. Andy also writes often for O'Reilly's Radar site (http://oreilly.com/) and other publications on policy issues related to the Internet and on trends affecting technical innovation and its effects on society. Print publications where his work has appeared include The Economist, Communications of the ACM, Copyright World, the Journal of Information Technology & Politics, Vanguardia Dossier, and Internet Law and Business. Conferences where he has presented talks include O'Reilly's Open Source Convention, FISL (Brazil), FOSDEM, and DebConf.

The previous part of this article ripped apart the use of the words “insurance” and “market” to characterize healthcare. Not let’s turn to another concept even more fundamental to our thinking about care.

Quality

The final element of this three-card Monte is the slippery notion of quality. Health care is often compared to the airlines (when we’re not being compared to the Cheesecake Factory), an exercise guaranteed to make health care look bad. Airlines and restaurants offer relatively homogeneous experiences to all their clients and can easily determine whether their service succeeded or failed. Even at a mechanical level, the airlines have been able to quantify safety.

Endless organizations such as the National Association for Healthcare Quality (NAHQ) and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) collect quality measures, and CMS has tried strenuously to include quality measures in Meaningful Use and the new MACRA program. We actually have not a dearth of quality measures, but a surfeit. Doctors feel overwhelmed with these measures. They are difficult to collect, and we don’t know how to combine them to create easy reports that patients can act on. There is a difference between completing a successful surgery, caring for things such as pain and infection prevention after surgery, and creating a follow-up plan that minimizes the chance of readmission. All those things (and many more) are elements of quality.

Worst of all, despite efforts to rank patients by their conditions and risk, hospitals repeatedly warn that quality measures underestimate risky patients and therefore penalize the hospitals that do the most difficult and important work–caring for the sickest. Many hospitals are throwing away donor organs instead of doing transplants, because the organs are slightly inferior and therefore might contribute to lower quality ratings–even if the patients are desperate to give them a try.

The concept of quality in health care thus needs a fresh look, and probably a different term. The first, simple thing we can do is remove patient ratings from assessments of quality. The patient knows whether the nurse smiled at her or whether she was discharged promptly, but can’t tell how good the actual treatment was after the event. One nurse has suggested that staff turnover is a better indication of hospital quality than patient satisfaction surveys. Given our fascination with airline quality, it’s worth noting that the airline industry separates safety ratings from passenger experience. The health care industry can similarly leverage patient ratings to denote clients’ satisfaction, but that’s separate from quality.

As for the safety and effectiveness of treatment, we could try a fairer rating system, such as one that explicitly balances risk and reward. Agencies would have to take the effort to understand all the elements of differences in patients that contribute to risk, and make sure they are tallied. Perhaps we could learn how to assess the success of each treatment in relation to the condition in which the patient entered the office. Even better, we could try to assess longitudinal results instead evaluating each office visit or hospital admission in isolation.

These are complex activities, but we have lots of data and powerful tools to analyze it. Together with a focus on changing behavior and environments, we should be able to make a real difference in quality–and I mean quality of life. Is there anything an ordinary member of the health professions can do till then? Well, try issuing Bronx cheers and catcalls at any meeting or conference presentation where someone uses one of the three misleading terms.

Three Words That Health Care Should Stop Using: Insurance, Market, and Quality (Part 1 of 2)

Posted on August 22, 2016 I Written By

Andy Oram is an editor at O'Reilly Media, a highly respected book publisher and technology information provider. An employee of the company since 1992, Andy currently specializes in open source, software engineering, and health IT, but his editorial output has ranged from a legal guide covering intellectual property to a graphic novel about teenage hackers. His articles have appeared often on EMR & EHR and other blogs in the health IT space. Andy also writes often for O'Reilly's Radar site (http://oreilly.com/) and other publications on policy issues related to the Internet and on trends affecting technical innovation and its effects on society. Print publications where his work has appeared include The Economist, Communications of the ACM, Copyright World, the Journal of Information Technology & Politics, Vanguardia Dossier, and Internet Law and Business. Conferences where he has presented talks include O'Reilly's Open Source Convention, FISL (Brazil), FOSDEM, and DebConf.

Reading the daily papers, I have gotten increasingly frustrated at the misunderstandings that journalists and the public bring to the debates of over health expansion, costs, and reform. But you can’t blame them–our own industry has created the confusion by misusing terms and concepts that work in other places but not in health. Worse still, the health care industry has let policy-makers embed the incorrect impressions into laws and regulations.

So in this article I’ll promote the long process of correcting the public’s impressions of health care–by purging three dangerous words from health care vocabulary.

Insurance

The health care insurance industry looks like no other insurance industry in the world. When we think of insurance, we think of paying semi-annually into a fund we hope we never need to use. But perhaps every twenty years or so, we suffer damage to our car, our house, or our business, and the insurance kicks in. That may have been true for health care 70 years ago, when you wouldn’t see the doctor unless you fell into a pit or came down with some illness they likely couldn’t cure anyway. The insurance model is totally unsuited for health care today.

The Affordable Care Act made some symbolic gestures toward a recognition that modern health care should embrace prevention and wellness. For instance, it eliminated copays for preventative visits. The insurance companies took that wording very literally: if you dare to bring up an actual medical problem during your preventative visit, they charge you a copay. Yet the “preventative” part of the visit usually consists of a lecture to stop smoking and go on the Mediterranean diet.

Effective wellness programs jettison the notion of insurance (although patients need separate insurance for catastrophic problems). They keep in regular contact with clients, provide coaching, and sometimes use intelligent digital interventions such as described by Dr. Joseph Kvedar in The Internet of Healthy Things (which I reviewed shortly after its release). There are scattered indications that these programs do their job. As they spread, the system set up to deal with catastrophic health events will have to adapt and take a modest role within a behavioral health model.

The term “insurance” is so widely applied to our healh funding model that we can’t make it go away. Perhaps we should put the word in quotation marks wherever it must be used.

Market

This term is less ubiquitous than “insurance” but may be even more harmful. Numerous commenters have pointed out the difference between health care and actual markets:

  • In a market, you can walk away and refuse to pay for a good that is too expensive. If the price of beef goes through the roof, you can switch to beans (and probably should, for your own health). So the best time to argue with someone who promotes a health care market may be right after he’s fallen from a ladder and is clutching at his leg in agony. Ask him, “Do you feel you can walk away from an offer of health care?” Cruel, but a lesson he won’t forget.

  • A market serves people who can afford it. It’s hard to find a stylish hair dresser in a poor neighborhood because no one can pay $200 for a cut. But here’s the rub: the people who need health care the most can’t afford it. Someone with serious mental or physical problems is less likely to find work or be able to attend a college with health insurance. Parents of seriously ill children have to take time off from work to care for them. And so on. It’s what economists–who have trouble discarding the market way of thinking–call a market failure.

  • In a market, you know what you’re going to pay for a service and what your options are. Enough said.

  • In a market, you can evaluate the quality of a service and judge (at least in retrospect) whether it was worth the cost. I’ll deal with quality in the next section.

The misconception of health care as a market came to a head in the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Presumably, millions of “young invincibles” were avoiding health insurance because of the cost. The individual mandate, combined with affordable plans on health care exchanges, would bring them flooding into the insurance system, lowering costs for everyone and balancing the burden created by the many sick people who we knew would join. And yet now we have stubbornly rising health care rates, deductibles, and caps, along with new costs in the states where Medicaid expanded Where did this all fall apart?

Part of the problem is certainly the recession, which caused incomes to decline or stagnate and exacerbated people’s health care needs. Also, there was a pent-up need for treatment among people who had lacked health insurance and avoided treatment for some time. This comes through in a study of prescription medication use. Furthermore, people don’t change habits overnight: many continue to over-rely on the emergency room (perhaps because of a shortage of primary care providers).

But there’s another unanticipated factor: the “young invincibles” actually start using health care once they get access to it. An analysis showed that mental health needs among the young are much higher than expected. In particular, they suffer widely from depression and anxiety, which is entirely reasonable given the state of our world. (I know that these conditions are connected to genetics and biology, but environment must also play a role.)

Ultimately, until we get behavioral health in place for everybody, health care costs will continue to rise and we won’t realize the promise of near-universal coverage. Many health care activists–especially during the recent political primary season–call for a single-payer system, which certainly would introduce many efficiencies. But it doesn’t solve the problems of chronic conditions and unhealthy lifestyles–that will require policy action on levels ranging from improvements in air cleanliness to new opportunities for isolated individuals to socialize. Meanwhile, we still have to look at the notion of quality in tomorrow’s post.

What Would New Care Delivery Models Look Like If Created Today?

Posted on November 24, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.


This tweet has been on my mind the last month. I’m sure that many in the trenches probably think that this type of thinking is a pipe dream and not worthy of discussion. While it’s true that we can’t go back and change the past, this type of thinking may predict where we need to go in the future.

I and many others have long talked about the way EHR software was built to maximize billing and then meaningful use. The focus of the EHR was not on how to improve patient care, but was really built around how the organization could manage it’s billing and make more money. So, we shouldn’t be too surprised that the EHR systems we have today aren’t these amazing systems that dramatically improve the care we provide.

With that said, there’s a sea change happening in health care when it comes to how organizations are being reimbursed based on value. Might I suggest that an organization that wants to be ready for this change in reimbursement might want to take the time to think about what care models would look like if they were created from scratch today without the overhead of the past.

I’m not the only one thinking about this. Check out this tweet from Linda Stotsky that quotes Rasu Shrestha, MD, MBA.


In the article that’s linked to in that tweet Rasu describes the real challenge of rethinking our care models:

What does it truly mean to have a patient-centered approach to care? As a clinician, I can tell you confidently that most of my colleagues tend to get defensive amid talk of the need to adopt a patient-centric approach to care. “Of course, we’re focused on the patient!” seems to be the most common reaction. Many simply assume that because care is essentially imparted onto a patient, everything we do, naturally, is patient-centric

Then he offers this frank comment:

But where is the patient in all of this? Is a system designed to help document our attempts to cure the patient, and help bill for the associated services, really the best we can do? Perhaps the problem is bigger than just the EMR. Perhaps our frequently paternalistic, and often heroic, approaches to care have been cherished, celebrated and incentivized for far too long. Perhaps we need to rethink care in a big way.

I agree with Rasu. He also quotes Ellen Stoval, survivor or three bouts of cancer who says, “We have been chasing the cure, rather than the care.” I’m actually optimistic that these changes are happening. We’re going to see a drastically improved health care system. It’s going to take time, but most changes do. What’s most exciting is that if we navigate these shifts properly, then doctors will finally get to practice medicine the way they imagined medicine. Instead of churning patients to meet revenue, they could actually spend more time caring for patients. That’s something worth aspiring towards.

How Will the Coming Election Year Impact Healthcare IT?

Posted on November 10, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

It seems like the Presidential election should be closer since we’ve been hearing about possible Presidential candidates for the past year. However, we still have a whole year before the next Presidential election. Does anyone else think we’re going to be tired of this process a year from now? (But I digress)

In past years, there was certainly a lot to talk about when it comes to the impact a new president would have on healthcare IT. However, I don’t think that this presidential election will be the same. I think that’s true for healthcare in general as well.

On the healthcare IT side, meaningful use has basically run its course. Sure, Jeb Bush has asked to eliminate meaningful use and government mandates and penalties for EHR use. Although, John Halamka and Marc Probst have both recently asked for the same. We’ve written previously about how getting rid of meaningful use wouldn’t do much of anything to alter the current course of EHR and healthcare IT. It just wouldn’t change much of anything.

What could a presidential candidate do to impact healthcare IT? I really don’t see them having an interest in doing much of anything to impact the current course of healthcare IT. If you think otherwise, I’d love to hear why.

On the healthcare side of things we might see more changes. Certainly the topic of healthcare costing the US too much money is a very big an important topic for the president. However, I think Obamacare and those healthcare reform efforts are too far gone to be able to really go back and change them now. Sure, we could see some changes here and there, but I think it’s too late for a new President to really drastically change what’s already been done.

Related to this is the move away from fee for service to a value based reimbursement environment. Would any President condone this direction? Would any President advocate for a return to the old fee for service environment? I don’t see it happening. As many people have told me, the shift to value based care has left the building. There’s no coming back. Could they modify the approach and some of the details. Certainly! However, they’re not likely going to change the trajectory.

Long story short, I’m not sure any Presidential candidate will do anything that will drastically impact healthcare IT and healthcare as we know it. Sure there will be some tweaks that will have some impact, but nothing major like Obamacare or the HITECH Act.

Do you agree or disagree? I always love to hear other perspectives.

The Post SGR Replacement World – An SGR Infographic

Posted on July 13, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I’ve been regularly blogging about the changes from a fee for service world to a new value based reimbursement world and everything that’s involved in that. I think it’s a key change that’s happening in healthcare that’s going to drive everyone to do things differently. This is particularly true as a healthcare IT vendor.

With that in mind, I found this history of Medicare SGR patches quite interesting. Understanding the past is a great way to take a look at where we’re heading in the future.
SGR Timeline and Move to MIPS and MACRA

ICD-10 Claims Monitoring Infographic

Posted on June 30, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I’m told that there are only 92 days left for Congress to delay ICD-10 until the deadline to implement ICD-10. A few weeks ago we published a great post from Vishal Gandhi, CEO of ClinicSpectrum, that talked about a part of ICD-10 preparation that is often forgotten: Claims Monitoring.

I know this is going to be a major problem for many healthcare organizations and is going to cause some major cash flow problems if they don’t get on top of their ICD-10 claims by implementing some sort of ICD-10 claims monitoring process. ICD-10 hiccups are the perfect excuse for a payer not to pay your claims.

For those that prefer a more visual approach to this discussion, Vishal and his team have put together an infographic that shares the same message as his post. Pretty cool. What won’t be cool is if you’re stuck with a lot of unpaid claims thanks to ICD-10. Make sure you and your organization are ready to deal with it.
What Are You Doing to Monitor Your Claims

Full Disclosure: ClinicSpectrum is a sponsor of EMR and HIPAA.

Farzad Mostashari’s Aledade Raises $30 Million on the Back of the Switch to Value Based Care

Posted on June 15, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

On Aledade’s 1 year anniversary, they just announced that they’ve raised a $30 million Series B round of funding from new investor ARCH Venture Partners and return investor Venrock. That brings their total funding to $35 million. For those not familiar with Aledade, it was Founded by Farzad Mostashari and Mat Kendall soon after Farzad left ONC. They work with independent, primary care physicians who want to participate in ACOs and value based reimbursement programs.

Farzad’s blog post announcing the funding says that by end of the year Aledade will have 100 physician practices managing 75,000 Medicare Patients. With such small numbers, this should illustrate what a huge opportunity value based reimbursement will be for many companies that get it right.

Aledade has an interesting business model. They take about $500/provider as a membership fee and then they split the value based reimbursement commission with the provider. 60% of the reimbursement goes to the provider and 40% goes to Aledade. I’ll be interested to see how well this commission structure holds up. While certainly not an Apple to Apples comparison, doctors are use to paying 5-10% commission to billing companies. Will they be ok with paying 40% to what will feel like a billing company to many? Is this an opportunity for medical billing companies?

I have no doubt that physicians and hospitals are going to need a great mix of technology and healthcare knowledge to be successful in this new world of value based reimbursement. Aledade is on the cutting edge of this trend. Time will tell if they’re too early or right on time for the change.

In a recent article in the Palm Beach Post, they said the following about Aledade:

Thanks to Aledade’s focus on data analytics and physician reminders, Mostashari’s doctors became five times more likely to give recommended preventative care to their older patients, such as annual wellness visits and vaccinations against pneumonia.

This sounds great on face. It’s great that primary care physicians are interested in the wellness of their patients. I also think it’s great that we have a method for incentivizing these kinds of actions. However, my fear with this trend is that we’ll push out guidelines for “wellness care” without knowing if those guidelines actually improve someone’s health.

One lesson Mostashari should have learned well from meaningful use is that if you regulate something too early, you might freeze something in regulation that adds a lot of burden without actually improving healthcare. I’m glad they’re on the cutting edge of this trend. Let’s just be thoughtful that we don’t give our doctors more hoops to jump through that don’t actually provide value. That’s the massive challenge we face with the shift to value based reimbursement and we’re just getting started.

Aledade and company are explorers of a new land. I think we’ve only found the Bahamas. Most of us believe the Americas are still out there to be discovered, but we haven’t found it yet. So, let’s be careful drawing the final maps.

Recorded Video from Dell Healthcare Think Tank Event – #DoMoreHIT

Posted on March 20, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I mentioned that I was going to be on the Dell Healthcare Think Tank event again this year. It was my 3rd time participating and it didn’t disappoint. In fact, this one dove into a number of insurance topics which we hadn’t ever covered before. I really learned a lot from the discussions and hopefully others learned from me.

Plus, in the first session I had the privilege to sit next to Dr. Eric Topol. He’s got such great insights into what’s happening in healthcare. Of course, I’m also always amazed by Mandi Bishop, who many of you may know from Twitter or her Eyes Wide Shut series here on EMR and HIPAA.

In case you missed the live stream of the event, you can find each of the three recorded sessions below. I also posted the 3 drawings that were created during the event on EMR and EHR. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on what was shared. Thanks Dell for hosting the conversation that brought together so many perspectives from across healthcare.

Session 1: Consumer Engagement & Social Media

Session 2: Bridging the Gap Between Providers, Payers and Patients

Session 3: Entrepreneurship & Innovation

Scariest Health IT Regulation – Healthcare IT Superlatives

Posted on November 3, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I thought it would be fun to look at a bunch of Healthcare IT Superlatives (best, scariest, cutest, smartest, funniest, etc etc etc). I imagine this will be a series of blog posts that never stops. If you’d like to see me write about a specific healthcare IT superlative, let me know in the comments or on my Contact Us page. I always like to cater to readers. Then, I at least no one person will find the post useful. Although, if one person finds it useful, it’s very likely that thousands of others are interested as well.

The first Healthcare IT Superlative we’ll consider is: Scariest Health IT Regulation

This is a challenging topic since healthcare is so burdened by regulation. I’m going to use a pretty broad interpretation of what I’d consider a healthcare IT regulation, but I’ll admit that I’m not as familiar with the medical device or pharma industry regulation. If you have experience in either of those, I’d love to hear what regulations in those industries is the scariest regulation.

When I think about all the various healthcare IT regulations, I have to narrow the scope down to the regulations that have the most over arching reach. That basically leaves me with ACO/Value Based Reimbursement, Meaningful Use, and HIPAA. Certainly there are plenty more that could be listed, but it’s not as scary for me if they aren’t large regulations that impact the majority of the healthcare system.

Of all of these, I’m most scared of ACO/Value Based Reimbursement. The worst part of any regulation is ambiguity. ACO and value based reimbursement is so vague right now that I don’t think anyone know where it will really end up going. That’s really scary for me and is likely scary for most healthcare organizations. It’s really hard to plan for something that’s vague and ambiguous.

Furthermore, the move to value based reimbursement and ACOs is likely going to have the biggest economic impact on healthcare. This doesn’t mean that every doctor and healthcare organization is going to lose when it comes to value based reimbursement. Definitely not. There are going to be a bunch of winners and losers. Some will really benefit from ACOs and some will suffer. However, my gut tells me that there’s going to be more losers than winners. That’s pretty scary to consider with all the other challenging dynamics at plat in healthcare today.

There you have it. What healthcare regulations are scaring you the most? Which regulations keep you up at night? I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Dishonesty Ruins So Many Things

Posted on September 5, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I’m always struck by this simple concept: Dishonesty make so many things more difficult than they should be.

We see this all over healthcare. Look for example at patient privacy and security. If people were just honest and thoughtful with patient data, our privacy and security challenges would be so much simpler. Imagine how much time and heartache we’d save if people were just honest when it comes to privacy and security. Yes, I’m looking at the million of hackers that are trying to take people’s personal information. Imagine if we could focus all the money and time we spend securing applications and apply it to improving healthcare. What a difference that would make.

The same could be said for reimbursement. Our reimbursement system would look drastically different if people were just honest. Yes, I’m talking about the billions of dollars of Medicare and other insurance fraud that’s out there. What a sad expense on our current healthcare system as dishonest people try and make a quick buck. While that expense is large, the even larger cost to our healthcare system is the toll that fraud adds to the honest actors.

Look at our current model of reimbursement for healthcare. So much of our insane documentation efforts are tied to the fact that insurance companies are trying to combat fraud. They don’t and can’t trust providers billing levels and so they’ve created layer and layer of requirements that makes the healthcare documentation process miserable. If you don’t agree with me, then you aren’t someone that’s involved in healthcare reimbursement.

This expense gets passed on to the employer and patients as well. Have you ever tried to make sense of the bill or statement of benefits coming from your doctor or insurance company? It’s like trying to make sense of a new language. It doesn’t make sense since you as a patient don’t know that language. Are they screwing you over in what they’re billing you or not? You don’t know either way and good luck trying to find out the answer. The person on the other end of the phone likely isn’t sure either because it’s so complex.

I first learned this principle in the credit card world. Why on earth do we pay 3+% of every transaction we do on our credit card. The answer is simple. Credit card fraud (otherwise known as dishonesty) is rampant and why credit card transactions cost so much. Imagine a world where the doctor wasn’t giving 3% of their business to process a credit card transaction since the cost to change digital digits should be nothing.

Unfortunately, the reality is we do live in a world with a lot of dishonest people who try and game anything and everything. We have to pay attention to security and privacy with these dishonest people in mind. We have to deal with insane reimbursement requirements as these payers try and combat fraud. We have to deal with credit card fraud and pay for it in the process.

It’s unfortunate, because dishonesty almost always catches up with people. Even when we think it doesn’t, dishonesty pays its own toll on a person as they can never be comfortable. Having a clear, honest conscious is one of the most beautiful things in life.