About Health Care Industry

BNET Healthcare provides daily industry trends and news coverage with insights for managers and executives, focusing on major health care providers, hospitals and facilities, insurance companies, and medical device manufacturers. In addition to detailed company profiles, you will find detailed industry analysis on new alliances and partnerships, healthcare products, medical patents, health care cost control, lawsuits, management and board changes, and all other important business issues.

Payers Promote Patient Safety With $$ Penalties

By Ken Terry | Aug 26, 2009

Before I start today’s post, I’d like to pay tribute to the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, who was unflagging in his support for universal health care (among other good causes) for four decades. That’s a long time to carry a torch that so many others were trying to extinguish, and it underlines Sen. Kennedy’s seriousness about providing adequate health care to every American. Whether or not you agree with his proposals for expanding the role of government in health care, his example deserves a moment of silence and reflection. Let us hope that our current elected representatives will finally achieve the dream of this Moses who led us so far, only to die before entering the Promised Land.

Now, on to the business at hand. Aetna has taken its commitment to safeguarding patient safety in hospitals a step further than it did a year and a half ago. Then, it included in its contract language terms that prohibited payment for three “never events” and 25 other egregious medical errors. Now it has flatly required providers to waive charges for the three never events—wrong surgery, surgery on the wrong person, and surgery on the wrong body part. In addition, Aetna says, Health care facilities will also be required to waive charges that are directly and solely related to eight other specific SREs [serious reportable events].”

Following the recommendations of the Leapfrog Group and the National Quality Forum, which drew up the list of SREs, as well as of JCAHO and the National Business Group on Health, Aetna is also requiring providers to notify Aetna and either the Joint Commission, a state reporting program, or a patient safety organization when a serious error occurs. It also wants hospitals to do a root cause analysis of the error and to communicate to patients and their families about it.

Aetna’s effort follows similar moves by Medicare and parallels similar patient safety initiatives by several Blues Cross Blue Shield companies, including Wellpoint and Blues plans in Massachusetts, Illinois, and Texas. The question is, will these efforts improve safety or increase the likelihood that providers will try to hide their medical errors?

Providers have long shied away from admitting mistakes because of concern about malpractice suits. Perhaps because of that, and because of the ingrained culture of professional autonomy in medicine, patient safety did not improve much in the five years following the Institute of Medicine’s 1999 report “To Err Is Human.” And in the past six years, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality found, the number of “adverse events” in hospitals has risen about 1 percent per year.

Will punishing hospitals financially when they admit their errors change this? That seems unlikely, but help may come from another source. Some hospitals have found that when they communicate their mistakes to patients and try to do something about them, the number of lawsuits drops. The University of Illinois Medical Center in Chicago, which started taking this tack in 2004, has seen the number of suits against the hospital drop 40 percent, even as its number of procedures has risen 23 percent.

Whacking providers’ revenues when they tell the truth won’t encourage them to confess. But somehow, we have to stop rewarding them for their mistakes.

Ken Terry, a former senior editor at Medical Economics Magazine, is the author of the book Rx For Health Care Reform. follow all BNET Healthcare posts on Twitter.

BNET User Analysis

Web Buzz:
  • Ted Kennedy’s Record On Health Care Reform

    Wonk Room - 89 days 18 hours 50 minutes ago

    Sen. Ted Kennedy considered health care reform “the cause” of his life. Throughout his 47 years in the U.S. senate, Kennedy fought for universal comprehensive coverage some 15 different times, working closely with the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) committee to pass health care reform bill this year, even while...

  • Ted Kennedy Sorely Missed in Health Care Negotiations [Sad]

    Gawker - 130 days 2 hours 30 minutes ago

    Ted Kennedy is going to die. Before that happens, the Senate would like to pass a health care reform bill, because that is what Kennedy would like his legacy to be. But the process is difficult without him. Because after fucking around and generally being the dumbest Kennedy for a couple decades, Ted buckled down and became a master...

  • Pollution-Powered Blanche Lincoln Takes Over Agriculture Committee

    Wonk Room - 75 days 20 hours 53 minutes ago

    Sen. Blanche Lincoln, an opponent of climate and clean energy action, is taking the helm of the key Senate Agriculture Committee. The current chair, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), is leaving his post to replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) at the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. As all the Democrats senior to Lincoln currently chair...

  • Republicans: Requirement To Have Health Insurance Is ‘A New Tax’ On Families And Businesses

    Wonk Room - 139 days 17 hours 50 minutes ago

    Rested and invigorated from their Fourth of July recess, Senate Republicans unleashed a new line of attack against the CBO’s score of Sen. Ted Kennedy’s (D-MA) health care bill. After initially claiming that the preliminary CBO estimate of the bill was too high, today during markup, Sens. Mike Enzi (R-WY) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) argued that...

  • Obama’s Letter To Baucus/Kennedy: Use Savings From Within The System To Finance Reform

    Wonk Room - 173 days 19 hours 4 minutes ago

    At first glance, I thought that blog coverage of the President’s letter to Sens. Max Baucus (D-MT) and Ted Kennedy (D-MA) seemed a bit overstated. While Obama may have “doubled down” on the public plan, he didn’t exactly endorse a muscular option. His support for Sen. John Rockefeller’ s (D-WV) proposal to give teeth to MedPAC’s...

Links from the Web Buzz:
 
Reply to Story

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

  •  
    1

    Alex0725

    08/27/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Payers Promote Patient Safety With $$ Penalties

    Before we start praising Ted Kennedy does anyone remember woman named Mary Jo Kopechne? Where is her remembrance? Just something to think about before we start making a shrine to old Ted.

  •  
    2

    Blatino

    08/27/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Payers Promote Patient Safety With $$ Penalties

    I am a career Root Cause Analysis (RCA) investigator who originated in the heavy manufacturing industry 25 years ago. I transitioned our PROACT RCA approaches to healthcare (HC) nearly 11 years ago. I think it is appropriate to cite some of the differences I have seen between how "RCA" is conducted in the two industries.

    One of the first observations I was struck with when I entered HC was how rudimentary RCA's were compared to Industry. Engineers would go to the nth degree to find out why a pump failed. They would have tests done on the metals, samples of the product, statistcal evidence about pump capacity, interviews, etc.

    Then I went into HC where a patient unexpectedly dies and they are "forced" to do an "RCA" quickly. Typically RCA's would be in the form of common quality tools like the 5-Whys or the Fishbone Diagram. The goal did not seem to be on preventing recurrence, but to meet the minimum regulatory requirements to pass an audit and receive their federal funding from CMS (Medicare and Medicaid). They are busy people and doing an RCA appears to be a burden.

    RCA as I know it is synonymous with the investigative approach of a police detective (although we are not seeking out the "whodunnit", but we are looking for the "why they dunnit". We collect evidence, form an unbiased team, construct a cause-and-effect depciation of the sequence of the events, use collected evidence to support hypotheses, develop and implement interventions and then ensure the interventions worked by tracking their impact.

    RCA is a very diluted and useless term these days because there is no universally accepted standard definition. Each regulatory agency, provider and user has their own definition. For this reason people throw less stringest tools like 5-whys and Fishbone under the umbrella of true RCA when they do not meet the test of comprehensiveness.

    Have you ever seen an NTSB investigator at a press conference showing a 5-Whys Tree or a Fishbone Diagram. These tools have their place but it is not in investigating serious events or fatalities.

    The Joint Commission (TJC) implemented their Root Cause Analysis guidelines for all hospitals around 1996. In these 13 years I am not aware of a single study that can attribute an increase in patient safety due to RCA's submitted. We can prove that all accredited hospital's RCA efforts passed TJC audits, but we cannot correlate an RCA passing an audit with increasing patient safety. This is where the ball has dropped as the tracking metrics are misplaced and providing a false sense of security to the patient.

    It is not good enough to just require "RCA". What is needed is to delineate the steps of an RCA to ensure appropriate breadth and depth of the investigation and to require sound evidence to support hypotheses. Despite what most say, hearsay is not a valid form of evidence. Ask any judge!

    Robert J. (Bob) Latino
    CEO
    Reliability Center, Inc.
    www.Reliability.com
    www.Proactforhealthcare.com
    804.458.0645 Tel
    804.452.2119 Fax




  •  
    3

    verycold

    08/27/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Payers Promote Patient Safety With $$ Penalties

    My head is spinning today. I just finished reading the contents of Medicare. I am doing so to get a better handle on what government has or hasn't done with this entitlement program. Yikes. The program now resembles a once sturdy home with many additions that morphed into a eyesore that nobody wants. Yuck and how utterly confusing and inefficient. When I think of a plan for all I think of the SAME darn plan for all not a bunch of exceptions. On top of this it is projected that medicare will run out of money by 2017. I should mention that that date gets ratcheted up each year and so maybe it is only a few years away in truth. By the year 2028 medicare will cost more than SS.

    Some years ago, while sitting on the edge of a swimming pool at the YMCA, a young man accidentally dove to close to me and hooked his foot around my neck and dragged me into the pool. I would not be right for many years and only now I have learned to cope with constant pain. I consider it one of many bruises in my life. It was an accident. Yes, it could have been prevented if the kids hadn't been having so much fun. Darn them. Our legal system has trained us well that there are NO accidents and thus the reason medical personnel feel the lawsuit pressure to do more than they should. To admit a mistake would automatically mean the plaintiff would have a legal case. I want to believe you might find the person like me that decided not to sue realizing life is full of mistakes, but our society have turned into people hell bent on fairness and everything being perfect.

  •  
    4

    verycold

    08/27/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Payers Promote Patient Safety With $$ Penalties

    Blatino - great post. Having worked myself in QA in the tech industry some years ago, I know I would do everything humanely possible to prevent the same mistake again. It was our mission. So it seems the working cultural environment is different with one adhering to what is required to get certification while the other going well past that to get to the root cause.

    I would add this which is involving yet another dimension of our society. I always thought it was the mission of police to ferret out the truth and root cause of an event, so that justice would be dispensed fairly. I was very wrong. What I am saying is that the many events prior to the big event matter very little. So what transpired weeks or even months before a police matter is just nuisance information. So there is no push to fix the problem permanently by putting all the pieces of the puzzle together, but instead to just diffuse the current event only to revisit it again and again and again.

  •  
    5

    Blatino

    09/01/09 | Report as spam

    ROI: Where is the cost of intellectual capital?

    To me, this is a fundamental issue in our society where it is difficult to quantify ?soft? issues dealing with the human being. Yes, when we have the desire and will we can measure human contribution to society via metrics such as productivity in the workplace (i.e. ? units per time period, etc.)and absenteeism to name a few.



    However, what we do not capture is the value of creativity, innovation, experience, skill and intellectual capital. The current Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) encourages and ingrains this mentality of equipment being valued more than humans in our organizations. You have heard me say this before but equipment is an asset under GAAP and humans are liabilities.



    What if we were able to measure the value of intellectual capital of our workforce? Right now when corporate America needs to shave costs considerably to meet the expectations of Wall St. (and thus shareholders) at the end of each quarter, it is commonplace to offer a ?golden handshake? (early retirement package) to the general population of employees in hopes that enough will take it in order for the organization to make their numbers.



    Who usually takes such packages? Those that know they can easily get another job and thus will have this sweet severance package and then will have a double income for a while. These are usually our brightest people that accept these packages. Why do we indiscriminately do this to humans?



    I do not know about you, but my experience tells me that Pareto applies here. I find that 20% of the workforce produces 80% of the results in an organization. These are the folks that work circles around the others and can do twice as much work per hour than the others. Why are they not valued in some fashion more than the others?



    How often do you see the CFO mandate that to curb quarterly losses we will be cutting back on 20% of the equipment in the hospital so we will be getting rid of 2 MRI machines, 3 dialysis machines, 3 X-ray machines?you get the picture. We would never do that to the equipment but we would do it to our own species?amazing.



    Until we place a higher value on the human as an asset, it will be more difficult to quantify the ?soft? issues in units that finance people will understand and appreciate.

    Robert J. (Bob) Latino

    CEO

    Reliability Center, Inc.

    www.Reliability.com

    www.Proactforhealthcare.com

    804.458.0645 Tel

    804.452.2119 Fax



    Visit our PROACT Root Cause Analysis Blog

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

advertisement
Click Here
advertisement
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
advertisement