Plan B: Context and Facts

Posted on | June 11, 2013 | No Comments

Medical Leaders and Consumers Lining Up To Support Nurses.

Posted on | June 7, 2013 | No Comments

Mike Magee

On January 1, 2014, as a result of implementation of the Affordable Care Act,  the US will experience a major expansion of individuals covered by health insurance. The law includes three key pillars – insurers must provide coverage to all comers regardless of medical history; all citizens must pay in (either through purchase of insurance or penalty payments); and premiums for those with low income will be subsidized.(1)

From a human resource standpoint, the bottom line is that the already existing primary care deficits will be acutely exacerbated. It is this concern that drove the policy journal Health Affairs to update their White Paper on “Nurse Practitioners and Primary Care” several weeks ago, and to publish a study in partnership with the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) on Americans’ support of nurse practitioners as primary care providers.(2,3)

First, some background. Currently 18 states allow nurse practitioners to treat patients without physician oversight. The federal government estimates that 55 million Americans in 5700 different locations currently suffer from limited access to primary care services. Fixing the problem will require 15,000 new practitioners if distributed properly. Attempts to address this need with primary care physicians have not been effective thus far. Training a physician, including schooling and residency requires 11 or 12 years compared to 6 years for a nurse practitioner or physician assistant.(2)

One solution is to allow nurse practitioners and physicians assistants to practice independent of physician oversight. As such, they would be able to establish their own care centers and offices, and would inject a level of competition into the health care system that could increase access, improve service and lower cost. The American Medical Association has steadfastly opposed such actions. As Health Affairs states, the organization “…asserts that encouraging patients to see nurse practitioners rather than primary care physicians may put patients at risk, although the evidence does not support these claims.”(2)

In fact, the Institute of Medicine, after a thorough review of 26 studies published since 2000, found no difference in care outcomes between the two groups, and recommended that state legislatures reform scope-of-practice laws.(4)

But would Americans be willing to see nurse practitioners and physicians assistants? The AAMC/Health Affairs survey says yes. Specifically, the study revealed that while approximately one half of those surveyed preferred to see a physician for care, when presented the choice of waiting 3 days to see a doctor compared to one day for a nurse practitioner, the majority chose the earlier nurse practitioner visit.(3)

As important, medical leaders are beginning to signal openness to new solutions. In the words of Darrell G. Kirch, MD, President and CEO of the AAMC, “As this nation faces a critical doctor shortage—90,000 by the year 2020—we must find ways to be certain patients have access to the care they need…This study shows that Americans are open to that possibility.  There is no single solution to this problem.  We need to focus on building our capacity to train physicians, while also embracing the roles in which other professionals can serve.”(5)

Health Affairs is even more explicit. Here is what they have to say about the value of allowing nurse practitioners to expand their scope of practice: “ … patients seeing nurse practitioners were also found to have higher levels of satisfaction with their care. Studies found that nurse practitioners do better than physicians on measures related to patient follow up; time spent in consultations; and provision of screening, assessment, and counseling services. The patient-centered nature of nurse practitioner training, which often includes care coordination and sensitivity to the impact on health of social and cultural factors, such as environment and family situation, makes nurse practitioners particularly well prepared for and interested in providing primary care.”(2)

Finally, on the issue of cost, in the 18 states where nurse practitioners are allowed to functiuon independently, they are reimbured at 85% of the physician rates under Medicare law. As for Medicaid, more than half the states pay nurse practioners less than physicians for the same services.(2)

As we approach the January 1, 2014 turning point, with a defined need, and a well documented and well supported cost-effective solution at hand, it makes good sense for the 32 states restricting nurse practitioner and physician assistant scope of practice to rethink their positions. As of one year ago, the National Conference of State Legislatures reported that there were 245 bills under consideration related to scope of practice, with 50 involving nurses.(2)

The movement toward “Medical Home” and “Accountable Care Organizations” fueled by the Affordable Care Act is driving us all toward team-based, personalized and preventive care models. To do so without fully mobilizing the human resources available to us makes little sense any longer.

For Health Commentary. I’m Mike Magee.

References:

1. Accountable Care Act. http://www.healthcare.gov/law/timeline/full.html

2. Nurse Practitioners and Primary Care: Federal and state laws and other policies limit how these health professionals can help meet the growing need for primary care. May 15, 2013. Health Affairs. http://healthaffairs.org/healthpolicybriefs/brief_pdfs/healthpolicybrief_92.pdf

3. Dill MJ et al. Survey shows consumers open to a greater role of physicians assistants and nurse practitioners. Health Affairs. June, 2013. vol. 32 no. 6, 1135-1142.
http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/32/6/1135.abstract

4. IOM Study. The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health. October,
2010.
http://www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2010/The-Future-of-Nursing/Future%20of%20Nursing%202010%20Report%20Brief.pdf

5. AAMC Press Release. June 3, 1013. Report Shows Patients Would Consider a Greater Role for Physician Assistants and Nurse Practitioners for Timely Access to Care.
https://www.aamc.org/newsroom/newsreleases/343992/060313.html

Airplane Medical Care: Could You Survive?

Posted on | May 30, 2013 | No Comments

Mike Magee

We are a globe trotting, increasingly mobile human population. And when we are traveling any sort of distance, especially if it involves crossing oceans, most of us travel by commercial airlines. In fact there were 2.75 billion passenger flights booked last year. That translates into nearly 10 billion passenger hours in the air. With those kind of numbers, it is reasonable to ask “What happens if I get sick up there?”

Well, first of all, your chances of having any sort of emergency are statistically slim. A recent retrospective study of 5 major airlines flying domestic and international routes found that there were 16 medical emergencies for every 1 million passengers. Looking at it another way, there was a medical emergency once in every 602 flights in this study. What were the presenting symptoms of these high flying patients? Fainting or feeling faint occurred in 37%, breathing difficulties in 12%, nausea or vomiting 10%, cardiac symptoms 8%, and seizures 6%.(1)

What is the process that guides medical treatment in the air? Here are the five steps  along the way.

1. Initial response: All major airlines require the flight crew be trained in basic medical emergencies. Most of those presenting have mild problems managed by the flight attendants without additional help.

2. Volunteer assistance requested: If the attendant believes the condition to be serious, an announcement is made requesting volunteer assistance from doctors or nurses onboard. The Aviation Medical Assistance Act passed in 1998 includes a Good Samaritan provision, protecting passengers who offer medical assistance from liability, except in cases of gross negligence or willful misconduct.(2) In this study, assistance was provided by physicians (48%), nurses (20%), EMS providers (4.4%), or other health care professionals (3.7%).(1)

3. Equipment support: All airlines maintain a medical kit with equipment and drugs to address basic emergencies. Some airlines maintain an enhanced medical kit which allows more serious interventions or procedures in the air. The contents of these kits are as follows:

Basic Medical Kit:

Airways, oropharyngeal
Adhesive tape
1-inch Alcohol sponges

CPR mask
IV administration set
Needles
Protective gloves
Sphygmomanometer
Stethoscope
Syringes
Tape scissors
Tourniquet
Manual resuscitation device with 3 masks
Basic instructions on use of the kit
Analgesic
non-narcotic Antihistamine, 50 mg
injectable Antihistamine tablets, 25 mg
Aspirin tablets, 325 mg
Atropine, 0.5 mg
5 cc Bronchodilator, inhaled
Dextrose, 50% / 50 cc
injectable Epinephrine 1:1000, 1 cc
injectable Epinephrine 1:10,000, 2 ml
injectable Lidocaine, 5 ml, 20 mg/ml
injectable Nitroglycerine tablets
Saline solution, 500 cc

Enhanced Medical Kit: (all of the above plus…)

Burn dressings
Cord clamps
Disposable scalpel
Endotracheal tubes
Emergency tracheal catheter
Glucometer
Laryngoscope blade
Steri-strips
Thermometer
Tourniquet
Urinary catheter
Calcium chloride
Diazepam
Digoxin
Glucose gel
Furosemide
Lorazepam
Haloperidol
Hydrocortisone
Meclizine
Methylprednisolone
Metoprolol
Morphine
Nalbuphine
Naloxone
Promethazine
Sodium bicarbonate

4. Medical Support On The Ground: Many airlines now maintain coverage with expert clinicians on the ground who are contacted in a true medical emergency, and who can help guide and support volunteer health professionals in the air. Some airlines require contact to be made in every case where the medical kit is opened.

5. Diversion of Flight: Under certain circumstances, flight captains can divert the aircraft to protect the life of the passenger. In this study, it occurred in roughly 7% of cases.(1) This low percentage reflects both the non-critical nature of many of the emergencies, and the fact that in many international flights there in no convenient alternate landing location available.

So how did the patients in this study fare? Of the 11,920 in-flight medical emergencies in this study, there were 36 deaths (.3%).  30 of these occurred in-flight. In one third of the total cases, the problem was mild and resolved sufficiently so that patients requested no additional care on landing. Roughly 2/3’s of the patients were met by EMS personnel on landing. 37% of these were taken to the hospital for further testing and evaluation, and 9% admitted for care. The major reasons for admission were stroke, cardiac symptoms and obstetrical or gynecologic emergencies.(1)

In general, obstetrical symptoms in-flight were rare, and supported recommendations that air travel is safe up to the 36th week of gestation.(3) Diversion of aircraft occurred in only three cases of women in labor beyond 24 weeks.

In this study, the overall death rate for airborne medical emergencies was .3%. Most were the result of cardiac arrest and accompanying arrhythmias. In the 920 cardiac cases that did not involve an arrest, there were no deaths. Most were treated with oxygen, aspirin, and nitroglycerin.(1) An Automated External Defibrillator (AED) device was commonly used to assess heart rhythm and for defibrillation when indicated. With cardiac arrest in the air, survival rates can be as low as 16%, but are substantially higher with ventricular fibrillation (up to 55%).

So what can each of us do, since we are unlikely to stop flying any time soon. For passengers, come on the plane full hydrated, stay hydrated during the flight, and get up and move around intermittently to aid circulation. Be certain to bring your medications with you, and a list of serious medical conditions you might have. For potential health professional volunteers, be aware that you might be called upon for help in the air. Reread the list of materials listed above, and consider how you might be asked to utilize these with the assistance of a skilled emergency physician providing support on the ground.

For Health Commentary, I’m Mike Magee.

References:

1. Peterson DC et al. Outcomes of Medical Emergencies on Commercial Airline Flights. NEJM. May 30, 2013. 368:2075-83. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1212052#

2.  Aviation Medical Assistance Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-170, 112 Stat. 47 (1998).

3.  ACOG Committee Opinion No. 443: air travel during pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:954-955 CrossRef | Medline

“You” Are Not You, But “We”: How The Microbiome May Change Everything.

Posted on | May 24, 2013 | No Comments

Mike Magee

In 2003, I was moderating a Q&A session with Craig Venter, the American biologist and entrepreneur of DNA mapping fame. On behalf of the audience, I asked him what percentage of the knowledge required to optimally care for human beings did we currently possess. His unhesitant response?  “Less than one percent.” Over the years I’ve wondered a bit whether that was an exaggeration. But this week I became a true believer.

My full conversion came at the hands of Michael Pollan’s New York Times Magazine article titled “Some of My Best Friends Are Bacteria”.(1) I’ve been a fan of Pollan – the citizen scientist, food expert and brilliant investigative environmental and ecological journalist – for a number of years. But now Pollan has decided to not leave food on the table, but instead follow it directly into the human gut. And what he reveals, on behalf of leading edge gastrointestinal researchers is nothing short of revolutionary and mind-altering for medical science.

What’s the big picture? Well to start with, you may think of “you” as you, but “you” are largely “them”. On the average, you carry about 2 pounds of microbes, largely in your intestinal tract. That includes some 100 trillion organisms, with hundreds of varieties, including non-invasive freeloaders, mutually beneficial symbiotics, and occasional harmful pathogens. Only 10% of the genomic material in your body is your own. The other 90% is possessed by these organisms, now termed your “second genome”, or your “microbiota” or “microbiome”.(1, 2)

In 2010, professors at the Center for Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Oregon published a landmark review article  titled, “From Structure to Function: The Ecology of Host-Associated Microbial Communities”. The authors created quite a stir when they said we humans needed to think of ourselves not as individuals but as communities, or in their words, “a collective property of the human-associated microbiota”. (3)

Going one step further, and reflecting on the fact that the average human gastrointestinal tract manages the passage of 50 tons of food in a lifetime, the authors suggested that much of that food goes to feeding the microbiome, a teeming collective life form essential to our survival, and integrated into all of our major homeostatic mechanisms. Further they suggested that feeding the microbiome the wrong types of food led to adjustments in the varied colonies of organisms, which in turn resulted in altered gut permeability and inflammatory reactions, and possibly common pathways to chronic diseases including diabetes, auto-immune diseases, cardiovascular disease, and cancer.(1,3)

It seems that intestinal epithelial cells are an internal type of skin that plays by very different rules. Where most cells receive nourishment through molecules distributed by our extensive vascular system, our colonic epithelial cells feed on short-chain fatty acids derived from intestinal bacteria driven fermentation of plant fiber in the large intestine.(2)

So we’re harboring a hidden world down there, a world that must be fed and treated properly if we are to thrive. But the story does not end there. It seems that evolutionary wise, we’ve outsourced a wide range of functions to this “second genome”, experts believe, because they are capable of managing normal and abnormal physiology better and quicker than our primary genome.(1,2,3)

Understanding the complexities of this huge and hidden wilderness is in its infancy. But what scientists have uncovered in just the last year or two, through the use of new gene sequencing technology to map the microbiome, is pretty startling including:

1. Our microbiome manufactures a variety of substances including the neurotransmitter  serotonin, enzymes, vitamins, amino acid and short-chain fatty acids, and signaling molecules that help modulate our immune and the metabolic systems.(2,3)

2. While involving itself in fundamental physiologic feedback cycles, the microbiome is also managing the speed, motility and efficiency of the movement of food through the human gut, and at the same time keeping a close eye on its own needs for food. Each organism has somewhat different needs. So the food we chose helps tip our microbiota in the direction of those microbes who like the diet we’ve selected for them.(1,2,3)

3. It turns out that scientists have been doggedly pursuing fecal samples in young and old here, there, and everywhere. Initially, newborns guts are sterile. Most of the bacteria are inherited from the mother when babies pass through the microbial rich birth canal. Babies born by C-section, lack this natural insemination. Their microbial guts early on resemble mostly the microbe colonies of mother and father’s skin. Babies who are breast fed have a different microbiome than those who are not. By age three, children have a nearly adult microbiome.(1,2)

4. Individuals in less developed nations have a more diverse micobiome which may in part be the reason they exhibit less inflammatory and chronic diseases than those in the developed world. At the same time, this diversity results in higher rates of morbidity and mortality from infectious pathogens.(2,3)

5. Our overuse of antibiotics clearly represents an assault on our microbiomes, and is life altering for the many microbial species we support as part of the “second genome’. But in addition, it likely has significant implications for basic physiologic mechanisms. For example, livestock producers have for many years used feed laced with low dose antibiotics because it is known to speed up growth of animals. Where it used to take 6 years to bring a cow to market, it now takes 18 months.(4,5) Might childhood obesity be similarly favored considering that the average American child ingests 10 to 20 courses of antibiotics before age 18?(1)

6. Where our personal genome is relatively rigid, fixed, and slow to adapt, our “second genome” is far more malleable and open to manipulation.(2,3) For example, individuals critically ill with Clostridia difficile have been successfully treated with fecal transplants donated from normal individuals.(6) If the microbiome can be positively impacted by treatment from below, could the same be true from above? Scientists involved in the field agree the answer is yes. Expect the rapid emergence of “therapeutic foods”.(1) But be aware of a high rate of fraud until regulations catch up. For example, one study of 14 probiotic products revealed that only one of them contained the microbes promised on the label.(7)

7. The American highly processed, additive rich, fast food diet favors upper GI quick feeding at the expense of lower GI slow fermentation. The resultant microbiome may be leading to gut epithelial permeability, inflammatory responses and numerous chronic disease entities.(1,2,3)

Clearly this is just the beginning. But it does point the way toward some actions now, according to the experts. These include:

1. A more cautious approach to the use of antibiotics.

2. A more relaxed sanitary regimen. Super sterile environments result in less microbiome diversity. Greater diversity overall is beneficial.

3. Elimination or serious reduction in processed food that discourages fermentation in the colon. To feed bugs well think Al dente pasta, steel-cut oats, raw or lightly cooked vegetables, home preparation, slow food and slow digestion.  As Pollan says,  “This is at once a very old and a very new way of thinking about food: it suggests that all calories are not created equal and that the structure of a food and how it is prepared may matter as much as its nutrient composition… With our diet of swiftly absorbed sugars and fats, we’re eating for one and depriving the trillion of the food they like best: complex carbohydrates and fermentable plant fibers.”(1)

Stay Tuned!

For Health Commentary, I‘m Mike Magee

References.

1. Pollan M. “Some of my best friends are bacteria”. NYT Magazine. May 19,2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/19/magazine/say-hello-to-the-100-trillion-bacteria-that-make-up-your-microbiome.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

2. Lozupone CA et al. Diversity, stability and resilience of the human gut microbiota. Nature.489:7415, Sept. 13, 2012. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7415/full/nature11550.html

3. Robinson CJ, et al. From Structure to Function: The Ecology of Host-Associated Microbial Communities. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews. 74(3):453-476. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2937523/

4. Gaskins HR et al. Antibioptics as growth promotants: Mode of action. Animal Biotechnology. 13:1,2002. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1081/ABIO-120005768#.UZ-TEjl7SHU

5. Pollan M. The Omnivore’s Dilemma. The Penquin Press. 2006. http://www.amazon.com/The-Omnivores-Dilemma-Natural-History/dp/1594132054

6. Kelly CP, LaMont JT. Clostridia difficil – More Difficult Than Ever. NEJM. 2008;359:1932-40. http://elearning6.ttuhsc.edu/som/internalmedicine/general/education/must_reads/documents/clostridium_difficile_nejm_oct2008.pdf

7. Marcobal A, Underwood MA, Mills DA. Rapid determination of the bacterial composition of commercial probiotic products by terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. J. Pediatric Gastrointestinal Nutrition. May, 2008. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18493222

HRSA Report: Nursing Supply Growing

Posted on | May 21, 2013 | No Comments

HRSA Report:

“There were 2.8 million RNs (including advanced practice RNs) and 690,000 LPNs working in the field of nursing or seeking nursing employment in 2008 to 2010. About 445,000 RNs (16 percent) and 166,000 LPNs (24 percent) lived in rural areas. The per capita distribution of RNs varied substantially across states.

The nursing workforce grew substantially in the past decade, with RNs growing by more than 500,000 (24 percent) and LPNs by more than 90,000 (16 percent).

Growth in the nursing workforce outpaced growth in the U.S. population. The number of RNs per 100,000 population (per capita) increased by nearly 14 percent, and the number of LPNs per capita increased by about 6 percent.”  Continue….

Resetting Our Biases: Entering A New Stage of “Health Enlightenment”

Posted on | May 15, 2013 | No Comments

Mike Magee

This week, the Washington Post published a lengthy piece focused on Medicare Part D, its history, and how it might be improved.(1) The suggestions – ranging from mining data to requiring diagnostic codes on prescriptions – zeroed in on “better prescribing”. What they missed completely was a simpler strategy with arguably greater benefit to health consumers – “less prescribing”.

Let’s step back for a moment and review the last 30 years of the health consumer movement. Gaining steam in and around 1983 as part of the civil rights movement, we have seen health consumers move from emancipation to educational empowerment to responsible direct engagement in their own health decision making. During that same period, the patient-physician relationship has shed much of its paternalism and moved toward partnership models marked by mutual decision making. Finally provision of care is increasingly delivered by a team, rather than by an individual. The teams are more diverse, multi-skilled and both technologically enabled and more mobile.(2)

All that said, further progress will be tied to adjusting biases of both providers and consumers to align with what appears to be an emerging age of “health enlightenment”. The sparks of this movement are largely being driven by two bands of women. The first are young mothers and mothers-to-be who are information and resource focused, and who rely on the Internet and social networking to advise, plan and execute healthy environments that maximize the human potential of their now and future families. The second band are a group of women, age 40 to 70, who are managing frail and disabled parents and grandparents while remaining engaged with children and grandchildren. These family caregivers seek a simpler, more efficient, more effective home-centered delivery system.(3)

In many ways these two bands leading the ‘health enlightenment” movement are mining the same simple fundamental truth – “less is more”. Less drugs, less fake food, less eating out, less stress, less sleep deprivation, less office visits, less hospitalization. They see low hanging fruit all around them. But how best might they execute this current revolution?

Here are three steps that would go a long way toward resetting a century of health provider driven bias that limits quality of life in a modern society.

1. Be Biased Against Medications. Ever since doctors returned from WWII flush with the joy of access to the “wonder drug”, Penicillin, our physicians have embraced the prescription pad as their best friend. Pharmaceutical reps happily fed the frenzy, and patients embraced what they saw as “easy fixes”. The reality is that many of these drugs are based on an incomplete understanding of human basic science, over-marketing of benefit and under-marketing of risk, and complex inter-drug interactions that create as many problems as they solve. The two critical questions consumers need to ask are, “Do I really need to take this drug?” and “How can I adjust my daily life to avoid having to take this drug?” The two critical questions the health professionals need to ask (think statins or anti-hypertensives) are “Has the ratcheting down of protocol driven ‘normal ranges’ been effected by expert witness/pharmaceutical conflict of interest?” and “Is the basic science underpinning for this drug I’m about to prescribe as well understood as the powers that be portray?” or stated in another way, “Have I properly weighted the downside of putting everyone with a diastolic blood pressure of 90, or a total cholesterol of 220, on a lifelong drug regimen?”

2. Be Biased Toward Self-Management. With the support of Obamacare, we are seeing major expansion of insurance coverage and conversion to electronic medical records. These changes will hopefully improve continuity of care and elements of health planning. Some consumers have interpreted this to mean that, if they can only find the right doctor and health system, the doctor will “keep track of keeping them well”.  But health consumers need to understand that no health professional is as motivated, focused and undistracted when it comes to the health planning for them and their families as they are. They need to maintain a file of their own medical records and results. As important, they need to plan forward and organize a system that will reliably flag them when certain preventive milestones like mammograms, colonoscopy, annual flu shots, childhood immunizations and more are due.

3. Be Biased Toward Learning. Deeply embedded in the psyche of America’s patients is the belief that medicine is too complicated for them to understand and is better left to doctors and nurses to learn and communicate to us. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The basics – including normal and abnormal function of organs, basic disease entities, basic approaches to safety and prevention, and basic techniques to promote family wellness are well within the reach of everyday people. We have come to understand that poor financial knowledge places individuals and families at risk. Well the same is certainly true for medical science knowledge. Now this knowledge is at our fingertips, and it is only going to get better. And in certain areas, such as home-based nutrition, stress reduction, and life balance, the consumer is often far ahead of the health professional.

In the modern patient-physician relationship, we will rely on the health professional team to analyze data, coach, and advise on our performance against customized, well thought-out, personalized health plans. That trusted team will also be called on to ease access to specilized care, complex diagnostics and hospitals if and when these are required. As important, in an era of “health enlightenment”, we seek out their knowledge, judgement, and counsel, and in return we adjust our behaviors to reinforce the health professionals success and well-being. To do all this, we must bring knowledge and good will to the table, and must be well informed, prepared, alert, engaged and enlightened.

Foe Health Commentary, I’m Mike Magee.

References:

1. Weber T, Orenstein C, LaFleur J. Strengthening Medicare’s Drug Benefit: 8 Recommendations. ProPublica published in Washington Post. May 11, 2013.http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/strengthening-medicares-drug-benefit-8-recommendations/2013/05/11/6998fdd6-b8f5-11e2-aa9e-a02b765ff0ea_story.html

2.Magee M. “Connecting Healthy Homes To A Preventive Healthcare System: Leveraging Technology.: The Populist Transformation of American Health Care”,Harvard Health Policy Review, Volume  8:7, Fall,2007. http://hhpronline.org/publication/previous-issues/fall-2007-part-1/

3. Magee M. “The Patient – Provider Relationship” in Connecting With The New Healthcare Consumer, McGraw Hill, 1999. http://www.amazon.com/Connecting-New-Healthcare-Consumer-Defining/dp/0071346724

IHI Report Looks At County to County Variability

Posted on | May 13, 2013 | No Comments

IHI ANNOUNCEMENT: “Quality pioneer W. Edwards Deming once remarked, ‘If I could reduce my message…to just a few words, I’d say it all has to do with reducing variation.’ If reducing variation is the path to improved quality, then identifying and understanding variation are surely the first steps. ‘Counties of Interest: Achieving Better- or Worse-Than-Expected Health Outcomes‘ —- a recently posted IHI 90-Day R&D Project Summary Report —- is the type of analysis that can help. This project identifies US counties with health outcomes significantly better or worse than expected based on their socioeconomic status and looks at what is behind the results through both a statistical analysis and a qualitative investigation. For those interested in learning more about geographical variation in health outcomes, be sure to check out the updated data from County Health Rankings —- a collaboration between the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute.”

keep looking »

"Plan B Gets Green Light"

 

Latest Health News

 

		Ralph Snyderman Prospective Health Blog BIOGRAPHY
		Bill Crounse Health Blog BIOGRAPHY
		Eric Dishman Intel Health Blog BIOGRAPHY
		William L. (Larry) Minnix, Jr. The Future of Aging Blog BIOGRAPHY
		Paul S. Auerbach, MD Water Disinfection for Developing Countries BIOGRAPHY
		Tom Linden, MD Health Blog BIOGRAPHY
		Eric Dishman Euthanasia, Abortion, Communism, Trillions of Dollars, Losing Freedom, and Town Hall Mobs BIOGRAPHY
		Meredith Magee Donnelly Healthy Choices for Children BIOGRAPHY
		Barbara Ficarra Don't go to the Hospital Without these BIOGRAPHY
		Mark J. Lema, MD Post-Election Healthcare Reform BIOGRAPHY
		Michael Millenson Yearning for Universal Coverage Is Not Universal BIOGRAPHY
		Lewis Miller Is America's Health Care System Failing? BIOGRAPHY
		Judith A. Salerno,MD, MS No Time for Health Like the Holidays BIOGRAPHY
		Rebecca Scritchfield Probiotics: Hope or Hype? BIOGRAPHY

 

 

 

 

Search for:

Subscriber Options

• Click Here to Subscribe

Archives

Select Month June 2013  (2) May 2013  (8) April 2013  (7) March 2013  (6) February 2013  (7) January 2013  (6) December 2012  (5) November 2012  (3) October 2012  (5) September 2012  (8) August 2012  (11) July 2012  (4) June 2012  (3) May 2012  (6) April 2012  (9) March 2012  (5) February 2012  (7) January 2012  (4) December 2011  (6) November 2011  (5) October 2011  (4) September 2011  (9) August 2011  (6) July 2011  (9) June 2011  (17) May 2011  (8) April 2011  (11) March 2011  (10) February 2011  (5) January 2011  (6) December 2010  (6) November 2010  (4) October 2010  (8) September 2010  (12) August 2010  (10) July 2010  (35) June 2010  (23) May 2010  (21) April 2010  (32) March 2010  (33) February 2010  (38) January 2010  (42) December 2009  (39) November 2009  (43) October 2009  (7) September 2009  (6) August 2009  (9) July 2009  (8) June 2009  (6) May 2009  (5) April 2009  (4) March 2009  (7) February 2009  (4) January 2009  (11) December 2008  (4) November 2008  (11) October 2008  (8) September 2008  (8) August 2008  (10) July 2008  (17) June 2008  (14) May 2008  (14) April 2008  (19) March 2008  (22) February 2008  (21) January 2008  (35) December 2007  (15) November 2007  (13) October 2007  (12) September 2007  (20) August 2007  (5) July 2007  (5) June 2007  (12) May 2007  (11) April 2007  (10) March 2007  (13) February 2007  (6) January 2007  (12) December 2006  (7) November 2006  (8) October 2006  (11) September 2006  (7) October 2000  (9) September 2000  (6)

Topics

• Classroom Use
• Comments
• Daily Choice
• Daily News Feed
• Guest Bloggers
• Health Commentary
• Health Politics
• New Offerings
• Permission
• Shared Links

Recent Posts

• Plan B: Context and Facts
• Medical Leaders and Consumers Lining Up To Support Nurses.
• Airplane Medical Care: Could You Survive?
• “You” Are Not You, But “We”: How The Microbiome May Change Everything.
• HRSA Report: Nursing Supply Growing

Recent Comments

• narzedzia pozycjonerskie on The Coffee Fix
• Deshawn Coull on The Bob Butler Tribute: 2 Week Seminar on Aging – Day 11
• piramida linków on Brother Austin David Embraces Technology: Circa 1977
• Mike Magee on Why Pick Up A Crying Baby?
• janice mancuso on Why Pick Up A Crying Baby?

Calendar

June 2013

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« May
					1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30