Investing in Information Technology Pays Off: Meaningful Use Stage 1 Met by Majority of US Hospitals
According to a new Health Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS) Leadership Survey (http://himss.files.cms-plus.com/HIMSSorg/Content/files/leadership_FINAL_REPORT_ 022813.pdf), which was released at the 2013 HIMSS annual conference, the government’s efforts to impact provider investments in information technology (IT) to qualify for Meaningful Use and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) conversions are paying off.
The Value of Actionable Content in a Clinical Setting: Access to Better Information Facilitates Enhanced Cancer Care
A ll available patient and medical information drives clinical decisions. However, the inability to provide evidence-based medical information when and where it is most useful can compromise efforts to deliver the best care. Payers and providers alike understand the importance of actionable content—namely, information designed to prompt or to suggest an action—but they struggle with how to deploy such information directly into the context of day-to-day patient care.
On January 17, 2013, nearly 3 years after its initial proposed rule, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued the long-awaited and much-anticipated Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) “omnibus” rule, extending the scope of the privacy law beyond healthcare providers to their business associates and subcontractors, and adding increased penalties for noncompliance.1
On December 12, 2012, Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Kathleen Sebelius mused in her blog on the progress made by health plans toward the establishment of the health insurance exchanges, which will open the world of health insurance to many currently uninsured, as well as insured, Americans. States can choose to establish their own exchange, enter into a state-federal partnership, or default to an exchange that will be set up and run by the federal government, under the auspices of the HHS Secretary.
Value-based reimbursement represents a fundamental shift in the way health plans pay providers for care. Rather than creating incentives for providers to deliver high-quantity care—a downside of the fee-for-service (FFS) model—value-based reimbursement aims at creating incentives for providers to achieve high-quality care.1,2 Because value-based reimbursement is focused on driving healthcare value, improved population-based outcomes are an expected result.1,2
Cost Management through Care Management, Part 2: The Importance of Managing Specialty Drug Utilization in the Medical Benefit
In our previous article, we outlined the importance of choosing a specialty pharmacy that is able to implement clinical and utilization management programs to maximize patient outcomes and minimize the waste associated with specialty pharmaceuticals.1 Those crucial capabilities prevent unnecessary plan expenditures on specialty medications. Each specialty medication covered by a payer is a substantial investment in a patient’s healthcare, often costing $20,000 to $200,000 or more annually.
Cost Management through Care Management: A Perspective on Choosing the Right Specialty Pharmacy Partner, PART 1
Specialty pharmaceuticals are quickly commanding a growing share of prescription market share dollars and consequently a greater amount of attention from payers. It is becoming increasingly important for payers to fully understand the nuances of cost control within the specialty pharmacy space before developing a contracting and formulary strategy for specialty pharmaceuticals.
Payers generally assert that in the face of rising costs they will manage pharmaceuticals more tightly. However, many restrictions that they say they will initiate never become widespread. Why not? Payers may offer a restrictive benefit design, but often employers and other plan sponsors are reluctant to select such designs for their employees. To understand the benefit landscape, we need to look to payers as well as employers.
Incorporating new research findings into medical practice can take almost 2 decades according to estimates from the Institute of Medicine. Even when new research is published, clinicians tend to apply this knowledge inconsistently. The problem is most common in outpatient settings, particularly when providers are dispersed and have few opportunities to work in organized care teams in which new research may be more readily discussed and disseminated.
Page 3 of 8
Results 21 - 30 of 73
Results 21 - 30 of 73