At Infosys, our Insurance, Healthcare and Life Sciences teams strive for holistic, better and safer healthcare through the technology we create. In this blog, we will discuss healthcare IT, obstacles, successes, new ideas and much more, with the aim of improving healthcare technology, and quality of life as a result.

« May 2009 | Main | July 2009 »

June 29, 2009

HIPAA 5010 – more than just the pre-requisite for ICD 10!

I wish experts gave HIPAA 5010 the credit it deserves as an independent endeavor to improve EDI and reduce cost of healthcare. Positioning HIPAA 5010 mainly as the “pre-requisite” for ICD 10 is turning organizations’ focus away from implementing 5010 as an improvement measure.

HIPAA 5010 has more than 1,000 unique changes and only a few of them are targeted to accommodate the expanded ICD codes. Of course there will be additional clinical information available on the HIPAA 5010 file format, but that’s not all. Take for instance 5010’s ability to better handle “Coordination of Benefits” or the new codes to support additional paperwork information available at the provider’s office – these can be used to improve the effectiveness of EDI in claims processing.

Moreover, HIPAA 5010 standards were developed based on industry feedback on the shortcomings of 4010. Some HIPAA transactions are currently used 20% or less number of times and the interactions between trading partners are still manual. There is significant opportunity for improvement. By viewing 5010 as an opportunity beyond just the pre-requisite for ICD 10, the healthcare industry will move towards improved EDI – it might not be able to address all the current shortcomings, but it will surely be one more right step towards reducing the cost of healthcare.

June 17, 2009

Pay for Performance: A step in right direction

Consumerism is re-defining the healthcare landscape. P4P had the focus of moving from Pay for improved process to Pay for improved Outcomes. This has resulted in:

Patient awareness:
You can gauge the level of interest has considerably gone up among patients in their care decision from the trends in web traffic volumes for last 3-4 years around healthcare portal sites(Eg: WebMD), clinical outcome scores (e.g., Health Grades) or healthcare blog sites. While some patients may not be educated or qualified to understand the information, perception matters--and may ultimately influence their care decisions.
Informed decision making:
Pay-for-performance programs allow patients to compare the care offered at various hospitals based upon clearly defined and standardized metrics.
Payers will provide clinical outcome data to customers and encourage them to use it in order to bring down their reimbursement cost.
Such incentives will help increase the importance of the quality information being published. Hospitals that perform well on quality indicators can leverage their scores to differentiate themselves from their competitors, thereby resulting in improved public awareness and increased patient preference to obtain their care there.
Physician- Hospital collaborative Incentive
Positive patient outcomes require a collaborative effort on the part of doctors and hospitals.  Physician can provide quality care by working collaboratively with the hospital support staff.  The win-win situation achieved through P4P is that a physician will be incentivized for achieving higher compliance score and the hospital in turn can expect better reimbursements on the services delivered. Again the non financial incentive in terms of improved public awareness and increased patient preference. Moreover, the good compliance scores of physicians, nurses and support staff can be a good recruiting tool.  Hospitals with superior quality outcomes would be in a position to attract top physicians and top physicians can expect premiums on their services. This doesn’t not mean the patient pays for the premium. The hospital would be able to being down the operational cost by using the services of efficient physicians and there by passing on that benefit to the patient.

My common sense suggest P4P is a step in right directions, however there are many who have opposed the merits of the program for its stress on evidence based medicine to experience & skills of individuals. They claim these programs would slowly kill the innovation in Medicare.  I have always liked the statement " In god we believe blindly, for everything else provide data". P4P advocates the same.

ICD10 transition – Are the providers ready?

Isn’t that the million dollar question? A very wise man once said that for one to be ready to tackle an issue, one first has to acknowledge that there is an issue. Furthermore, one has to consider the issue as a clear and present impact/danger to one’s current state of existence, be it financial, physical or mental.

Problem is that there is a significant stratum of healthcare population who are still in denial mode. Payers, especially the large ones, have moved on from the denial phase and are gearing up for the impending change. In fact some of them are even using the mandate as an opportunity to generate efficiencies, as I mentioned in my last post. On the other hand, we have a large population of providers, who for one or the other reason are not willing to accept that the new code set is coming and is coming pretty hard, let alone the possibility that the impact will be catastrophic if one is not well prepared.

Over the last few months, I have heard a variety of reasons being proffered for this laissez-faire attitude, ranging from ‘It is never going to happen. ICD11 will come before ICD10 ever gets implemented’ to ‘What do I care. My vendor will provide me with all the upgrades that I ever need’ to ‘I outsource my revenue cycle in any case, so why should I care’. In certain uncomfortable encounters people have just simply laughed at me when I brought up ICD10, as if I have just cracked a real funny joke. Trust me it has given me second thoughts about my career choice, Maybe I should have become a stand-up comic. But then the sanity prevails.

Seriously, how can anybody think on such lines, especially when we just went through a mess with NPI? One account that I read sometime ago, stated that the overall reimbursement rate for the providers dipped by 4-6 percent because of the interruptions caused by NPI. And to think that the scope of NPI was a pittance compared to what is in store with ICD10. Let’s talk about some of these objections,

• It is never going to happen because ICD11 is already defined – I have just one thing to say about this one. ICD10 was defined way back in early 90s and it is going to take only around 20+ years to implement it in USA. What makes you think that ICD11, which came into draft reckonings only in mid 2000s, is going to be adopted any sooner. By the way, rest of the developed World has adopted ICD10 and going by precedence I don’t think we are going to leapfrog to unchartered waters.
• It will be pushed back – Well, it has already been pushed back. Original date was October 2011 and not 2013. If we go by precedence, CMS is not in the habit of pushing things back indefinitely. HIPAA Admin Simplification was pushed back a couple of times, NPI was pushed back by a year and so has ICD10 been too. Also, with the spiraling healthcare costs and bigger deficits, the administration is trying its best to improve initial quality of care and hence more focus on highly granular code schemes such as ICD10.
• Vendor will provide all remedies magically – First of all, most product vendors will cover only the absolute-must requirements such as increasing field sizes to cover 7 digit codes instead of 5 digit ICD9s. Second, at the best vendors will cover only their respective products. What happens to those umpteen home-grown COBOL programs? Thirdly, who said this is just a technical issue? What about the impact on all associated business processes? Even if your contract management system covers for 7 digit codes, if you have not renegotiated your contracts with your payers for new DRGs, don’t complain about the steep reductions in your payouts.
• All revenue cycle processes are outsourced – Really. And that is supposed to help you? I hope people realize that the impact of code changes is not only on RCM and/or contracting activities. It is going to pervade every sinew of the body that is healthcare. From benefit planning to claims adjudication, from contract negotiation to fee schedules, from care considerations to life style management, from disease management to pay for performance. The list is endless. You better have outsourced your physicians too, in case you want hide behind the “outsourcing” excuse.

So what is the net result? In my humble opinion (obviously I stretch the truth here by using the word ‘humble’), the state of readiness is a typical reflection of the World that we live in, i.e., a World divided between ‘Haves’ and ‘Have-nots’. The only difference is here it is ‘Getting ready’ or ‘Going to get into trouble’. There is no third category. Nobody is completely ready yet and won’t be for some time so that excludes the ‘Ready’ category. And on the other end anybody who does not get prepared is betting against odds higher than lightening striking the same place 10 times in a row (See, I deliberately did not use the lightening-striking-twice phrase because the odds the unprepared guys are working against are much larger than that). So that rules out the category ‘See-I-was-smart-did-not-spend-a-dollar-and-came-out-smiling’. That brings me back to my two original categories, ‘Getting ready’ or ‘Going to get into trouble’.

This is a very serious situation, especially in the ‘Provider’ space. The ‘bury-the-head-in-sand’ approach is not going to work. Believe it or not, the mandate is coming and equally certain is the fact that most payers (and all the big ones, commercial and blues) are going to be ready. And that could mean only one thing: providers will find themselves on the wrong end of the stick when it comes to renegotiating payments for new DRGs and/or worse yet, challenging the payouts down the line. How can one negotiate without any information or preparation with guys that have done their homework well? How can one not get penalized for low quality of care when one does not even have systems and/or processes to support the higher level of clinical granularity?

I don’t know who originally said it but I distinctly remember Sean Connory’s character saying it in ‘Untouchables’:

Never take a knife to a gun-fight.

Truer words have not been spoken and still we do it repeatedly and provider fraternity is no exception this time around.

June 16, 2009

HIPAA 5010 Transition – is a distinct “pilot” phase necessary?

HIPAA 5010 and ICD 10 are impacting the healthcare industry in an unprecedented way. The scale of the impact to systems and processes is such that there is no scope for debate on the need for upfront risk management strategies. However, I think the need for a distinct pilot phase as part of the risk mitigation strategy is debatable.

Healthcare EDI transactions involve loads of data, in a “many to many” interaction between trading partners. It is imperative that a small mismatch in the message format between trading partners or a small glitch in the claims processing rules can cause significant reduction in straight thru processing and its repercussions on loss of productivity and customer dissatisfaction. Due to lack of commitment and planning for a dedicated pilot phase, I have seen valid large value claims getting stuck in the chain of processes during the 4010 implementation – such incidents caused provider dissatisfaction and required backend updates to send the payment out after months of delay and follow up by the provider’s office. A distinct pilot phase between key trading partners will reduce the chances of such incidents on a large scale.

On the other hand, a distinct pilot phase requires significant investment. Key production systems will need to be replicated on a parallel pilot environment. This will require hardware, software and manpower investment. Additionally, the pilot phase will require equal amount of commitment from the trading partners – which might be difficult to guarantee in a “many to many” relationship.

So, a cost/benefit analysis should be carried out to determine the need for a distinct pilot phase. Experience with implementing the 4010A1 standards should be leveraged while making the call. There should be adequate focus on system and integration testing, if the decision to go without a distinct pilot phase is made.

Your thoughts and ideas on this topic are welcome!

June 15, 2009

AHIP 2009 - Key to the HC Reform and Trends for the future

I was at the Institute 2009 conducted by AHIP in San Diego. Excellent weather, fantastic people and exciting ambience has now put San Diego on the top of my list for a repeat visit. However these were just added attractions when compared to the seminar. Almost 1400 people attended, 400 odd from the various health plans and the rest were people trying to sell them some solution or services! It was a motley crew of attendees from an Infosys perspective: Clients, Prospects, Potential and current alliance partners, competitors. The booth area was huge and was extremely well designed to manage the flow of people. We had a protest too and the officer assigned to stand guard at the main building entrance spend 15 minutes talking to me about the pros and cons of the various pubs and steakhouses in the Gaslamp Area – but that’s another story.

A lot of political leadership turned up for the show: Jeb Bush, Howard Dean , Tom Daschle , to name a few and all the public policy meetings were jam packed. There were some very good insights into what’s going to happen in the next hundred days and Senator Daschle was unequivocal when he said the administration would probably be coming up with a framework for reform and set up a board in the lines of Fed reserve to oversee it. Governor Bush was all for free enterprise as long as it is government funded and left to the “care” of the private sector to run and manage the show.

The themes for this year were very clear:
-       Reduce cost of Health care
-       Reduce administrative costs
-       Shift the focus to improve the member’s health and work out a plan to fix the system – a clear hint on wellness based vs illness based approach
-       Strong focus on EMR and RHR across the entire HC value chain
-       Interoperability and collaboration across all stakeholders
-       “Meaningful use and common good” (this was kind of a last minute theme that many speakers injected into the meeting after their most recent Washington visits)

I will expand on them in my future blogs. Yours truly got to shake hands with Tom Daschle and got a signed copy of his book. By far he was the most impressive speaker in the conference – a true strategic thinker and consensus driven, he was undoubtedly the best choice for the Secretary of Health. I was also impressed with Dr Charles Kennedy from Wellpoint with strategic thinking and rapid dissection of the strategic element into realistic action plans!

Right now, I am low on battery and there is no charging port in sight. The airport has an amazingly fast free wi fi and excellent Mexican food with fresh salsa bars! Adios! Viva San Diego (MHRIP!)

June 10, 2009

“The Wizard of Oz” (Healthcare)

Observations;

There seems to be a divide in the Healthcare Technology World in the U S between those that are proactively pursuing technology because it is necessary, improves quality and a necessary component of compliance and those who are “Capital” challenged and waiting for the “Wizard” to grant them the permission ($) to proceed. The ARRA HIT stimulus bill is effecting Healthcare Executives in different ways. George Halverson, CEO of Kaiser Permanente, one of the largest Healthcare Provider organizations in the world, declared at HIMSS, 2009 in Chicago during his keynote address that it was time to “Fix it Dammit”. While it is obvious that this is one approach there are still those that want the money first.

Reality for the Market;

Compliance still matters! Does it really? Quality still matters! Oh yeah? There is a contingent of CIOs that are being told to “Fix it Dammit” by their Executive Teams and are exploring otherwise forbidden fruit for many Regional and National Health Systems. Value Propositions for cost efficiencies, improving quality, competing in a patient competitive market space (for now) with the provision of EHR/PHR and closely tracking revenue winners/losers (P4P) for patient referral data is paramount for those companies that will ultimately win out. How about Utilization, Enterprise Performance Management and utilization, CXO Dashboards?

 How about “Shovel Ready”? What does that really mean? Is it going to mean those that are proactive will get the ($) first with their strategically planned and developing projects or is it going to be beneficial for those that wait?

I am told by prospective customers that are closely following Washington legislators and assisting with the development of the Obama Health Stimulus Plan that the lack of expertise on the political panels sitting on the other side of the table is much like “The Wizard of Oz “(Healthcare). Who needs a heart, courage or a brain? Will the Wizard tell us? Will we “Fix it Dammit” or will this be another exercise in “Community Health Information Networks” (CHINS) that arose in 1993 out of the Hillary plan? (a failed effort)

 There are many possibilities according to which way the political winds blow but just maybe we can control this proactively before the government steps in and tells us what to do and how to do it. If the latter happens, quality of patient care in the U S will surely diminish.

June 05, 2009

ICD-10 – How to deal with the increase in paperwork?

As with anyone, physicians and other healthcare providers see paperwork as more of a burden on them than anything else. While there is no doubt that ICD-10 is going to improve the quality and efficiency of overall healthcare delivery and administration, it is going to increase the burden of paperwork even further. I think there is an urgent need for investment to address providers’ concerns around paperwork, especially with ICD-10 due for implementation in a few years.

Investments need to be channeled towards Research and Development of new technology and towards leveraging existing technology on the healthcare industry. Speech recognition, new automated ways of converting paper to reliable electronic data and intuitive automated systems that can use historical data to reliably predict outcomes and create prescriptions, are some of the ways to reduce paperwork.

Reliability is a key requirement for technology deployed in healthcare delivery. And it takes significant amount of time and money to build reliable systems. A big portion of Obama administration’s earmarked fund for healthcare needs to go to a focused technology initiative. Inaction to address the increase in paperwork due to ICD-10 will frustrate physicians more than they already are with the current volume of paperwork – and we don’t want frustrated doctors to be treating us; do we now?

June 02, 2009

Have a heart for the poor physician bearing the brunt of healthcare reform initiatives!

Has anyone really given a thought to the plight of the small (and large!) physician as a result of all of the proposed reforms in healthcare?  Doctors, to a large extent, seem to have been made scapegoats in the battle for healthcare reform.  At the same time, true reform is impossible without doctors participating willingly and eagerly. An incredibly ironic situation, but ripe for disaster in the making.

Not so long ago, doctors were professionals who were primarily focused on clinical care.  Today they are focused on clinical care + practice management + claims management + IT implementation + legal concerns +..... the list is almost endless.  Add to this, the pressure of society's sole barometer for success being financial, and the burden becomes a mountain.

In the face of these overwhelming yet invariably contradictory forces, clinical practice today has become almost impossibly challenging for even the most committed of doctors.  Everyone, literally EVERYONE, has complaints against the quality of medical care today.  Almost invariably the blame for this is brought to rest at the doctor's door.

I would think that given this state of affairs, one of the first places to look to actually implement true reform is the doctor and the doctor - patient relationship!  But, this is the last area that is being actually seriously looked at, if at all!. 

We hear strong statements about EHR implementation, P4P, Universal insurance, Executive consortium meetings, ARRA etc etc.  Shouldn't we also be hearing, equally stridently; about physician support, physician value proposition, medical education reforms, relationship management, clinical decision support systems, knowledge management value to clinicians etc etc....?

So let me make a somewhat radical statement - and I GENUINELY hope I will be proved wrong.

In spite of the wonderful noises being made on healthcare reform, very little or no improvement will be seen in the healthcare industry's functioning by 2018 that can be DIRECTLY attributed to the reforms being proposed.  Natural balancing systems of supply, demand and the cultural inflexibility of the industry's clinical and administrative bureaucracy will more than compensate for any 'business level' changes that are being attempted.

I propose that the ONLY way to bring about any serious healthcare reform is to target the 2 KEY participants in this industry.  The doctor and the patient.  The best analogy I have found to clearly, completely and concisely explain this fact is to give the following analogy.

Imagine that for some reason - it may well be needed, but is not my area of expertise :-) - the practice of religion needed to be reformed! Would you not first look at the behaviour of the priest and the believer?

Healthcare is as personal, emotional, individual and sometimes illogical to the patient and practitioner as religion is to the believer and priest.

Essentially the foundation of healthcare lies in trust, respect and belief between these two 2 key participants.  This may well be less true in highly 'developed' countries compared to 'developing' countries (a potentially endless topic of debate), but still remains the key to reforming the industry.

Thus:

1)  Reform medical education. 

Essentially catch them early and mould physicians into the right attitudes and character required to genuinely provide the best possible care.  Make Medical Education truly holistic in ALL aspects of caring for a patient; not just in the area of academic knowledge.

2)  Empower the physician with the best possible knowledge management tools and technologies available.

Medical knowledge has gone beyond the ability of any single human being to completely encompass even within a single specialised or super-specialised area.  This is not via just data collection through EHR/EMR but a need for a serious focus on intelligent decision support and knowledge management tools. If we don't execute this, physicians (and therefore the industry) will increasingly lose sight of the holistic aspect of patient care in an effort to keep pace with knowing everything about a single area of speciality.

3)  Empower the patient with substantially more medical knowledge and authority than he / she possesses today.

Level the playing field and balance the relationship between the physician and the patient. These 2 players should be true partners and drivers of the industry!


Only if you do the above, even to a partial extent, will the 'reforms' proposed today have any chance of truly reforming the industry!


In the words of the great poet Rabindranath Tagore:

Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high;
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening thought and action--
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.


Replace 'country' with 'healthcare industry' and you will perhaps be even more relevant!!  It definitely can't be done without the physician!

Subscribe to this blog's feed
Webinar: Zero Business Interruption SAP upgrade - Hear how Astra Zeneca and Infosys made it happen

Infosys on Twitter


Blog Roll