From a national public policy perspective, it is becoming increasingly evident that our nation is steadily evolving towards embracing an integrated, primary care-oriented health care delivery system. The enactment of President Obama's landmarkPatient Protection and Affordable Care Act [PPACA] is unquestionably the most dramatic indication. This law provides the various States and the Administration with considerable flexibility to reach national objectives, as it is systematically implemented over the next five to ten years. The legislation is fundamentally patient-centered and not provider-centric. Psychology must appreciate that the clinical services our practitioners provide are, in today's political and policy world, deemed to be health care services. Accordingly, how the nation addresses the complexities of that environment will have a direct and profound impact upon the profession's future (i.e., practice, education, and research). Substantive change evolves over time and is almost always based upon foundations established by visionaries from the past. We would urge that psychology pay careful attention to the views expressed by those Institute of Medicine (IOM) participants who have, and frequently still are serving as health policy appointees within the Bush and Obama Administrations. Their focused attention upon curtailing the ever-escalating cost of health care and bringing data-based, scientific knowledge to the daily delivery of care is unprecedented. The advances occurring within computer sciences and related communications fields make their vision achievable.
Movement Towards Integrated Care: Five years ago the State ofMassachusetts joined Hawaii in enacting legislation which took a significant step towards guaranteeing that all of its citizens would have access to necessary health care. Recently, due primarily to ever-escalating costs, it is considering replacing its fee-for-service system with an increasingly capitated approach that is very similar to President Obama's Accountable Care Organization (ACO) initiative (which many have suggested is founded upon President Nixon's HMO vision). The underlying concept is to provide pre-set payments to organized teams of health care providers which would be responsible for all of the care required by a group of patients, with the possibility of bonuses for keeping people healthy. Currently 98% of Mass.residents are insured with the Senate President acknowledging: "We did access first. Now we have to figure out how we afford that." The Governor's proposal builds upon a consensus among leaders from the state's insurance and hospital industries, medical society, and legislature who served on a special state commission. Fee-for-service "is a primary contributor to escalating costs and pervasive problems of uneven quality" the commission unanimously concluded.
The Healthcare Imperative: Lowering Costs and Improving Outcomes: The IOM has proposed lowering the nation's health care expenditures by 10% in 10 years, while improving patient health and the quality of care provided. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that federal spending on health care will double in the next decade, consuming 27% of the budget by 2020. The overarching IOM vision is to have 90% of clinical decisions being supported by accurate, timely, and up-to-date clinical information by 2020. To accomplish this, it will be necessary to develop a learning health system that is designed to generate and apply the best evidence for the collaborative health care choices of each patient and provider and to drive the process of discovery to become a natural outgrowth of patient care, while ensuring innovation, quality, safety, and value in health care. Evidence development must not be merely an occasional byproduct of health care, but instead evidence capture and analysis, as well as its application, must be systematically structured as an integral and natural component of the care process.
An IOM workshop identified six domains of excess costs in health care: unnecessary services (volume), services delivered inefficiently, prices that are too high, excessive administrative costs, missed prevention opportunities, and fraud. The participants concluded that each is an important contributor to excessive health care costs and the amount of excessive costs incurred from each is tremendous. Excess costs stemming from waste and inefficiency in the nation's health care system was estimated by IOM to total between $750 billion and $785 billion in 2009.
Health care cost increases continue to outpace the price and spending growth rates for the rest of the economy by a considerable margin. At $2.5 trillion and 17% of the GDP in 2009, health spending in our nation commanded twice the per capita expenditures of the average for other developed countries. "Moreover, there are compelling signals that much of health spending does little to improve health, and, in certain circumstances, may be associated with poorer health outcomes." Interestingly, the Peter G. Peterson Foundation which supported this workshop is primarily dedicated to the mission of increasing public awareness of the nature and urgency of key economic challenges threatening the nation's fiscal future, and accelerating action by identifying sensible, sustainable solutions. It has committed significant resources and attention to the area of health care costs and solutions given health care's direct impact upon the economy.
Without significant action, by 2050 Medicare and Medicaid expenditures will account for nearly a quarter of the entire U.S.economy. In 2008, Medicaid spending accounted for approximately 21% of total state spending and represented the single largest component of state spending. Similarly, in the private sector health care costs have contributed to slowing the growth in wages and jobs. "While the United States has the highest per capita spending on health care of any industrialized nation – 50 percent greater than the second highest and twice as high as the average for Europe, it continually lags behind other nations on many healthcare outcomes, including life expectancy and infant mortality."
A number of common themes surfaced. The Cost and Outcome Challenges. * Health Cost Excesses with Personal, Institutional, and National Consequences. * Health Outcomes Far Short of Expectations. Racial disparities in access lead to poorer outcomes, lost productivity, and lower quality of life. * Fragmented Decision Points, Inconsistent Principles, Political Distortions. The Drivers of the Shortfalls. * Scientific Uncertainty. The gap between practice needs and available guidance is growing. * Perverse Economic and Practice Incentives. * System Fragmentation. * Opacity as to Cost, Quality, and Outcomes. * Changes in the Population's Health Status. Since 48% of Medicare beneficiaries have at least three chronic conditions and 21% have five or more conditions, it has been estimated that approximately 60 million Americans have multiple morbidities, a number that is expected to increase to 81 million by 2020. * Lack ofPatient Engagement in Decisions. Almost 40% of Americans possess only "basic" or "below-basic" health literacy skills. Thus, their ability to make informed decisions becomes increasingly difficult as the volume and complexity of data available to them increases. * Under-Investment in Population Health. Only about 6% of national health expenditures are spent on public and population health. Levers to Address the Drivers. * Streamlined and Harmonized Health Insurance Regulation. * Administrative Simplification and Consistency. * Payment Redesign to Focus Incentives on Results and Value. There is a need to better target resources on those patients at highest risk of poor outcomes. * Quality and Consistency in Treatment, with a Focus on the Medically Complex. There are already more than 3,000 guidelines from more than 280 organizations registered with the National Guideline Clearinghouse, thus consistency in guideline recommendations is a concern. * Evidence That Is Timely, Independent, and Understandable. * Transparency Requirements as to Cost, Quality, and Outcomes. * Clinical Records That Are Reliable, Sharable, and Secure. * Data That Are Protected But Accessible for Continuous Learning. * Culture and Activities Framed by Patient Perspective. With 25% of Medicare expenditures attributed to unwanted variation in preference-sensitive care, it was noted by many of the participants that much of health care delivery has been shaped over the past generation with the primary convenience and interests of the clinician, not the patient, in mind. * Medical Liability Reform. And, * Prevention at the Personal and Population Levels.
As one should expect, there was considerable discussion surrounding the potential benefits of Comparative Effectiveness Research and Health Information Technology (i.e., electronic records and telehealth services). One of the participants asserted that: "(E)nhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of the U.S.healthcare system was dependent upon maximizing the contributions of healthcare professionals who are not physicians. She identified a number of current barriers which limit appropriate use of such providers, including federal and state laws and regulations; opposition from healthcare systems, professional medical groups, and managed care organizations; reimbursement and other payment policies; and exclusion from demonstrations proposed as part of health reform."
Psychology's Visionaries – Interdisciplinary Care: "I have had the privilege of serving on the Board of Advisors of the Duke University School of Nursing for the last four years at the request of the Dean who is the current President of the Association for the Advancement of Nursing. While I have always been a strong advocate of collaborative care, this experience is an education for me in the roles that nurses play in our emerging healthcare systems. I have learned about the roles nurses play in Global Health, such as the Duke nurses who develop and staff clinics in rural Tanzania with others leading distance education programs in the British West Indies. I have learned about the new professional degree for nurses, the Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP). At Duke, DNPs are being prepared to innovate and provide leadership in clinical service delivery, and to translate evidence into practice at the point of care. I have learned about the innovative on-line educational programs now available to nurses. I was able to attend a course for Nurse Informatacists on the Second Life platform. I have learned about the science of nursing, and the role Ph.D. faculty play in advancing healthcare science and education. Some nurses ARE psychologists, having earned their Ph.D. in psychology after attending nursing school; for example our immediate APA Past-President Carol Goodheart. Carol truly appreciates the emerging data on the social determinants of health as well as the importance of the primary healthcare providers in our country: family (as defined by the patient) caregivers, for acute and chronic conditions, which was one of her impressive Presidential initiatives. I have learned about how effective nursing organizations and their leadership are in their advocacy efforts, supporting their discipline and focused on better patient care. There is a profound research-practice gap in all disciplines. Researchers must come to understand the values and beliefs of particular clinicians in order to achieve wide dissemination. Psychology has much to learn from our sister discipline of nursing, whether through interdisciplinary courses or collaborative research or advocacy" [Susan McDaniel, University of Rochester Medical Center].
Ensuring Culturally Sensitive Care: "I Ola Lahui Rural Hawai'i Behavioral Health Program opened its doors in August of 2007 with the specific intention of developing an APA accredited internship program to helpHawai'i 'grow its own.' With only four APA accredited internships in the state, many of the best and brightest have been forced to leaveHawai'i during their crucial training years. On November 9th, 2010 the I Ola Lahui Internship Program was approved as an APA accredited program beginning in December, 2009. Since 2007, we have trained 10 psychologists with eight of them living and working in medically underserved areas. We currently have five more in training.
"Native Hawaiians continue to have major health and socioeconomic concerns that are disproportionately greater than other ethnic groups in Hawai'i. Native Hawaiians have the highest rate of untreated medical and psychological concerns, and those who do seek services rely primarily on state and federally sponsored programs for their health care. Greater medical and psychological concerns coupled with disparities in income and education and the cultural distress experienced by Native Hawaiians have created an unprecedented demand for health and mental health services. Further exacerbating the dire need for mental health treatment in underserved areas is the reluctance of patients to seek treatment due to the stigma of mental health problems. Increased access to quality health care for Native Hawaiians and other medically underserved populations in Hawai'iis desperately needed to combat these health disparities.
"The idea of creating I Ola Lahui arose from the growing behavioral and mental health care needs of the medically underserved and people who reside in the rural communities of Hawai'i. As with many medically underserved and rural communities across the U.S., those in Hawai'i face challenges in receiving quality medical and psychological services. Often people do not access care, are offered limited care, or are referred to specialty health care services in urban areas miles away or even on another island in our state. I Ola Lahui provides a sustainable source of behavioral health care that is tailored to the unique needs of this group.
"I Ola Lahui expresses our intent to improve the health and well being of our people. It means, 'So that the people will live and thrive.' The I Ola Lahui mission is to provide culturally-minded, evidence-based behavioral health care that is responsive to the needs of medically underserved and predominately Native Hawaiian rural communities. In recognition of Hawai'i's urgent need for more quality mental health care, I Ola Lahui is committed not only to providing services, but also to investigating the effectiveness of the services we provide and to training future providers with the hope of increasing the number of doctoral level behavioral health providers and services available in the medically underserved and rural areas of Hawai'i.
"I Ola Lahui is designed to serve Native Hawaiians and other medically underserved groups through specialized training exclusively in Hawai'i's Native Hawaiian Health Care System (NHHCS) clinics, Federally Qualified Community Health Centers (FQCHCs), and related programs. Although we, as an organization, aspire to have a significant impact upon the health and well being of all Native Hawaiians and other medically underserved groups living in rural areas, our mission is simple and based soundly in a real desire to improve the lives of the people in our islands. We are honored that this year we had 70 applicants for the two internship slots we can offer" [Robin Miyamoto, former HPA President]. "Chills the body but not the soul, hallelujah…. Michael row the boat ashore, hallelujah." Aloha,
Pat DeLeon, former APA President
