The Whatcom Alliance for Health Care Access is a long time community health care study group that I participate in, which is dedicated to improving access and quality of care in Whatcom County, Washington. It is composed of citizens from all walks of life and segments of society. On November 2, 2009, they reviewed HR 3962 and released their findings. What follows is my edited version of their conclusions.
General Comments on the Bill• This is a very comprehensive reform package that lays the ground work for providing changes and incentives to the delivery system that will reduce waste and improve outcomes overtime.
• Strong, thoughtful approach to Medicare payment reform that will result in implementation of recommendations over time
• Recognition and inclusion of reform initiatives. Specifics include a focus on wellness and prevention, expanding support for primary care training, creating opportunities for state and community level pilot projects and innovations and recognition of the importance of consumer engagement in reducing costs and improving outcomes.
Specific Comments Relative to Principles of Reform 1. Need to provide coverage and care for all people at all times regardless of age, employment status, economic circumstances and preexisting conditions• Bill effectively addresses underwriting issues relative to age, health status and pre-existing conditions and creates level playing field for public and private market
• Bill provides options for all individuals (including low income) and most businesses to access affordable and in some cases subsidized health coverage through the exchange or through Medicare or Medicaid
2. Need to improve patient outcomes and reduce waste through improved care coordination, and a focus on primary care and preventive care.• Emphasis on reduction of waste and fraud throughout bill including provisions in Medicare and Medicaid changes are seen as addressing this issue
• Reform elements throughout bill to increase primary care training including expanding residency options seen as positive
• Medical home recognition and including support of medical home pilot programs and shared decision making seen as effective
• Elimination of co-payments and deductibles for preventive services in Medicare and Medicare supports access to preventive care
• Grant program to help small employers to strengthen workplace wellness programs and support of community preventive services grants seen as important steps.
3. Need to assure consumer choice of providers and public and private plans • Addressed through establishment of exchange and creation of a self sustaining public option.
4. Need to simplify the system (insurance administration, etc.) so that it is user friendly (understandable and transparent to consumers.)• Creating level playing field in terms of underwriting and enactment of administrative simplification to reduce paperwork, standardize transactions and improve transparency seen as important step forward
5. Need to control costs and improve quality of care by reforming the payment system so that it rewards results and not activity and holds providers accountable for outcomes not procedures.• Increased payments for primary care under Medicaid important step
• Addressing of Medicare payment rates based on geography and geographic variations in health spending through IOM studies with provisions for adopting recommendations is needed for cost control and quality improvement in Medicare
• Provisions for Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation creation and empowerment, creation of Accountable Care Organization program and Comparative Effectiveness Research Agency all needed to identify quality measures, provide the science to implement evidence based care and provide the incentives for the delivery system to implement those changes
• Changes to Medicare Advantage plans seen as supporting this principle
Some Persisting Questions and Issues1. Affordability will be an ongoing challenge that needs to be monitored and addressed. How will that be handled?
2. What role will the public options play in health reform proposals to drive innovation?
3. Is financing adequate and sustainable?
