Health system CFOs across the country face a unique quandary. Operating margins remain low, staffing shortages restrict services, industry-wide buying power is waning, organizational credit ratings are at risk, and inflation rapidly affects reimbursement and patient affordability. From the CFO’s point of view, it is prudent to look toward other industries and adopt a holistic approach to managing their organizations’ financial health.

The following seven habits can be employed by health system CFOs leading through turbulent economic times:

Embrace Adaptation in the Post-Pandemic Era

The pandemic disrupted traditional operations, requiring a departure from established norms. In this post-pandemic era, CFOs must acknowledge that returning to the pre-pandemic status quo is not feasible. Rising labor costs and supply chain challenges in the face of capped payor contracts demand fresh strategies. Relying solely on traditional approaches and partners in this new environment will not work. To remain effective, CFOs and their operational leaders must lead their organizations in adapting to the new post-pandemic reality.

Repurpose Savings for Clinical Impact

Non-clinical departments often struggle to inspire clinicians, but CFOs can bridge this gap by strategically connecting clinical goals with repurposed savings from overhead departments. Healthcare leaders should embrace innovative cost-saving approaches, such as considering non-clinical spending as a strategic category of costs to negotiate. CFOs can funnel those savings back into the clinical environment, easing pressure on physicians and nurses and enhancing patient care. An annual habit of exploring non-clinical spending to fund clinical initiatives can pay off for both resources and morale.

Shift from Volume to Efficiency

The age-old adage “volume is everything” in healthcare may not go away entirely, but it is evolving. CFOs increasingly steer their organizations toward cost-efficient practices rather than merely focusing on volume growth. Shifting performance measures from volume to efficiency is worthwhile, even if it is a departure from traditional thinking. This habit is needed as the industry acknowledges the importance of cost-effective care delivery—and the value within risk-based payment programs.

Execute Beyond Technology

Technological solutions typically rely on business cases and aim to provide essential tools for modern operations. However, this technology assessment must go beyond adoption and implementation. The true value lies in the execution of the solution and the insights gained from its use and performance. Sound systems require good data to meet their potential. As an example, a national home goods retailer conducted an RFP and needs assessment for its 1,200-truck delivery fleet. The organization derived information to extend the contract with a current vendor. The negotiation resulted in over $1.8M in savings through invoice credits, cash retention bonuses, and contracted cost savings. Most notably, the negotiation never disrupted distribution. The habit of “focus and finish”—connecting technology with non-tech performance measures—ensures that insights are effectively translated into actionable strategies. The discipline to perform a rigorous “look back” analysis on major technology investments is essential to achieving the promised ROI.

Embrace Data and Strategies Beyond Your Four Walls

There is a world of insights and opportunities beyond the healthcare industry. Although healthcare is unique compared to other industries, there are insights and lessons to be learned from looking at how business is conducted outside of healthcare. For example, wouldn’t a hospital want to know what the local university pays for groundskeeping in the same city? What about bank processing and other financial fees? In one case, the CFO of a big-box retailer looked beyond the industry for insights and saved over $10M by uncovering overcharged credit card processing fees that had slipped past their internal process for more than four years. With this information, the CFO and team negotiated a refund of the fees and all credit card agreements.

Knowledge sharing across industries can be valuable for all organizations. The habit of expanding a network of partners and collaborating with businesses outside the industry can provide fresh perspectives and solutions, which ultimately benefit the health system’s financial performance.

Question the Status Quo

CFOs should embrace the habit of challenging industry norms and targets. It’s a requirement to push change management boundaries in pursuit of effective solutions. One industry norm worth challenging is the singular reliance on group purchasing organizations (GPOs) to aid in spend analysis and negotiations. With GPOs addressing only 25% of non-clinical spending, there is an excellent opportunity to address cost savings in these categories. Unlike direct clinical spending, health systems compete with all industries to secure optimal non-clinical product and service contracts. Leading companies outside healthcare often devote more time and resources to secure better contracts. Continually setting the bar higher—to renegotiate contracts, adopt cutting-edge technology, or pursue innovative partnerships—can drive tangible results and transform the financial trajectory of health systems, no longer leaving money on the table.

Manage Non-Clinical Costs Proactively

Non-clinical cost allocation, akin to investments in a personal portfolio, requires constant monitoring and adjustment. CFOs should adopt a proactive habit of managing non-clinical costs that consume approximately 20% of revenue. By acknowledging the dynamic nature of healthcare finances, CFOs position their organizations for financial success. Also, the CFO can no longer assume that existing structures and partners are sufficient to control these non-clinical costs. Research shows that 75% of non-clinical spending falls outside GPO and procurement contracts. With today’s financial challenges, this leaves a gap in controls that must be addressed. The habit of managing non-clinical costs proactively pays off.

Proactive management of v costs has been proven to result in favorable contracts and significant savings in both annual direct costs and signing bonuses. This outcome was demonstrated by a discount retailer that conducted an RFP and needs assessment with their 10-year incumbent Warranty provider. The proactive assessment resulted in a more favorable contract with higher vendor engagement and training support from a new vendor. Beyond the service value, the resulting savings were $4M in annual direct costs and a $4M signing bonus in the contract’s first year, with the new vendor covering all transition costs.

Today, the role of a health system CFO extends beyond traditional financial management. CFO leadership requires a blend of strategic vision, adaptability, and innovative thinking about benchmarking and managing change. CFOs who embrace these seven habits can navigate the healthcare industry’s challenges in a post-pandemic economic climate, foster financial resilience, and ultimately contribute to enhanced patient care, organizational success, and highly competitive service delivery.

******

Special thanks to co-author Mark Van Sumeren, who has more than 40 years of experience in healthcare strategy, operations, and supply chain management. As the General Manager of the healthcare practice at LogicSource, he spearheads cost-savings initiatives within nonclinical healthcare supply chains. Previously Mark held senior executive positions at Owens & Minor, Ernst & Young, and Detroit Medical Center, collaborating with major integrated delivery networks and academic medical centers to enhance operational efficiency and supply chain practices. 

The post Seven Habits of a Highly Effective Health-System CFO appeared first on Medika Life.

In order to make that money, however, it takes literally decades of schooling and many years of training, racking up hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. In order to become a specialist, it can take more than half a decade of training to get there. It is not an easy path.

And, it is also true that primary care physicians are among the least paid of the profession. Primary care physicians are the bulwark of the healthcare system, the load bearing walls of our field, and it is truly unfortunate that, sometimes, they can make less than many other professionals.

Having said all of that, it is also true that the latest rounds of physician pay cuts announced by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) are quite distressing and truly unsustainable.

They state that these cuts are mandated by federal law:

By factors specified in law, overall payment rates under the PFS are proposed to be reduced by 1.25% in CY 2024 compared to CY 2023. CMS is also proposing significant increases in payment for primary care and other kinds of direct patient care.

The proposed CY 2024 PFS conversion factor is $32.75, a decrease of $1.14 (or 3.34%) from the current CY 2023 conversion factor of $33.89.

The conversion factor is multiplied by relative value units, which quantify how much “work” something a physician does, to arrive at a payment from CMS. And, CMS only pays 80% of that rate, the rest being paid by supplemental insurance (if a patient has it).

Immediately, physician groups decried the cuts:

“While the ACR [American College of Rheumatology] appreciates CMS’ continued recognition of the value of complex care provided by rheumatologists and other cognitive care specialists … we are gravely concerned that the proposed rule’s physician payment cuts contained in CMS’ conversion factor would add to physicians’ uncertainty about their continued ability to provide the highest quality of care to Medicare patients,” ACR president Douglas White, MD, PhD, said in a statement.

The President of the American Medical Association also weighed in with a statement, saying:

When adjusted for inflation, Medicare physician payment already has effectively declined 26% from 2001 to 2023 before additional inflation and these cuts are factored in. Physicians are one of the only providers without an automatic inflationary increase … Physicians need relief from this unsustainable journey.

Anders Gilberg, MGA, senior vice president for government affairs at the Medical Group Management Association chimed in as well:

The proposed 2024 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) raises significant concerns for medical groups related to its 3.4% reduction to the conversion factor, which further increases the gap between physician practice expenses and Medicare reimbursement rates. Medicare already largely fails to cover the cost of furnishing care to beneficiaries, and the proposed cut to the 2024 conversion factor compounds the problem.

This is the key to understanding why physicians are upset about these cuts. It is not about greedy physicians. It’s not about a doctor previously earning $400,000 and now earning $388,000.

It is about the costs of running a practice. When adjusted for inflation, physician reimbursement has declined significantly, as the AMA correctly pointed out. But, the costs of running a physician practice has not decreased by the same amount. They have, in fact, dramatically increased: there has been 7% inflation in healthcare labor costs, and now CMS answers this increase in costs with another 3% payment cut. This math is not sustainable.

I used to be a partner in a small private practice. Yes, I earned a comfortable living. But, it costed a lot of money to keep the practice open: the salary of the office staff; the rent of the office space; the utilities; office supplies; among many other costs. Those costs didn’t go down. Ever.

Yet, our reimbursement from CMS and other payers did. Eventually, if the costs of running a practice exceed its income, the practice closes. Or, they stop taking Medicare because the reimbursement was not enough to cover the costs.

In very large practices, there are other costs – such as interest on loans to cover payroll – have increased dramatically in the past few years. With every cut in reimbursement, it makes staying in business that much more difficult.

This is what physician groups mean when they say these payment cuts by CMS threaten access to care for seniors. If practices close their doors because the math is not sustainable, then that means less doctors are available to care for seniors. There is already a shortage of physicians, especially in rural areas, and these payment cuts could make it worse by making it impossible to run a practice.

Now, it is great that CMS is paying primary care physicians more. It is high time they get the proper reimbursement they deserve. What I don’t understand is why the law forces CMS to pay PCPs more by taking the money from other physicians, most notably specialists. This makes no sense to me.

“Well,” some may say, “specialists make too much money anyway.” That’s a non-argument. The whole formula under federal law needs to be changed for something much more sustainable for everyone.

Physicians can’t just keep working harder for less reimbursement. That is part of what is driving physicians to burn out and leave the profession. How does this help our patients? And, no one tells a plumber, after he or she fixed your leaky shower or faucet, “Well, your bill is $200, but I’m only going to pay you $120.”

Yet, that’s what happens to physicians all the time, and the math is not sustainable. CMS spends only 1 out of every 5 dollars on physician and clinical services. It is not right to keep cutting physician reimbursement to reduce healthcare spending. There has to be a better way.

The post The Unsustainable Math of Medicare Physician Reimbursement Cuts appeared first on Medika Life.

The clinics, spread over two floors and 180 sqm, will house a resident OB-GYN and pediatrician with access to the latest medical technology. Expectant mothers will also benefit from on-site birthing facilities in a country with high maternal mortality.  The pilot clinics will be built in Albay, a rural region of Luzon, the Philippines’ largest island. The Philippines is home to approx. 140 million people, many of whom still live below the poverty line.

“Statistics tell the relentless story of needless suffering and death,” reflects Clinics IV Life Founder. Robert Turner.  “For decades we’ve thrown billions of dollars in aid each year at the problem. It remains and, in many instances, worsens year to year. Historical charitable models are flawed.”  Turner adds: “Clinics IV Life was launched by seasoned health professionals who seek to address these shortcomings in novel ways. Our hybrid clinic model removes the need for continued donor funding and integrates into local healthcare systems, removing the dependencies created by historical charitable efforts.”

Each clinic aims to treat 1000 indigent patients annually, making inroads on the high maternal and infant mortality levels plaguing developing nations. The first of the three clinics earmarked for Luzon will open in 2024, followed by openings in late 2024 and 2025. Access to care remains one of the critical reasons mothers die in childbirth.  The leading causes of maternal mortality in the Philippines – like in many emerging nations – include challenges that can be prevented with medical oversight, such as bleeding, infection, unsafe abortion, hypertensive disorders and obstructed labor.

A NEW ECONOMIC MODEL FOR SUSTAINABILITY

Their clinic model relies on a unique shared practice agreement that ensures its clinics are self-sustaining, removing the need for the continued use of donor funds beyond construction and equipping a site. The Not-for-Profit plans to extend its reach into India, Africa and other Asian countries during the next three years.

Unlike traditional charitable models, Clinics for Life will not seek funding from the general public. 

“We form close corporate partnerships with companies that serve the maternal and newborn health markets and share our vision. Our clinic model offers the best ROI in terms of corporate giving. We pair each clinic with a corporate partner and for a single donation a company can generate more than 30 years of health impact in a community. It’s a gift that keeps on giving; both for the patients and the donors,” says Kemi Olugemo, chair of Clinics IV Life’s Fundraising Board, on their approach to funding.

ABOUT MATERNAL AND INFANT MORTALITY 

Every minute, around the globe, four newborns die; every two minutes, an expectant woman dies, often in childbirth. It is estimated that 85% of these deaths, primarily occurring in developing countries, are avoidable with access to proper medical care. In India alone last year, 2.7 million babies were stillborn, and nearly 600 thousand died in their first month.

Historically, women suffer more from health inequalities and require more complex medical interventions than their male counterparts on a more frequent basis. Access to procedures taken for granted in developed nations, like ultrasounds and fetal monitoring, are luxuries in developing countries, only affordable to those with money. 

ABOUT CLINICS IV LIFE 

Clinics IV Life was created specifically to address these health inequities that are commonplace in emerging nations. Their hybrid clinic model overcomes continued reliance on donor funding by creating self-sustaining businesses, obviating the need for financial donor support to ensure the ongoing success of each clinic. Donor funds are only utilized for the construction and equipping of a clinic.

Clinics IV Life views every element of the patient-provider ecosystem as being of equal value, and places great emphasis on ensuring its doctors, nurses and staff can serve their patients in a safe, secure and welcoming environment while having access to the latest medical technology and training and a global network of knowledge provided by colleagues who selflessly volunteer their time and skills.

The Clinics IV Life board of directors includes physicians, pharmacists, psychologists, public health professionals and business leaders who have brought their knowledge, connections and resources to this needed cause.  

Find out more by visiting: https://clinics4life.com/

Clinic IV Life Board members and industry advisors include: 

• Robert Turner – Founding Board Member
• Kemi Olugemo MD FAAN – Chair, Fundraising and Board of Directors
• Shazia Ahmad
• Gil Bashe – Board of Directors
• Grace Delerme
• Hesham Hassaballa MD
• Sharon Handelman-Gotlib
• Karie Hudson MS
• Viveca Livezey MD FAAN
• Jeff Livingston MD, Board of Directors
• Kellie Lease Stecher MD
• Dr. Soojin Jun
• Tom Krohn
• Teresita Pulgarin 
• Bianca Rose Phillips LLB. BComm. GradDipLP. LLM 

Media Contacts:

Kemi Olugemo, MD, FAAN
Board Chair, Fundraising
Tel: +1 (781) 226 0429
Email: kemi.olugemo@clinics4life.com

Gil Bashe
Board Chair, Executive
Cell: +1 (732) 371-0922
Email: gil.bashe@finnpartners.com

The post Clinics IV Life Launches a New Clinic Model to Change the Face of Charitable Maternal Care, Delivery to Impoverished Communities appeared first on Medika Life.

President Biden, in his State of the Union address, also spoke about noncompete clauses to a great amount of applause: “For example – and I should’ve known this, but I didn’t until two years ago: 30 million workers had to sign non-compete agreements for the jobs they took. 30 million. So a cashier at a burger place can’t walk across town and take the same job at another burger place and make a few bucks more. That was part of the deal, guys. But not anymore. We’re banning those agreements so companies have to compete for workers and pay them what they’re worth.”

This proposed ban on noncompete clauses would include healthcare professionals such as physicians, and some colleagues hailed the new rule: “Although I am professionally and personally fulfilled with my current practice and the community I serve, there are physicians and providers who do not enjoy the same luxuries as me. Noncompete clauses ultimately infringe on physician well-being, which then cascades opens in a new tab or window into suboptimal patient care,” wrote Dr. Jeremy Peterson, a family physician practicing in Minnesota.

He further illustrates the conundrum faced by physicians who are subject to these noncompetes: “If a circumstance arises where I no longer wish to carry on my employment status with my current healthcare organization, I will be faced with a terrible choice. I will have to choose between either: uprooting my family and severing the community bonds I have built within my personal and professional roles; commuting further than the 3.5 miles I currently drive to a clinic outside of my noncompete agreement in a community I have no personal engagement within; or roll the dice and set up a practice in my community and beg for my noncompete clause to not be enforced. I cannot imagine how a fully vested and seasoned family physician could navigate this choice.”

I totally understand this conundrum. In fact, I knew a colleague who was forced to stay in a terrible job because her employer (a private medical practice) had a noncompete clause that would force her to practice hundreds of miles away. These types are noncompetes are truly obnoxious, and those deserve to be banned. Incidentally, when her kids finally finished school, she did in fact leave and practice hundreds of miles away for two years. Once her noncompete clause expired, she came back to that very same hospital and directly and successfully competed with her former employer. So, these sort of egregious noncompetes tend to be counterproductive anyway.

At the same time, as someone who recruits and hires physicians and APPs, I see why a noncompete clause would be beneficial. For a business associate, companies can take back stock or prevent their stock from vesting if they leave for a competitor. For a clinician, however, a considerable amount of resources is expended in hiring and onboarding that individual. There is the cost to recruit them (including substantial signing bonuses sometimes), train them, and fund their working capital before any revenue comes in from their work. If they then leave and go work for a competitor down the street (or in the same hospital), it places a substantial strain on the medical practice.

Another scenario is spending a tremendous amount of resources purchasing a practice from a physician or physician group, and then that physician or group turns around and sets up shop across the street, directly competing with us. That is not to mention any trade secrets that this physician or APP would come to learn and potentially take to the competition. Theoretically, the noncompete clause protects the employer from this risk.

I asked a healthcare executive, who asked to remain anonymous for this article, about the issue of noncompetes: “I think it is a complex topic. We never prohibit people from making a living, [it] just can’t be at the detriment of [our company].” This executive also told me, “I think the bigger issue is how do we prevent competitors from just taking a big group of our docs to sell the same services to an existing client. That is the one I have always struggled with. Clearly, trade secrets, etc. are hard to legally protect in the real world. The noncompete is a more concrete way to protect trade secrets at least for a period of time.”

Steve Lowenthal, MD – Senior Vice President and Chief Medical Officer of Rush Copley Medical Center – also made a reasonable point: “It takes a lot of investment to bring a physician into a practice. Once this investment is recouped by the health system, I think it is reasonable to no longer have a noncompete clause. How long would this take? 5 years? 10 years? That is still unclear.”

Throughout my entire career, I have always been subject to noncompete clauses. I understood them to be part of the business of healthcare, especially in the era of private practice. Yet, they have always been reasonable, and I would never have agreed to a noncompete clause that would force me to leave an entire metropolitan area if I had to leave a job for whatever reason. In fact, I would actively avoid those practices which were known to include such egregious noncompete clauses (and counsel my colleagues to do the same).  

I think there should be a balance. A reasonable noncompete clause, such as not practicing in the same specialty in the same hospital or hospital system for two years, should be allowed. Perhaps the distance requirements, such as not practicing within 10 or 15 miles of every facility in the hospital system, should be banned, as these can force someone to uproot their entire families for a job change. I also like Dr. Lowenthal’s suggestion that noncompetes should “sunset” after a certain number of years. And if an employer is at fault and the reason why someone is leaving, then the employee should not be subject to the noncompete clause.

Furthermore, it is not like these clauses are Scripture in an employment contract; they are clearly negotiable. I have had hires negotiate these noncompete clauses with us, and I myself have also negotiated these clauses for my own employment contracts. It also must be said that employers cannot hide behind noncompete clauses to avoid dealing with toxic work environments or poor working conditions. This persistent problem needs to be addressed. At the same time, it is clear that the issue of noncompetes are more complicated than the catch phrases of “economic liberty” and “freedom of choice” that grab headlines. It is my hope that the final rule issued by the FTC can strike a proper balance. 

The post In Defense Of The Noncompete Clause In Healthcare appeared first on Medika Life.

In previous articles, we have been discussing the various different types of reasons insurance companies deny payment for services rendered by hospitals to their patients. Perhaps the most annoying and frustrating for me is the “30 day readmission” denial. This is a denial in which payment is denied for a hospital stay that is within 30 days of a previous hospital stay. The allegation is that the patient was inappropriately discharged from the previous hospital stay, and thus the subsequent stay should be considered part and parcel of the first, what we call the “index,” hospitalization. I have seen these denials come through even with hospital stays three weeks later, even for a different reason. 

Now, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, affectionately known as CMS, also penalizes hospitals for excess readmissions within 30 days. It is called the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program, and it tracks the ratio of the predicted-to-expected readmissions to the hospital for the following conditions: (1) acute myocardial infarction, (2) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, (3) acute heart failure, (4) pneumonia, (5) coronary artery bypass graft, and (6) elective total hip and knee surgery. If there are excessive readmissions to the hospital for patients with any of these conditions, payments to that hospital are reduced the following year. 

Some commercial insurance companies have taken the concept of this program to the extreme by denying payments for any hospitalization, for any reason, for any condition within 30 days. For example, if a patient is admitted to the hospital for pneumonia, and then suffers a heart attack three weeks later and admitted again for the heart attack, I have seen commercial insurance companies deny payment for that subsequent hospital stay, even though it had nothing to do with the previous one.

CMS claims this program “encourages hospitals to improve communication and care coordination to better engage patients and caregivers in discharge plans and, in turn, reduce avoidable readmissions.” This goal, of course, is laudable. Everyone wants the best quality care if they must be admitted to the hospital.

At the same time, a readmission to the hospital is completely unavoidable. Sometimes, as I mentioned previously, a patient suffers an unexpected complication such as a cardiac arrest. Sometimes, a patient is in a car accident and has to be admitted to the hospital. Sometimes, a patient does not follow medical instructions, such as taking diuretics to reduce total body volume for heart failure, and they present back to the hospital for another exacerbation of heart failure. Sometimes, it is unfair to penalize a hospital for something that is beyond its control.

At least, CMS tracks a ratio rather than an absolute number. The denials I am talking about here are absolute: a payer will simply deny payment because a patient is admitted to the hospital within 30 days. Even if it is 29 days, I have seen these denials come through. And, frequently, there’s absolutely no explanation as to why the denial occurred. 

Moreover, many times, the subsequent hospitalization is very long because the patient is extremely sick, such as suffering cardiac arrest and having brain injury due to lack of oxygen. To simply deny the subsequent hospital stay because it happened to occur within 30 days of a previous hospital stay is inappropriate and beyond frustrating. “Ensuring quality of care” by by making such a denial is disingenuous at best. 

It is one thing if a hospital, seeking to minimize length of stay, prematurely discharges a patient while they are still clinically unstable: for example, with an incompletely treated infection or still with significant heart failure. That hospital deserves to be penalized for a readmission. I can say, with a reasonable amount of certainty, that most hospitals do not fall into this category. 

Most hospitals try their best to treat the patients entrusted to their care in the most appropriate and efficient manner as possible. I can understand CMS’ readmission reduction program. The readmission denials I see coming from commercial payers are simply punitive and wholly unnecessary. 

It is unlikely that these types of denials will ever go away completely, especially given the presence of the CMS hospital readmissions reduction program. I can always see commercial payers pointing to the program as inspiration for their own 30 day readmission denials. At the same time, I am going to call out their callous and arbitrary nature. With all the challenges and challenging environments we in healthcare have to deal, needing to expend precious resources to defend denials such as these is truly baffling. 

The post From The Appeals Desk: The “30 Day Readmission” Denial appeared first on Medika Life.

Offer a doctor a new application or solution and his first question is always, “why do I need this” followed by “does it reduce my workload”. Data-driven solutions often fail to offer significantly satisfying answers to these questions, literally disqualifying themselves before they even step out the starting gate.

If you cannot convince your target sales market that it requires your solution, it’s time to reconsider both your solution and strategy. Many new solutions offering patients ownership of their PHI will fall by the wayside as they fail to correctly address their market and the patient’s actual needs.

What do patients really want?

Ownership of their health data? Really? How many patients fully understand the power and benefits offered by ownership and control of their PHI? It has been my experience that when a lengthy explanation is required to sell something, the sale is a non-starter. Many of the new companies developing solutions for this market assume patients will be beating a path to their door. Why should they? Patients need to be incentivized.

Full disclosure, I am involved in the industry, in conjunction with colleagues seeking to develop a system that will empower patients by ensuring their ownership and control of their PHI. We are however setting about the process a little differently, simply because we don’t believe selling the general public on the importance of their PHI is possible. Not if broadscale adoption is important to the success of a platform.

We believe what patients really want are immediate tangible benefits associated with their healthcare. Cash in their pockets and actual engagement in the processes that determine their care. Let me explain and I will use our business model to outline how we currently perceive the market.

We are developing five separate patient-focused solutions that will eventually underpin a PHI system. Solutions that offer exactly these benefits; paid health surveys, access to paid clinical trials, paid social media sharing tools, the sale of health-related content, and more. All our solutions will be Web 3.0 compliant and built on the blockchain using smart contracts, but again, don’t confuse features with benefits. Features rarely sell something.

Unlike conventional approaches, we aren’t knocking on the patient’s door with a complex data tool that manages their PHI. In our case, the PHI solution will be added, almost as an afterthought, onto a platform enjoyed by thousands of customers already utilizing our “introductory” suite of tools. Trust will already be established with our client base and much of the relevant data required to populate the patient’s PHI will already exist within our eco-system. 

Trust versus benefit

Perhaps the most damaging fallout from the pandemic has been to the public and the healthcare sector relationship. Misinformation and horrendous pandemic mismanagement have cost the relation years of hard-earned trust. Large swathes of the public now view the industry as a whole with a mixture of disdain and distrust. As unpleasant as this may be to accept, it is a fact and the damage will take years to repair.

We cannot however wait years. We MUST return ownership of health data to the patient. Common sense and ever-increasing risks from data theft and the illicit sharing and sale of PHI (another nasty but undeniable fact) demand it. How we set about this process matters and for effective adoption, we have to develop with the patient in mind. 

Their needs, their priorities, and their limited understanding of the power that resides in their data all need to be addressed. Enable and educate. Rather than offering them ownership of an asset, the value of which they don’t fully grasp, I believe we start by allowing patients to share in the profits generated by their data, sharing in the processes that determine their health, and placing them on an equal footing in the patient/provider relationship.

Simple, functional tools are required to achieve this. tools that will lead to the eventual establishment of a leveled playing field, restoring trust and improving communication between the two key elements in healthcare. The providers and their patients.

Blinded by the light

All the above would appear reasonably self-evident. Most patients and many within healthcare would agree with the views I have expressed above and yet we are still forging ahead with project after project that ignores these basic fundamentals, not only where patients are concerned, but also for providers.

Not enough basic research is being performed into the actual need for a solution, in either of the above groups. The best-conceived ideas that fly on paper often crash spectacularly on execution. Understanding, really understanding, the market you are developing for is perhaps the most important part of your business model. Needs drive adoption, practical and simple drive adoption. Innovation is not a need and cannot create one where none are perceived.

Speak to your market, understand your market and engage with it, long before you decide to cure it of ills you perceive from afar. As investors become more circumspect about the “fake it till you make it” mindset that pervades startups, acquiring seed capital will become far more challenging. Doing your homework will pay off in ways you cannot imagine and benefit both you and your target audience, patients and providers alike.

The post What’s in it for me? Encouraging patient ownership of PHI Data appeared first on Medika Life.

Date of Release: December 14, 2021

NEW YORK — Global independent marketing and communications firm FINN Partners today announced that starting January 1, 2022, Medika.Life – a global opinion and news platform recognized for hosting and distributing health-sector thought-leaders’ content to its 100,000 and more monthly readers, joins FINN as a unique operating unit. Medika.Life and its regular content, which includes the popular listicles “Fifty of the Most Influential Voices in Healthcare,” “Fifty of the Most Impactful Tech Innovators in Digital Healthcare” and “The 50 Most Influential Leaders in Pharmacy,” will be championed by Gil Bashe, Global Health Chair, FINN Partners, and Noah Finn, Managing Partner, Integrated Marketing.

Editors-in-Chief Robert Turner and Jeffrey Livingston, MD will assume new roles as Founding Editors-in-Chief Emeritus. Bashe will take on an additional agency role as Medika.Life editor-in-chief. Bashe and  Noah Finn will serve together as co-publishers to support operations of the platform, which now hosts more than 40 authors sharing content in general medicine, health policy, ecohealth, disease awareness and issues of interest for patients, payers and providers. Popular contributors, including physician leader Hesham A. Hassaballa, MD, a  New York Times featured Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine specialist in clinical practice for more than 20 years, and Lisa Bradburn, a psychotherapist writing about the nexus between technology and the human condition, will continue in their roles. Technology theorist John Nosta, contributor to Bloomberg, Forbes, Fortune and Psychology Today will be joining the platform and additional editors and authors will be added in the months ahead.

“Vision and values drive mission, and the Medika.Life platform – through its content and reach – seeks to tackle many of the same societal challenges that FINN, as a major global communications agency, is working to address with our clients,” said Peter Finn, Founding Partner, FINN Partners. “When Medika.Life sought out a committed partner that mirrored its values and vision to support its mission and continued growth, we were honored to be approached,” he added.

“Medika is far more than simply aggregating medical data and information. Since our founding in 2020, our goal has been to advocate for a medical community committed to uniting the fragmented health ecosystem toward a globally accessible, ethical, and equitable industry that places the needs of patients at the forefront,” shares Robert Turner, co-founder and Co-Editor-in-Chief Emeritus, Medika.Life.  “We invited Gil Bashe to write for our platform at its genesis. In him, we found a kindred spirit equally dedicated to our efforts. It made the conversation with FINN a given as we all looked to support the platform’s future,” he added.

“We amplify the voices of medical professionals who seek positive reform within the industry, and we provide a platform to highlight injustice, inequality, and racial bias in medicine,” reflects Jeffrey Livingston, MD, co-founder, and Co-Editor-in-Chief Emeritus, Medika.Life, who is a board-certified ob/gyn and CEO, MacArthur Medical Center, in Dallas, TX. “We created Medika.Life recognizing that even the most inspired and motivated voices require a network of committed fellow professionals for support and collaboration,” he added. Livingston is also editor-in-chief of Being Well on Medium, which will continue its collaboration with Medika.Life by sharing content across platforms.

“Physicians, patients, policy leaders, planetary health advocates, and health innovation leaders saw an urgent need to reach like-minded people to foster conversation and motivate change. Medika.Life quickly became a go-to for sharing bold ideas. With its continued cross-platform connection to Being Well on Medium, Medika – with added support from FINN – will provide authors expansive reach to address public health priorities and share ideas directly with key audiences,” said Gil Bashe, Chair Global Health, FINN.

Together with the Pharmacy Podcast Network (PPN) – a news organization absorbed by FINN in November that is known for hosting and distributing content to an audience of 100,000+in the pharmacy community – Medika.Life will form the core of the FINN new omni-channel communications effort, which offers invited contributors opportunities to share their ideas and opinions with influential and important audiences throughout the health ecosystem.

About FINN Partners, Inc.

Founded in 2011 on the core principles of innovation and collaborative partnership, FINN Partners has more than quadrupled in size over the past 10 years, becoming one of the fastest-growing independent, integrated marketing agencies in the world. The full-service marketing and communications company’s record-setting pace is a result of organic growth and integrating new companies and new people into the FINN world through a common philosophy. With more than 1,000 professionals, FINN provides clients with global access and capabilities in the Americas, Europe, and Asia. In addition, FINN provides its clients with access to top tier agencies around the world through its membership in the global network PROI. Headquartered in New York, FINN’s other offices are in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Denver, Detroit, Dublin, Fort Lauderdale, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Honolulu, Jerusalem, London, Los Angeles, Munich, Nashville, Paris, Portland, San Francisco, Seattle, Shanghai, Singapore, Southern California, and Washington D.C.

Find us at finnpartners.com and follow us on Twitter and Instagram at @finnpartners.

Find Medika.life at medika.life and on Twitter at @medikalife

MEDIA CONTACTS:

Gil Bashe

gil.bashe@finnpartners.com | gil.bashe@medika.life | CELL: 732 371 0922

Celia Jones

celia.jones@finnpartners.com | CELL: 773 885 9781

The post FINN Adds Medika Life to its Omni-Channel Communications Platform appeared first on Medika Life.

Championing Frontline Health Professionals Dedicated to Improving Access and Care, PPN Reaches over 100K+ listeners, Pharmacists, and Other Health System Influencers

NEW YORK, November 22, 2021 — Global independent marketing and communications firm FINN Partners today announced that starting December 1st, the Pharmacy Podcast Network (PPN) – a news
organization known for hosting and distribution of content that reaches 100,000+ in the pharmacy community – will join the agency. PPN and its new digital magazine Rx Influencer will operate as a unique unit of FINN, led by Todd Eury, vice president and executive producer. Eury, based in Pittsburgh, PA, will report to Gil Bashe, Global Health Chair, FINN Partners.

“Iconic newsstand media such as Forbes and BusinessWeek are evolving their business models – inviting once-readers to become paid ‘participant columnists’ – while The Atlantic and Wall Street Journal thrive
on edgy digital content and mainstage conferences. Today, ideas and opinions are honed and expressed across medium and channels – and FINN is following that lead, too,” said Peter Finn, Founding Partner,
FINN Partners.

“Pharmacists are central in every health setting – from neighborhoods to hospitals; long-term care residences to payer formulary committees; and in Federal and state policy forums. Payer, provider, and product innovation clients seek to reach this influential community, and PPN has evolved into the go-to content and digital platform for connection to this influential audience,” said Todd Eury, vice president, and Executive Producer, Pharmacy Podcast Network, a FINN division.

Growing Importance of the Pharmacy Community in Public Health

PPN has 100K+ monthly listeners to its programs and is ranked as one of the nation’s leading business audio programs alongside the Wall Street Journal, CNBC, and Bloomberg podcasts, making it the dominant leader in podcasting for the pharmacy industry. PPN also has some 20+ clients across the health ecosystem that sponsor their own podcast series, including the American Pharmacists Association, Omnicell, Surescripts, and Rx Safe. The PPN Twitter handle is followed by more than 25,000
people.

Producer Todd Eury will be part of the FINN community and continue to operate PPN independently and maintain authority over content decisions. FINN will have a direct connection to breaking trends, policies, and the needs of this front-line health professional community – growing in its importance to driving public health measures and operationalizing decentralized clinical trials for patient participation in drug development.

FINN at the forefront of an “omni-channel” communications approach.

“Beyond our leadership strength in earned and content media, thought leadership platforms, publishing, social media, and podcasting, FINN has been expanding its reach to enable client voice and priorities to be heard and reinforced,” said Gil Bashe, Global Health Chair, FINN Partners. “Our goal is to explore how
to be a stronger, direct bridge between clients and their customers. Pharmacists have that direct connection and demonstrated their life-saving importance once again in responding to COVID-19 vaccination urgencies,” he added.

A number of FINN clients – across Practices, geographies, and services – are focusing on the pharmacy sector for many reasons. These include leaders in consumer personal care, over-the-counter products, behind-the-counter devices to monitor and keep-in-check health concerns, and vaccines that prevent
serious, preventable illnesses. Pharmacy is the link from sick care to self-care.

About Pharmacy Podcast Network

Pharmacy Podcast Nation is the flagship show hosting all of the Pharmacy Podcast Network 1400+ episodes. With more than 30 different podcast programs and some 40 different co-hosts helping to develop audio content about the pharmacy sector, its reach includes communities, hospitals senior-care residences, military, and public health settings that meet the information needs of 300,000 pharmacists with more than 100,000 monthly listeners. PPN also delivers a unique publication called Rx Influencer to all healthcare professionals with a specific focus on pharmacy.

For more information visit: pharmacypodcast.com

About FINN Partners, Inc.

Founded in 2011 on the core principles of innovation and collaborative partnership, FINN Partners has more than quadrupled in size over the past 10 years, becoming one of the fastest-growing independent, integrated marketing agencies in the world. The full-service marketing and communications company’s record-setting pace is a result of organic growth and integrating new companies and new people into
the FINN world through a common philosophy. With more than 900 professionals, FINN provides clients with global access and capabilities in the Americas, Europe, and Asia. In addition, FINN provides its clients with access to top-tier agencies around the world through its membership in the global network PROI.

Headquartered in New York, FINN’s other offices are in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Denver, Detroit, Fort Lauderdale, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Honolulu, Jerusalem, London, Los Angeles, Munich, Nashville, Paris, Portland, San Francisco, Seattle, Shanghai, Singapore, Southern California, and Washington D.C.

Find us at finnpartners.com and follow us on Twitter and Instagram at @finnpartners.

FINN CONTACTS:
Gil Bashe
gil.bashe@finnpartners.com
CELL: 732 371 0922

Celia Jones
celia.jones@finnpartners.co

The post FINN Partners Brings Aboard the Pharmacy Podcast Network appeared first on Medika Life.

Author: Bianca Rose Phillips LLB, BComm, GradDipLP, LLM, Lawyer & Officer of the Supreme Court of Victoria. Bianca Rose Phillips is a global digital health law theorist, a lawyer, and the founder of a Digital Health Think Tank.

Editorial: Jack Murtha and Tom Castles

Publication Date: September 2021

No revolution exists and develops in a vacuum. Change within an industry is driven by complex and diverse relationships and to truly grasp long-term implications, an understanding of these factors is essential. One oft-ignored factor is the impact of law on the healthcare and digital sectors. Making the Digital Health Revolution seeks to address this topic to provide a broader understanding of current and future trends within the digital health sector.

Meet the Author

Bianca Rose Phillips is a global digital health law theorist, a lawyer, and the founder of a Digital Health Think Tank. Her work explores the role of law, philosophy, and ethics (digital health law) in the making of The Digital Health Revolution. Her vision is to help build a world where telemedicine enables access to healthcare no matter where you live, where the mainstream use of wearables predicts disease before human suffering, and the use of personalized medicine improves health outcomes.

She is considered a leading thinker on the future of digital health and the law, recognized globally for her thought leadership in the field. Her ideas attract the biggest minds and companies in digital health. Her works include The Digital Health Revolution: Structural Elements & Logical Methods, The Eight Pillars of the Digital Health Revolution, and The Digital Health School of Thought. These works explore the processes, pillars, and methods upon which digital health laws and societies are built, constrained, transformed, and revolutionized.

Bianca is also a speaker. Recent events: panelist at SingularityU Australia Summit (topic – IT and wellness). Speaker at the VOH Summit at Harvard Medical School, USA, and faculty at the Summit Bootcamp (topic – data ownership). Project Voice AI in Chattanooga TN USA (topic – AI & lawmaking). In addition to her work supporting digital health innovations, Bianca conducts research and hosts events on how we can use technology to advance healthcare equality. In 2020 Bianca launched her series ‘Voice for Equality, with Amazon being the event sponsor of her January 2021 event.

She holds a Bachelor of Laws, Bachelor of Commerce, Graduate Diploma of Professional Legal Practice, Master of Laws (Medical Law & Telemedicine). She is admitted as a Lawyer & Officer of the Supreme Court of Victoria. She is also a Juris Doctor Lecturer.

Bianca was selected as ‘One of Fifty of the Most Influential Voices in Healthcare for 2021‘ by Medika Life, sharing the list with healthcare leaders such as Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Eric Topol, Gil Bashe and John Nosta. She is motivated and inspired by her daughters to explore the future of law, society & humanity.

We chatted to Bianca, asking her first why she had chosen to write on this specific topic.

My latest work focuses on revolutions and the role of law in making them. The challenge was to select a case study to explore hard questions on the legal process of revolutions. Read chapter 1 and you will see why digital health was selected. At this moment, the field is one of the most exciting and trying arenas for human discovery and innovation. If we allow it to grow, digital health will challenge and change humanity and evolve humankind. The 22nd-century history books will likely judge our success or failure.

Could you elaborate on the relationship law currently enjoys within this sector?

The reality is that the legal mechanisms underlying the digital health revolution have yet to be critically explored. Through a historical review and case study, this book aims to examine those mechanisms and contribute to our societal knowledge on digital health and revolutions.

Who is your target audience?

Making the Digital Health Revolution is for those with a desire to discover more about healthcare revolutions and to understand the role of law and legal philosophy in making them.

Text Extracts

Content Overview

• Preface
• Ch 1 Digital Health as a Case Study of Revolutions 
• Ch 2 What Makes a Revolution?
• Ch 3 General Theories on Structure & Logic in Law Making
• Ch 4 Specific Theories: Pillars of Digital Health Law Making
• Ch 5 Specific Theories: Structure & Logic in Digital Health Law Making.
• Guest Writer Contributions by eleven thought leaders.
• Endnotes

Publication Format

• Interactive eBook with links to podcastsOption to highlight and add comments to the bookPage numbers align with those in PDF reader Printable PDF (can be printed once downloaded)
• File size 1,001 KB $34.80 AUD (apply the code LAUNCH during the month of September for a discount on this price)
• Order exclusively via www.biancarosephillips.com

The post Book Review. Making the Digital Health Revolution appeared first on Medika Life.

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., Aug. 16, 2021 — HealthTap, a leading virtual healthcare provider, today announced that HealthTap Enterprise clients can add Care Orchestration into their HealthTap employee telemedicine plans. Care Orchestration encourages timely use of employee health and wellness benefits, based on personalized recommendations from HealthTap doctors.

“There is no authority more influential, trusted, and effective in deciding which healthcare services you need than your own doctor,” said HealthTap CEO Sean K. Mehra. “Doctors know their patients best. By equipping them with new information about what other benefits their patients can access with Care Orchestration, doctors can be even more effective by routing them to the most clinically appropriate and effective services, exactly when they need them.”

With Care Orchestration, doctors have visibility into the benefits that organizations offer employees, which can range from diabetes management and back pain programs to fertility counseling, dental care, and mental health support. During visits, doctors make relevant recommendations about benefits that address specific concerns and diagnoses, helping employees to take full advantage of resources provided by employers.

For example, HealthTap’s Dr. Geoff Rutledge orders diabetes screening tests for a patient, whose employer provides HealthTap to all team members. The tests indicate prediabetes, which can be treated through lifestyle changes. Dr. Rutledge sees that his patient’s workplace offers a diabetes prevention program, but they are unaware of this benefit. Dr. Rutledge encourages his patient to register for the program to reduce the risk of developing diabetes.

The need for benefits education and awareness continues to grow, and HR leaders are seeking ways to drive meaningful engagement in the programs in which they have invested. According to a 2021 Voya Financial survey, 35% of employed individuals report not fully understanding any of the employee benefits they’re enrolled in. The numbers are higher among younger workers, with 54% of millennials reporting that they don’t understand their benefits.

While many organizations offer comprehensive benefits, most employees don’t take full advantage of what’s available. Some are unaware of their benefits, while others may be confused about them. Both the employer and the employee lose in this situation. Employees don’t get the care and services they need, while employers pay for unused benefits.

HealthTap’s Care Orchestration changes this paradigm, injecting the voice of doctors into benefits communications. By helping people better understand their benefits during visits, doctors can play an even greater role in supporting stronger health and wellbeing for their patients.

About HealthTap

HealthTap is a virtual-first, affordable urgent- and primary-care clinic, providing top-quality physician care nationwide to Americans with or without insurance.  Our proprietary, easy-to-use, and innovative apps and electronic medical record apply Silicon Valley standards to effectively engage consumers and doctors online to increase the equity, accessibility, and efficiency of ongoing medical care for consumers, providers, employers, and payers. In addition, with HealthTap, businesses can offer virtual primary care to employees for less than the cost of free coffee. HealthTap’s US-based board-certified physicians are available throughout North America. For more information, visit www.healthtap.com.

Media Contact:
Jordan Dinneen
media@healthtap.com            
(929) 900-5983

SOURCE HealthTap

Related Links

http://www.healthtap.com

The post HealthTap Launches Care Orchestration to Drive Timely Use of Employee Benefits appeared first on Medika Life.