
PatientsChartingCourse
.pdf244 |
PATIENTS CHARTING THE COURSE |
ing Collaborative develop a framework for ongoing assessment of the efficacy of these reimbursement experiments with respect to increasing value?
•What specific actions could be taken to reduce healthcare costs and increase value? What incentives are needed to encourage those actions?
•What incentives, financial or otherwise, are needed to encourage providers to place greater emphasis on engaging patients in their care?
As these issues are considered, it is important to note that the focus of the workshop was ultimately for and about the patient. Addressing these specific issues will help to move the health system toward one that provides the right care to the right person at the right time and for the right price. There is an opportunity to reach this ideal, but it will take commitment from all stakeholders, leadership, and diligence to reach a health system where patients are able to chart their own course.
REFERENCE
Ad Hoc Committee on Health Literacy for the Council on Scientific Affairs, A.M.A., 1999. Health literacy. Journal of the American Medical Association 281(6):552-557.
Appendixes
Appendix A
Workshop Agenda
Patients Charting the Course:
Citizen Engagement and the Learning Health System
A Learning Health System Activity
IOM Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care
April 1–2, 2010
Keck Center of the National Academies
Washington, DC 20001
Motivating issues and assumptions underlying the discussion
1.Advances. Progress in medical science, basic research, information technology, and operations research offers the potential for immediate, continuous, and transformative improvement in health care.
2.Performance. In terms of both effectiveness and efficiency, the nation’s healthcare system is underperforming. The United States has the highest health expenditures per capita—twice the per capita average for other developed countries—yet consistently rates no better than the middle tier of developed nations on such key indicators as infant mortality, life expectancy, and overall health system performance.
3.Core aim. The core aim of health care is improved outcomes: to maintain or enhance patient status with respect to disease, injury, functional status, or sense of well-being. Yet often the dominant characteristics are more oriented to clinician preferences or interests, and economic rewards for volume over value.
4.Anchor foci. The primary foci of care in a manner that emphasizes outcomes should be on the mutually dependent aims of patient-centeredness, better science, better value, and continuous improvement.
5.Key elements. Efforts of the IOM and others have fostered a better understanding of the foundation stones of the Learning Health System, and, as discussions continue on health reform, special
247
248 |
PATIENTS CHARTING THE COURSE |
consideration is warranted on the current priorities and strategies to accelerate progress.
6.Communication. Central to progress are the communication strategies necessary to inform and engage the public and patient communities as understanding advocates, partners, and change agents.
Objectives
1.Identify the state of play with respect to the foundation stones of the Learning Healthcare System, and the most important priorities and policy levers necessary to accelerate progress.
2.Explore and clarify the integral links among the three key aims of care delivered: science-driven, patient-centered, and value-enhancing.
3.Discuss communication and public engagement strategies important to improving awareness and action necessary for transformation to a Learning Health System.
DAY ONE
9:00 Keynote: the learning health system—now and to come Overview of the nature and promise of the learning healthcare system for advancing a culture of patient-centeredness, science, and value. Discuss approaches to the key challenges and identify health reform priorities to make a learning healthcare system possible.
Harvey Fineberg, Institute of Medicine
9:30 Session 1: Clinical research, patient care, and learning that is realtime and continuous
What is needed to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and volume of clinical research; and, how might capacity be structured to support a system of real-time and continuous learning that anticipates research needs and produces and applies evidence that is timely, relevant, and applicable to real-world care?
Chair: Joel Kupersmith, Veterans Health Administration
ØComparative effectiveness research—accounting for patient, clinician, and policy needs
Patrick Conway, Office of the Secretary, Department of HHS
ØHealth systems as research platforms—enhancing science, value and innovation
Sherine Gabriel, Mayo Clinic
APPENDIX A |
249 |
ØEnhancing the culture of patient contributions to learning in health care
Diane Simmons, Center for Information & Study of Clinical Research Participation
11:00 Session 2: Clinical data as a public good for discovery
What is meant by the notion of clinical data as a public good, what is the potential, and how can issues such as de-identification, data integrity, and privacy and security concerns be best addressed? What strategies are needed to better engage patients and the public as advocates?
Chair: Karen Smith, AstraZeneca
ØInformation needs for the learning healthcare system
Farzad Mostashari, Office of the National Coordinator for HIT
ØOpening access to high-value data sets
Todd Park, Department of Health and Human Services
ØEnsuring data integrity—implications of privacy protection and proprietary concerns
Don Detmer, University of Virginia
[Lunch 12:30–1:00]
1:00 Session 3: Engaging patients to improve science and value in the Learning Health System
What is meant—theoretically and practically—by patient engagement in health care, how might health systems better learn from patient participation across health system activities—as consumers, actors and research subjects—and what are the implications related to clinical science, healthcare delivery, and patient engagement strategies?
Chair: Myrl Weinberg, National Health Council
ØInvesting patients in the research and continuous improvement enterprise—related to clinical science, health services, value, and patient orientation
Sharon Terry, Genetic Alliance
ØPublic and patient communication strategies to improve health system performance—encouraging patient engagement and participation
James Conway, Institute for Healthcare Improvement
250 |
PATIENTS CHARTING THE COURSE |
ØCommunicating with patients about their concerns, preferences, and expectations–evidence translation, dissemination, application
Karen Sepucha, Harvard Medical School
2:30 Session 4: Health information technology as the engine for learning
What are the trends and strategies for HIT adoption and how can this infrastructure resource be developed simultaneously as a knowledge engine, a tool for care improvement, and a portal for practical patient engagement?
Chair: Murray Ross, Kaiser Permanente
ØMeaningful use of health information technology
David Blumenthal, Office of the National Coordinator for HIT
ØData linkage, distributed data networks, and infrastructure for clinical research
Daniel Masys, Vanderbilt University
ØHIT and Web 2.0 as a vehicle for patient engagement—at the clinical encounter and beyond
Joseph Kvedar, Center for Connected Health
4:00 Session 5: Patients, clinical decisions, and health management in the information age
What lessons can be learned about patient/caregiver needs and expectations from efforts to support active engagement of patients in their healthcare decisions and management; and how might these factors inform priorities and strategies for improving patient involvement and investment in health care?
Chair: Michael Fordis, Eisenberg Center and Baylor College of Medicine
ØPublic and patient information access and use as a core care component
George D. Lundberg, former editor-in-chief (JAMA, eMedicine, and MedScape)
ØHIT-based approaches to care management and shared decision-making
Paul Tang, Palo Alto Medical Foundation
ØHealth and disease management outside the clinic doors
Doriane Miller, University of Chicago Medical Center
5:30 WRAP-UP COMMENTS
APPENDIX A |
251 |
5:45 RECEPTION
DAY TWO
9:00 Session 6: Applying evidence for patient-centered care—standards and expectations
How do the key precepts of patient-centered care, personalized medicine, and evidence-based medicine interplay and complement each other to yield care that is more effective and efficient; and, what are the implications for shaping a health system to meet these expectations?
Chair: William Novelli, Georgetown University
ØThe role of evidence in patient-centered care—“whatever the patient wants”?
Dale Collins Vidal, Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice
ØEvidence standards and application approaches that help get the right care to the right patient at the right time
Clifford Goodman, The Lewin Group
ØTranslation and communication needs for care under evidence uncertainty
Fran Visco, National Breast Cancer Coalition
10:30 Session 7: Team-based care and the learning culture
What is meant by team-based care, how might it look in a learning healthcare system, and should, or how should, caregiver culture and practice vary by circumstance? What are the implications for health professions education and training?
Chair: J. Michael McGinnis, Institute of Medicine
ØPractical experience with collaborative models in the health professions
Allan Frankel, Brigham and Women’s Hospital
ØMeasures and strategies for clinical excellence and continuous improvement
Joyce Lammert, Virginia Mason Medical Center
ØCare cooperation and continuity across clinicians, facilities, and systems
Alice Bonner, Massachusetts Department of Public Health
[Lunch 12:00–12:30]
252 |
PATIENTS CHARTING THE COURSE |
12:30 Session 8: Incentives aligned with value and learning
What are the key opportunities to better align incentives with elements important for care that is effective, efficient, and adds to learning?
Chair: Helen Darling, National Business Group on Health
ØPaying for value and science-driven care
Michael Chernew, Harvard University
ØGenerating evidence to guide care
Richard Gilfillan, Geisinger Health Plan
ØCreating a learning culture
Anne Weiss, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
2:00 Session 9: Strategies and priorities moving forward
A policy-oriented panel to pull together and discuss key themes from workshop presentations on next steps, public perception and opinion and reflect on key opportunities, possible messages, and approaches to encourage greater public engagement in driving system improvements
Moderator: J. Michael McGinnis, Institute of Medicine
ØKathy Buto, Johnson & Johnson
ØHelen Darling, National Business Group on Health
ØDeborah Trautman, Johns Hopkins Medicine Center for Health Policy
ØMyrl Weinberg, National Health Council
Appendix B
Biographical Sketches of
Workshop Participants
David Blumenthal, M.D., M.P.P., formerly served as the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology under President Barack Obama. In this role he was charged with building an interoperable, private and secure nationwide health information system and supporting the widespread, meaningful use of health information technology (IT). Dr. Blumenthal received his undergraduate, medical, and public policy degrees from Harvard University and completed his residency in internal medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital. Prior to his appointment to the administration, Dr. Blumenthal was a practicing primary care physician; Director, Institute for Health Policy; and the Samuel O. Thier Professor of Medicine and Professor of Health Policy at the Massachusetts General Hospital/Partners HealthCare System and Harvard Medical School. Dr. Blumenthal is a renowned health services researcher and national authority on health IT adoption. With his colleagues from Harvard Medical School, he authored the seminal studies on the adoption and use of health IT in the United States. He is the author of more than 200 scholarly publications, including most recently, “Heart of Power: Health and Politics in the Oval Office,” which tells the history of U.S. presidents’ involvement in health reform, from Franklin D. Roosevelt through George W. Bush. A member of the Institute of Medicine and a former board member and national correspondent for the New England Journal of Medicine, Dr. Blumenthal has held several leadership positions in medicine, government, and academia including Senior Vice President at Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital; Executive Director of the Center for Health Policy and Management and Lecturer on Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government; and as a professional staff
253