Get the E-newsletter
According to the Institute of Medicine (IOM) report Improving Diagnosis in Health Care, released in September, most people are likely to experience at least one diagnostic error in their lifetime—sometimes with devastating consequences. Diagnostic error, defined in the report as “the failure to (a) establish an accurate and timely explanation of the patient’s health problem or (b) communicate that explanation to the patient,” has widespread consequences:
Systemic causes of diagnostic error include inadequate collaboration and communication among clinicians, patients, and their families; a work system not designed to support the diagnostic process; limited feedback about diagnostic performance; and a culture that discourages transparency and disclosure of errors. Other causes are cognitive, meaning the physician does not know about a disease (a rare occurrence), fails to gather all the necessary data about a patient (more common), or errs in putting all the pieces together (most common).
The IOM concluded that solving the problem requires a broad focus on improving diagnosis. Toward that end, the institute has issued eight recommendations for hospitals and health systems, physicians, IT vendors, regulatory bodies, educators, and patients:
Leadership spoke with four experts who are intimately involved in bringing this change about: Mark Graber, MD, FACP, president, Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine, and senior fellow, RTI International; Michael Kanter, MD, CPPS, regional medical director of quality and clinical analysis, Southern California Permanente Medical Group; Gordon Schiff, associate professor of medicine, Harvard Business School, and associate director, Center for Patient Safety Research & Practice, Brigham & Women's Hospital; and Geeta Singhal, MD, MEd, attending, pediatric hospital medicine, Texas Children's Hospital, and director, Office of Faculty Development and associate professor of pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine.
Mark Graber, MD, FACP, president, Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine, and senior fellow, RTI International.
Graber: They’re the same kind of mistakes we all make in our everyday lives; it’s just that doctors are making them in a high-stakes environment. Our intuition does a great job, but every once in a while it will lead us astray. Three of the most common and troublesome ‘biases’ in medicine are framing and context biases (for example, a patient who complains of pain in the stomach area makes us tend to think the cause might be gastrointestinal, when really it’s something else entirely), premature closure (the tendency to be happy with the first plausible diagnosis that comes to mind, without considering other possibilities), and various confirmation biases (for example, we tend to favor evidence that’s consistent with our initial diagnosis and discount evidence that might suggest something else).
If every time we came up with a diagnosis, we stopped and asked ourselves what else it could be, this would tend to counteract all three of these bias tendencies. Constructing a differential diagnosis would accomplish the same thing, as would taking advantage of one of the several excellent web-based, differential-diagnosis programs that can provide suggestions in just a few seconds. When you’re really puzzled about a case, you’re going to automatically slow down, maybe do a little reading or get a consult; it’s when you’re making a very common diagnosis on the basis of very familiar symptoms that you need to double-check your thinking.
In the same way surgeons use checklists, physicians might benefit from using a checklist for diagnosis:
Geeta Singhal, MD, MEd, attending, pediatric hospital medicine, Texas Children’s Hospital, and director, Office of Faculty Development and associate professor of pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine.
Singhal: We need to teach medical students and physicians about critical thinking, about how to overcome cognitive biases. For example, we know that premature closure is one of the most common causes of diagnostic error: Once a diagnosis is made, thinking stops, whether it’s an ED [emergency department] physician accepting the diagnosis of a patient’s primary care practitioner or an attending accepting the diagnosis of an ED physician. While you respect that opinion, you need to consider other possibilities, especially if you have new information.
I’m personally susceptible to authority bias—as a hospital-based general pediatrician, I work with a lot of subspecialists, and early on I might have disregarded internal misgivings if one of them said a patient had a particular condition. Now I’ve learned to take that recommendation into account, but also to listen to my own experience.
Graber: The first thing is that healthcare organizations need to start finding diagnostic errors and studying them and thinking and talking about them. Right now the tools—both process and technological—that hospitals have to detect patient safety problems don’t pick up diagnostic errors.
There are some pilot programs. There’s one in Maine Medical Center, where one of the hospitalists told his colleagues, “I’m interested in diagnostic error; please tell me about the cases you think are candidates.” In six months, he got 36 reports of errors, none of which were detected by the usual safety-monitoring tools in operation at the time. All it took was a champion.
Start encouraging second opinions, and make it easier to get one—one way is to enlist and promote physician volunteers interested in providing second opinions. Spend a tiny bit of money and make those web-based differential- diagnosis programs available. Get proactive about feedback: Bring back autopsies and close the loop on diagnostic test results—send them to patients and monitor how many critical results are acted on within 30 days. Empower nurses to ensure tests get done, facilitate communication between patients and physicians, and monitor for new and resolving symptoms.
Singhal: Number one is raising awareness. One of the best ways to do this is with grand rounds, which have great reach—our invitations go out to about 400 people in and outside the hospital—and great impact, because they’re typically used to deliver cutting-edge information. This is a powerful way to deliver a message.
One interesting model is Harvard and its affiliated hospitals’ use of a malpractice company to educate their physicians in diagnostic error. Because at least initially a lot of the data about diagnostic errors came from malpractice claims, and usually if an attorney’s speaking, a physician is going to listen.
Gordon Schiff, MD, associate professor of medicine, Harvard Business School, and associate director, Center for Patient Safety Research & Practice, Brigham & Women’s Hospital.
Schiff: Holding M&M [morbidity and mortality] conferences where clinicians follow up on missed or mistaken diagnoses can be quite successful, but organizations have to establish a culture of patient safety, where everyone is passionate about sharing and learning together from mistakes and physicians feel safe from punitive action.
Another thing we can do is close the feedback loop, perhaps by having nurses call patients two days after they are seen in the ED. We’ve been experimenting with an interactive voice response system in a variety of ways. This might mean the patient gets a call that says, “This is Brigham and Women’s Hospital following up on your visit with Dr. Schiff: Press 1 if you’re better and 2 if you’re not better.” If they press 2, they get to speak with a nurse. However we do it, the key, in addition to helping the patient, is to use such feedback to create learning systems, hardwiring follow-up both literally and figuratively.
Michael Kanter, MD, CPPS, regional medical director of quality and clinical analysis, Southern California Permanente Medical Group.
Kanter: We have implemented two programs to improve diagnosis in ambulatory care that have proven to be very effective. One is our Sure Net program, which uses electronic clinical surveillance to identify potential lapses in the diagnostic process, such as by monitoring patients on medications, reevaluating high-dose acetaminophen prescriptions, and following up on abnormal prostate- specific antigen (PSA) smears. That last example is one of our biggest successes out of almost 40 Sure Net programs; we do about 50,000 screening PSA tests a year, and in a three-year period Sure Net identified 8,076 patients who looked like they needed some kind of follow-up; 3,833 got a urology appointment, 2,200 underwent biopsy, and we found 745 cancers. We can’t really translate that into lives saved, but clearly the program has made a difference. We used to have a couple of lawsuits a year over the failure to catch prostate cancer, and since we started it we’ve had none.
The other thing we did was establish a centralized reading center for diabetic retinopathy (DR) imaging, in which specially trained certified ophthalmological assistants and technicians read all the images from 13 medical centers under the supervision of a retinal specialist. Previously, we had significant unexplained variation among our medical centers in the rate of DR diagnosis, suggesting there was some misdiagnosis even though we could not identify exactly which patients might have been affected. As a result of our centralized reading center, the variation in the rate markedly decreased and our DR prevalence went from 10.1 percent of those tested in 2009, far below the national average, to 22.1 percent in 2012—meaning we caught more cases of DR, which is the leading cause of blindness among adults.
Kanter: One thing is giving them access to their own information. Our patients can see their lab results, their problem list, their medication records, etc., on our patient portal. Another tool on that portal is their online personal action plan, which lists what care elements they need and how to get those things done; for example, it will say you need a mammogram and here’s the phone number to call to schedule that. Patients actually get an email alert to log on and see what they’re missing.
On our appointment reminder cards, we can inform patients that it’s important to make sure they understand their diagnosis when they see the doctor and what they should be doing. After a visit, they also get a plainly written summary of everything that went on in the visit.
Singhal: We also need to empower patients and their families to question the doctors. At Texas Children’s, we have a rapid response team that we can call if a child is getting sicker; someone from the ICU [intensive care unit] will come up and provide a consult. A physician or nurse can call this number, but so can a parent.
One thing that’s really important to me as a pediatrician is whether the parents agree with my diagnosis. I look for nonverbal cues from parents, and then I might say, “Mrs. Smith, you’re the expert on your child, does this make sense to you?” I think the same thing would be especially useful with families of geriatric patients.
Graber: Providers should take advantage of every opportunity to encourage patients to speak up, to ask questions: What else could this be? What should I expect? When and how should I follow up if symptoms persist or worsen? What resources can I use to learn more? Is this test worthwhile—can we wait? We should encourage them to keep good records of their symptoms and how they respond (or don’t) to treatment, their medications, and their test results.
Schiff: I think the most obvious way is access to data. If an EMR is searchable and properly organized and interoperable—which, unfortunately, most are not—you can quickly find biopsy reports and medication lists and records from other hospitals, all of which are important in making an accurate diagnosis. For example, if someone has a low platelet count, the EMR could remind me that the patient is on a drug that can lower platelets.
We certainly have a long way to go to make the EMR more efficient in terms of input efficiency and information display. For example, it would be useful if we could use our electronic notes to think out loud—What do I think is going on with this patient? What is the differential diagnosis? What am I unsure about?—and share that information with our colleagues. If your diagnostic assessment is buried in 10 or 20 pages of pasted-in data, it’s going to be hard to locate and not terribly useful.
Another aspect of this is transparency, so someone else can come along and see in my differential diagnosis that I haven’t considered something—or that I indicated I was uncertain. It would be great, for example, if every admitting note from the ED would say not just, “I think this person has a pulmonary embolism,” but also how certain that physician is in his or her diagnosis.
Whether current EMRs are helping or hindering our communication is still an open question. It may be that the most potent source of clinical decision support that EMRs now provide is streamlined access to information—for example, electronic textbooks such as Up-to-Date or Dynamed. It turns out that about half the time, doctors end patient encounters with unanswered questions—What are the causes of shortness of breath and blood in the urine? Can X actually cause Y?—they would like to follow up on but often don’t, because they simply don’t have the time.
Schiff: Taking this deployment of technology a step further, one could imagine ubiquitous real-time telemedicine, using the camera on our computer: I see an unusual lesion on somebody’s leg, and I hit a button and the dermatologist is there to weigh in.
I’m a big believer in voice-recognition technology. The accuracy has gotten remarkably higher in recent years, and it’s likely to play a big role in recording clinical history and assessments. This will make it easier for us to maintain eye contact with patients rather than having to look at the screen, which is helpful if you’re trying to engage them in coproducing a diagnosis.
One project we’ve been working on is including the indication, the why, in drug prescriptions, so we can link all the medications a person is taking to each diagnosis and make mistakes stand out. We’re trying to use this as a safety check and a patient education vehicle; it could also help inform clinicians why somebody is taking a particular medicine and be a cross-check on diagnosis to make sure the doctor and patient are on the same page.
Graber: The first step is for healthcare leaders and professionals to accept that we have a problem with diagnosis. There’s been an assumption that we’re doing OK here, and there is a good basis for that assumption: It is a testament to the quality of our physicians and healthcare organizations that the correct diagnosis is reached around 90 percent of the time, because there are over 10,000 diseases and uncertainty is a constant at every step of the diagnostic process. But given the harm that we know ensues from diagnostic error, we really need to do better, to get to 92 percent, then 95 percent, as quickly as we can. I think that’s very doable—so many of the problems we’ve identified are preventable.
Schiff: I’m optimistic, with qualifications. We’re moving toward being able to use the EMR to get real-time support, reminders, help, and communication, but at the same time we’re also moving in the opposite direction with information overload and inefficient work flows. The EMR was supposed to make charting more efficient, yet to date it’s had quite the opposite effect. These things have seemingly not been priorities for the EMR vendors. But the transformative potential is there, and we’ve outlined more than a dozen ways we need to challenge the EMR and electronic documentation to live up to that potential.
Lauren Phillips is president of Phillips Medical Writers, Ltd., Bellingham, Wash., and a frequent contributor to Leadership.
Grant Thornton: Facilitating EAM
Priority Advantage: Helping Organizations Optimize Their Medicare Advantage Plans
6 Patient Revenue Cycle Metrics You Should Be Tracking (and How to Improve Your Results)
Patient financial engagement is more challenging than ever – and more critical. With patient responsibility as a percentage of revenue on the rise, providers have seen their billing-related costs and accounts receivable levels increase. If increasing collection yield and reducing costs are a priority for your organization, the metrics outlined in this presentation will provide the framework you need to understand what’s working and what’s not, in order to guide your overall patient financial engagement initiatives and optimize results.
10 Ways to Reduce Patient Statement Volume (and Reduce Costs)
No two patients are the same. Each has a very personal healthcare experience, and each has distinct financial needs and preferences that have an impact on how, when and if they chose to pay their healthcare bill. It’s no longer effective to apply static billing techniques to solve the complex challenge of collecting balances from patients. The need to tailor financial conversations and payment options to individual needs and preferences is critical. This presentation provides 10 recommendations that will not only help you improve payment performance through a more tailored approach, but take control of rising collection costs.
Reduce Patient Balances Sent to Collection Agencies: Approaching New Problems with New Approaches
This white paper, written by Apex Vice President of Solutions and Services, Carrie Romandine, discusses the importance of patient segmentation and messaging specifically related to the patient revenue cycle. Applying strategic messaging that is tailored to each patient type will not only better educate consumers on payment options specific to their billing needs, but it will maximize the amount collected before sending to collections. Further, targeted messaging should be applied across all points of patient interaction (i.e. point of service, customer service, patient statements) and analyzed regularly for maximized results.
The Future of Online Patient Billing Portals
This white paper, written by Apex President Patrick Maurer, discusses methods to increase patient adoption of online payments. Providers are now seeking ways to incrementally collect more payments due from patients as well as speeding up the rate of collections. This white paper shows why patient-centric approaches to online payment portals are important complements to traditional provider-centric approaches.
Payment Portals Can Improve Self-Pay Collections and Support Meaningful Use
Increased electronic engagement between healthcare providers and patients provides significant opportunities for improving revenue cycle metrics and encouraging patients to access EHRs. This article, written by Apex Founder and CEO Brian Kueppers, explores a number of strategies to create synergy between patient billing, online payment portals and electronic health record (EHR) software to realize a high ROI in speed to payment, patient satisfaction and portal adoption for meaningful use.
Large Health System Drives 10% UP (Patient Payments) and 10% DOWN (Billing-related Costs)
Faced with a rising tide of bad debt, a large Southeastern healthcare system was seeing a sharp decline in net patient revenues. The need to improve collections was dire. By integrating critical tools and processes, the health system was able to increase online payments and improve its financial position. Taking a holistic approach increased overall collection yield by 10% while costs came down because the number of statements sent to patients fell by 10%, which equated to a $1.3M annualized improvement in patient cash over a six-month period. This case study explains how.
ICD-10: Managing Performance
With the ICD10 deadline quickly approaching and daily responsibilities not slowing down, final preparations for October 1 require strategic prioritization and laser focus.
Clarity Drives Collections
Read how Gwinnett Medical Center provides clear connections to financial information, offers multiple payment options for patients, and gives onsite staff the ability to collect payments at multiple points throughout the care process.
Orlando Health Gains Insight into Denials, Reduces A/R Days with RelayAnalytics Acuity
Read how Orlando Health was able to perform deeper dives into claims data to help the health system see claim rejections more quickly–even on the front end–and reduce A/R days.
Revenue Cycle Payment Clarity
To maintain fiscal fitness and boost patient satisfaction and loyalty, healthcare providers need visibility into when and how much they will be paid–by whom–and the ability to better navigate obstacles to payment. They need payment clarity. This whitepaper illuminates this concept that is winning fans at forward-thinking hospitals.
Streamlining the Patient Billing Process
Financial services staff are always looking for ways to improve the verification, billing and collections processes, and Munson Healthcare is no different. Read about how they streamlined the billing process to produce cleaner bills on the front end and helped financial services staff collect more than $1 million in additional upfront annual revenue in one year.
Wallace Thomson Hospital Automates to Maximize Limited Resources
Effective revenue cycle management can be a challenge for any hospital, but for smaller providers it is even tougher. Read how Wallace Thomson identified unreimbursed procedures, streamlined claims management, and improved its ability to determine charity eligibility.
7 Steps for Building and Funding Sustainability Projects
Before launching an energy-efficiency initiative, it’s important to build a solid business case and understand the funding options and potential incentives that are available. Healthcare leaders should consider taking the steps outlined in the whitepaper to ease the process of gaining approval, piloting, implementing, and supporting sustainability projects. You will find that investing in sustainability and energy efficiency helps hospitals add cash to their bottom line. Discover how hospitals and health systems have various options for funding energy-efficient and renewable-energy initiatives, depending on their current financial structure and strategy.
Key Capital Considerations for Mergers and Acquisitions
Health care is a dynamic mergers and acquisitions market with numerous hospitals and health systems contemplating or pursuing formal arrangements with other entities. These relationships often pose a strategic benefit, such as enhancing competencies across the continuum, facilitating economies of scale, or giving the participants a competitive advantage in a crowded market. Underpinning any profitable acquisition is a robust capital planning strategy that ensures an organization reserves sufficient funds and efficiently onboards partners that advance the enterprise mission and values.
Key Capital Considerations for Mergers and Acquisitions
The success of healthcare mergers, acquisitions, and other affiliations is predicated in part on available capital, and the need for and sources of funding are considerations present throughout the partnering process, from choosing a partner to evaluating an arrangement’s capital needs to selecting an integration model to finding the right money source to finance the deal. This whitepaper offers several strategies that health system leaders have used to assess and manage capital needs for their growing networks.
Trend Watch: Providers adapt as value-based care moves from hype to reality
Announcements from several commercial payers and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) early in 2015 around increased efforts to form value-based contracts with providers seemed to point to an impending rise in risk-based contracting. Rather than wait for disruption from the outside in, health care providers are now making inroads on collaborating with payers on various risk-based contracting models to increase the value of health care from within.
Yuma Regional Medical Center case study
Yuma Regional Medical Center (YRMC) is a not-for-profit hospital serving a population of roughly 200,000 in Yuma and the surrounding communities.
Before becoming a ZirMed client, Yuma was attempting to manually monitor hundreds of thousands of charges which led to significant charge capture leakage. Learn how Yuma & ZirMed worked together to address underlying collections issues at the front end, thus increasing Yuma’s overall bottom line.
Reforming with a New 50-Bed Acute Care Facility
Kindred Hospital Rehabilitation Services works with partners to audit the market and the facility’s role in that market to identify opportunities for improvement. This approach leads to successes; Kindred’s clinical rehab and management expertise complements our partners’ strengths. Every facility and challenge is unique, and requires a full objective analysis.
5-Minute Briefing on Revenue Integrity Through HIM WhitePaper Hospitals FS
As the critical link between patient care and reimbursement, health information enables more complete and accurate revenue capture. This 5-Minute White Paper Briefing shares how to achieve cost-effective revenue integrity by your optimizing HIM systems.
5-Minute Briefing on Accelerating Cash Flow Through HIM WhitePaper Hospitals FS
Speedier cash flow starts with better CDI and coding. This 5-Minute White Paper Briefing explains how providers can improve vital measures of technical and business performance to accelerate cash flow.
5-Minute Briefing on Reducing the Cost of RCM WhitePaper Hospitals FS
Qualified coders are getting harder to come by, and even the most seasoned professional can struggle with the complexity of ICD-10. This 5-Minute White Paper Briefing explains how partnerships can help improve coding and other key RCM operations potentially at a cost savings.
Providers Focus Too Much On Revenue Cycle Management
The point of managing your revenue cycle isn’t just to improve revenue and cash flow. It’s to do those things effectively by consistently following best practices— while spending as little time, money, and energy on them as possible.
Lucille Packard Children’s Hospital Stanford Case Study
How Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital Stanford increased payments received within 45 days by 20% and reduced paper submission claims by 70% by using ZirMed solutions.
Using Predictive Modeling To Detect Meaningful Correlations Across Claims Denials Data
The reasons claims are denied are so varied that managing denials can feel like chasing a thousand different tails. This situation is not surprising given that a hypothetical denial rate of just 5 percent translates to tens of thousands of denied claims per year for large hospitals—where real‐world denial rates often range from 12 to 22 percent. Read about how predictive modeling can detect meaningful correlations across claims denials data.
ZOLL and Emergency Mobile Health Care Case Study
Emergency Mobile Health Care (EMHC) was founded to be and remains an exclusively locally owned and operated emergency medical service organization; today EMHC serves a population of more than a million people in and around Memphis, answering 75,000 calls each year.
Maximizing Medicare Reimbursements White Paper
Since the Physician Quality Reporting Initiative (PQRI) introduction, CMS has paid more than $100 million in bonus payments to participants. However, these bonuses ended in 2015; providers who successfully meet the reporting requirements in 2016 will avoid the 2% negative payment adjustment in 2018, so now is the time to act! Included in this whitepaper are implications of increasing patient responsibility, collections best practices, and collections and internal control solutions.
Denials Deconstructed: Getting Your Claims Paid
Getting paid what your physician deserves—that’s the goal of every biller. Yet even for the best billers, achieving that success can be elusive when denials stand in the way of success, presenting challenges at every turn. Denials aren’t going away, but you can learn techniques to manage and even prevent them.Join practice management expert Elizabeth W. Woodcock, MBA, FACMPE, CPC, to: Discover methods to translate denial data into business intelligence to improve your bottom line, determine staff productivity benchmarks for billers, and recognize common mistakes in denial management.
Automation and Operational Improvement Drive Sustainable Results
Physician practices must improve organizational efficiency to compete in this era of reduced reimbursement and escalating administrative costs.
Revenue Cycle Management Resolves Migration Implementation Issues
Many healthcare organizations are pursuing next-generation health information systems solutions. Learn more about Navigant's work with University of Michigan Health System.
Partnering For Success – Provider Achieves Strength in Stability
The proper implementation of healthcare information technology systems is crucial to an organization’s financial health.
Building a Clinically-Integrated Network
As value-based payment models evolve, providers are challenged to maintain superior clinical outcomes while controlling costs.
Winning in the Post-Acute Marketplace
Read more about factors contributing to the changes in the post-acute marketplace and what it means for manufacturers, physicians, clinicians, patients, and post-acute facilities as they anticipate the transition to the second curve.
Building A Common Vision with Employed Physicians
HSG helped the physicians and executives of St. Claire Regional in Morehead, Kentucky, define their shared vision for how the group would evolve over the next decade. As well as, develop the strategic and operational priorities which refocused and accelerated the group’s evolution.
Practice Performance Improvement
The client was a nine-hospital health system with 14 clinics serving communities in a multi-state market with very limited access to care, poor economic conditions, high unemployment, and a heavy Medicare/Medicaid/uninsured payer mix. In most of these communities, the system was the sole source of care.
Though the clinics were of substantial size (they employed 98 physicians) and comprised of multiple specialists, the physicians functioned as individuals and the practices lacked any real group culture.
Clinical Integration Without Spending a Fortune
Clinical integration can be expensive, but it doesn’t have to be, as this four-step road map for developing a CIN proves. Does it have to cost millions to initiate a clinical integration strategy?
Contrary to popular belief, we have clients who have generated substantial shared savings and a significant ROI over time, without massive investments. Yes, some financial capital is required for resources the CIN providers can’t bring to the table themselves. But the size of that investment can be miniscule relative to the value it produces: improved outcomes and documentation for payers.
Adding Value to Physician Compensation
Today’s concerns about physician compensation are the result of the changing healthcare environment. The transition to value is slow, but finally becoming a reality. Proactive hospitals want to ensure that provider incentives are properly aligned with ever-increasing value-based demands.
This report focuses on the three big questions HSG receives about adding value to physician compensation; Why are organizations redesigning their provider compensation plans? What elements and parameters must be part of successful compensation plans? How are organizations implementing compensation changes?
Effective Revenue Cycle Management in Your Network
Revenue Cycle Management has become an even more complex issue with declining reimbursements, implementation of Electronic Health Records, evolving local carrier determinations (LCD), and payer credentialing [The emphasis on healthcare fraud, abuse and compliance has increased the importance of accuracy of data reporting and claims filing).
The efficiency of a medical practice’s billing operations has critical impact on the financial performance. In many cases, patient billings are the primary revenue source that pays staff salaries, provider compensation and overhead operating cost. Inefficiencies or inaccurate billing will contribute to operating losses.
Succeeding in Value-Based Care
This publication identifies and outlines the necessary characteristics of a fully-functioning clinically integrated network (CIN). What it doesn’t do is detail how hospitals and providers can participate in the value-based care environment during the development process.
One common misconception is that the CIN can’t do anything significant until it has obtained the FTC’s “clinically integrated” stamp of approval. While the network must satisfy the FTC’s definition of clinical integration before single signature contracting for FFS rates and contracts can legally start, hospitals and providers can enjoy three key benefits during the development process.
Therapy: Benefits at All Levels of Care
Nearly half of all Medicare beneficiaries treated in the hospital will need post-acute care services after discharge. For these patients, a stay in an inpatient rehabilitation facility, skilled nursing facility or other post-acute care setting comes between hospital and home.
Does Your Budgeting Process Lack Accountability?
With the proper process, tools, and feedback mechanisms in place, budgeting can be a valuable exercise for organizations while helping hold organizational leaders accountable. Having a proper monthly variance review process is one of the most critical factors in creating a more efficient and accurate budget. Monthly variance reporting puts parameters around what is to be expected during the upcoming budget entry process.
Cost Accounting: the Key to Cost Management and Profitability
Managing the cost of patient care is the top strategic priority of most hospital CFOs today. As healthcare shifts to more data-driven decision making, having clear visibility into key volume, cost and profitability measures across clinical service lines is becoming increasingly important for both long-range and tactical planning activities. In turn, the cost accounting function in healthcare provider organizations is becoming an increasingly important and strategic function. This whitepaper includes five strategies for efficient and accurate cost accounting and service line analytics and keys to overcoming the associated challenges.