How Technology Affects Patient Care
By Brent A. Metfessel MD, CMP™ [Hon]
www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
One area where technology assessments, clinical guidelines, and EMR data can make a true difference in patient care is in disease management.
DMAA Definition
The Disease Management Association of America (DMAA) defines disease management as “a system of coordinated health care interventions and communications for populations with conditions in which patient self-care efforts are significant”. Disease management supports the physician-patient relationship and places particular significance on the prevention of exacerbations and complications of chronic diseases using evidence-based clinical guidelines and integrating those recommendations into initiatives to empower patients to be active partners with their physicians in managing their conditions.
Usual Conditions
Typically, targets for disease management efforts include chronic conditions such as asthma, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, and heart failure, where patients can be active in self-care and where appropriate lifestyle changes can have a significant favorable impact on illness progression.
Outcomes Measurement
The DMAA also emphasizes the importance of process and outcomes measurement and evaluation, along with using the data to influence management of the medical condition.
Assessment
Although claims and administrative data can be used to measure and evaluate selected processes and outcomes, EMRs will be needed to capture the full spectrum of data for analyzing illness response to disease management programs and to support necessary changes in care plans to improve both intermediate outcomes (such as lab values), and long-range goals (such as the prevention of illness exacerbations, managing co-morbidities, and halting the progression of complications).
Channel Surfing the ME-P
Have you visited our other topic channels? Established to facilitate idea exchange and link our community together, the value of these topics is dependent upon your input. Please take a minute to visit. And, to prevent that annoying spam, we ask that you register. It is fast, free and secure.
Conclusion
Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.
Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com
OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:
- PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
- HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
- CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
- ADVISORS: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org
- FINANCE: Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors
- INSURANCE: Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors
- Dictionary of Health Economics and Finance
- Dictionary of Health Information Technology and Security
- Dictionary of Health Insurance and Managed Care
Filed under: Book Reviews, CMP Program, Information Technology, Recommended Books | Tagged: Brent A. Metfessel, Business of Medical Practice, Disease Management, Disease Management Association of America, EHRs, EMRs, www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com |














Employer Wellness Programs and Financial Incentives
In 2013, 35 percent of employers say employee wellness programs are a very effective strategy for controlling costs, a larger share than says the same about any other strategy, including disease management (22 percent), consumer-driven health plans (20 percent) or higher cost sharing (17 percent).
Nearly all large employers (at least 200 workers) offer at least one wellness program, which can take many forms and target a wide range of conditions. More than a third (36 percent) of large employers who offer wellness programs offer some kind of financial incentive for workers to participate, such as lower premiums or a lower deductible, receiving a larger contribution to a tax-preferred savings account, or gift cards, cash or other direct financial incentives.
Among large firms offering health benefits, more than half (55 percent) offer some kind of biometric screenings to measure workers’ health risks. Of these, 11 percent reward or penalize workers financially based on whether they achieve specific biometric outcomes.
Source: Kaiser Family Foundation
LikeLike