Michelle Obama says she had to ease nation into a first lady with Black hair: ‘Let me keep my hair straight. Let’s get health care passed’

Michelle Obama says she intentionally waited until she left the White House to finally wear her hair in braids, suggesting that the country was “just getting adjusted” to a Black woman as first lady.

“They ain’t ready for it!” Obama told Ellen DeGeneres on Tuesday, as she kicked off a nationwide book tour in Washington to promote her new self-help book and memoir “The Light We Carry.”

“The code of ethics at a workplace, as Black women we deal with it, the whole thing about do you show up with your natural hair?” Obama said.

“Braids, ya’ll!” Obama exclaimed to applause from the sold-out crowd, as she motioned to her hairstyle.

“We gotta ease up on the people,” Obama quipped about how she wore her hair while living in the executive mansion.

“They tripped out when Barack wore a tan suit,” Obama continued, referring to the then-president’s 2014 sartorial choice that quickly became a viral sensation.

“The great indignity, the scandal of the Obama administration,” the former first lady said with a laugh.

Dramatizing what she imagined the reaction would’ve been if she debuted braids while in the White House, Obama took on the tone of her critics and said, “Remember when she wore braids? Those are terrorist braids! Those are revolutionary braids!”

“Let me keep my hair straight,” Obama continued. “Let’s get health care passed.”

Obama said she’d sometimes tease her team by mentioning a desire to switch up her look.

“I would get my staff all worried, too. I was like, ‘I was thinking about getting braids,’” Obama chuckled as she stroked her hair.

“That’s the African American experience,” Obama said, “but women in offices that are worried, ‘Should I wear skirts? Should I wear pantyhose?’ I hate pantyhose.”

“But when you’re carrying all this other stuff, this mask, these differences and you’re trying to do your job, it’s just an extra burden on overcoming,” she told DeGeneres.

Obama’s appearance at the Warner Theatre coincided with former President Trump’s announcement on Tuesday in Florida that he was launching a 2024 White House bid. No mention was made of Trump by name at the event, but Obama did reflect on the “painful” experience of his 2016 victory.

“You don’t want to make this personal, but as I write in the book, it hurt. It hurt because you wonder was it a rebuke of the eight years, the sacrifice we made? Was it complacency? What was it?” Obama, 58, said.

“We sacrificed a lot to make that set of changes and because not enough people voted, that was that.”

In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, Obama said, “You’re looking at the world and you’re looking at the world literally fall apart before your very eyes. And for us, it was particularly painful because we knew this would happen.”

“I mean, if you — if you guys recall, I said, ‘Don’t vote for this guy.”

“I have to say, and I should have listened to you, I regret voting for him,” DeGeneres, an outspoken Trump critic, deadpanned. “I thought he was a good guy,” DeGeneres joked.

Saying while she didn’t want to “talk too much politics,” Obama told the audience, “The truth is, we have a vested interest in making sure that more people feel seen.”

“That more people feel like they have a stake in what’s going on. People need jobs, they need housing, they need to feel like they can get ahead, they need to feel like they have a stake in this world and then they won’t tear it apart,” she said.

“They won’t tear it apart with racism, or with violence, or with crime because it’s theirs.”

—Updated at 10:50 a.m.

Teladoc Health Reaches 50 Million Visit Milestone

Teladoc Health Reaches 50 Million Visit Milestone

Teladoc Overall health, Inc.

Sector leader drives considerable, lasting wellbeing impression for men and women & accessibility to excellent treatment all over the world

Buy, NY, Nov. 15, 2022 (Globe NEWSWIRE) — Teladoc Health and fitness (NYSE: TDOC), the world wide leader in full-man or woman digital care, declared today that it has surpassed 50 million visits sent by the company’s global community of clinicians. This milestone is in addition to the millions of visits enabled by its organization digital treatment system for healthcare facility and health procedure customers.

Around its 20-yr historical past, Teladoc Well being has experienced a significant impact on thousands and thousands of lives, bringing global entry to entire-person treatment. As the first telehealth organization to hit a person million visits in 2015, its scale and get to continue being unmatched considering the fact that its founding, with 1 in 4 People now acquiring access to Teladoc Well being solutions by way of their employer or wellness program.

“We have created a unified and customized expertise even though supporting a variety of full person wellness requires, which includes main treatment, persistent problem administration, psychological well being and nourishment,” said Jason Gorevic, main govt officer of Teladoc Overall health. “As we replicate on this milestone, we keep on being centered on how we can have the biggest influence, for the greatest amount of folks all over the environment, throughout the finest variety of desires – empowering all persons everywhere you go to reside their healthiest life.”

New details released by Teladoc Wellness demonstrate need for unified complete-human being treatment continues to speed up:

  • People are now significantly counting on Teladoc Overall health to aid a selection of wellbeing requirements, like most important care (4x growth in visits YTD) and nourishment (+30{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} development in visits YTD).

  • 1 in 3 Main360 customers are now utilizing at least a person added Teladoc Wellness company, like mental overall health treatment or chronic treatment management.

  • The share of folks enrolled in persistent issue administration answers working with two or much more courses proceeds to improve, from 13{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} in 2020, to 24{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} in 2021, to 34{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} in 2022.

  • About 1 3rd of Teladoc Health’s 50 million visits have occurred in the past calendar year.

  • About the previous 3 many years, Teladoc Health’s clinicians have observed a 15x jump in anxiousness and depressive disorders diagnoses, and a 10x leap in diagnoses for acute worry.

The milestone follows a number of recognitions of the company in 2022 – which include Newsweek America’s Most Dependable Firms, Excellent Destinations to Function and LinkedIn’s Major Firms in Healthcare.

Founded two many years in the past with a mission that everyone must have obtain to the very best health care, Teladoc Health’s unique total-individual care model leverages insights, data, and clinical know-how to generate far better overall health close to the entire world.

The announcement was highlighted during remarks by CEO Jason Gorevic at the once-a-year HLTH conference in Las Vegas, Nevada.

About Teladoc Well being

Teladoc Well being empowers all people just about everywhere to are living their healthiest lives by transforming the health care expertise. As the entire world leader in full-particular person virtual treatment, Teladoc Health and fitness employs proprietary health and fitness alerts and individualized interactions to push greater wellness results across the complete continuum of care, at every phase in a person’s overall health journey. Teladoc Well being leverages far more than two decades of knowledge and data-driven insights to meet the increasing virtual treatment requirements of consumers and healthcare industry experts. For more information, remember to stop by www.teladochealth.com or abide by @TeladocHealth on Twitter.

Source: Teladoc Health and fitness, Inc. – Common

Media:

Carolyn Edwards

321-795-1952

pr@teladochealth.com

Sick Profit: Investigating Private Equity’s Stealthy Takeover of Health Care Across Cities and Specialties

Two-year-old Zion Gastelum died just days after dentists performed root canals and put crowns on six baby teeth at a clinic affiliated with a private equity firm.

His parents sued the Kool Smiles dental clinic in Yuma, Arizona, and its private equity investor, FFL Partners. They argued the procedures were done needlessly, in keeping with a corporate strategy to maximize profits by overtreating kids from lower-income families enrolled in Medicaid. Zion died after being diagnosed with “brain damage caused by a lack of oxygen,” according to the lawsuit.

Kool Smiles “overtreats, underperforms and overbills,” the family alleged in the suit, which was settled last year under confidential terms. FFL Partners and Kool Smiles had no comment but denied liability in court filings.

Private equity is rapidly moving to reshape health care in America, coming off a banner year in 2021, when the deep-pocketed firms plowed $206 billion into more than 1,400 health care acquisitions, according to industry tracker PitchBook.

Seeking quick returns, these investors are buying into eye care clinics, dental management chains, physician practices, hospices, pet care providers, and thousands of other companies that render medical care nearly from cradle to grave. Private equity-backed groups have even set up special “obstetric emergency departments” at some hospitals, which can charge expectant mothers hundreds of dollars extra for routine perinatal care.

As private equity extends its reach into health care, evidence is mounting that the penetration has led to higher prices and diminished quality of care, a KHN investigation has found. KHN found that companies owned or managed by private equity firms have agreed to pay fines of more than $500 million since 2014 to settle at least 34 lawsuits filed under the False Claims Act, a federal law that punishes false billing submissions to the federal government with fines. Most of the time, the private equity owners have avoided liability.

New research by the University of California-Berkeley has identified “hot spots” where private equity firms have quietly moved from having a small foothold to controlling more than two-thirds of the market for physician services such as anesthesiology and gastroenterology in 2021. And KHN found that in San Antonio, more than two dozen gastroenterology offices are controlled by a private equity-backed group that billed a patient $1,100 for her share of a colonoscopy charge — about three times what she paid in another state.

It’s not just prices that are drawing scrutiny.

Whistleblowers and injured patients are turning to the courts to press allegations of misconduct or other improper business dealings. The lawsuits allege that some private equity firms, or companies they invested in, have boosted the bottom line by violating federal false claims and anti-kickback laws or through other profit-boosting strategies that could harm patients.

“Their model is to deliver short-term financial goals and in order to do that you have to cut corners,” said Mary Inman, an attorney who represents whistleblowers.

Federal regulators, meanwhile, are almost blind to the incursion, since private equity typically acquires practices and hospitals below the regulatory radar. KHN found that more than 90{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} of private equity takeovers or investments fall below the $101 million threshold that triggers an antitrust review by the Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Justice Department.

Spurring Growth

Private equity firms pool money from investors, ranging from wealthy people to college endowments and pension funds. They use that money to buy into businesses they hope to flip at a sizable profit, usually within three to seven years, by making them more efficient and lucrative.

Private equity has poured nearly $1 trillion into nearly 8,000 health care transactions during the past decade, according to PitchBook.

Fund managers who back the deals often say they have the expertise to reduce waste and turn around inefficient, or moribund, businesses, and they tout their role in helping to finance new drugs and technologies expected to benefit patients in years to come.

Critics see a far less rosy picture. They argue that private equity’s playbook, while it may work in some industries, is ill suited for health care, when people’s lives are on the line.

In the health care sphere, private equity has tended to find legal ways to bill more for medical services: trimming services that don’t turn a profit, cutting staff, or employing personnel with less training to perform skilled jobs — actions that may put patients at risk, critics say.

KHN, in a series of articles published this year, has examined a range of private equity forays into health care, from its marketing of America’s top-selling emergency contraception pill to buying up whole chains of ophthalmology and gastroenterology practices and investing in the booming hospice care industry and even funeral homes.

These deals happened on top of well-publicized takeovers of hospital emergency room staffing firms that led to outrageous “surprise” medical bills for some patients, as well as the buying up of entire rural hospital systems.

“Their only goal is to make outsize profits,” said Laura Olson, a political science professor at Lehigh University and a critic of the industry.

Hot Spots

When it comes to acquisitions, private equity firms have similar appetites, according to a KHN analysis of 600 deals by the 25 firms that PitchBook says have most frequently invested in health care.

Eighteen of the firms have dental companies listed in their portfolios, and 16 list centers that offer treatment of cataracts, eye surgery, or other vision care, KHN found.

Fourteen have bought stakes in animal hospitals or pet care clinics, a market in which rapid consolidation led to a recent antitrust action by the FTC. The agency reportedly also is investigating whether U.S. Anesthesia Partners, which operates anesthesia practices in nine states, has grown too dominant in some areas.

Private equity has flocked to companies that treat autism, drug addiction, and other behavioral health conditions. The firms have made inroads into ancillary services such as diagnostic and urine-testing and software for managing billing and other aspects of medical practice.

Private equity has done so much buying that it now dominates several specialized medical services, such as anesthesiology and gastroenterology, in a few metropolitan areas, according to new research made available to KHN by the Nicholas C. Petris Center at UC-Berkeley.

Although private equity plays a role in just 14{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} of gastroenterology practices nationwide, it controls nearly three-quarters of the market in at least five metropolitan areas across five states, including Texas and North Carolina, according to the Petris Center research.

Similarly, anesthesiology practices tied to private equity hold 12{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} of the market nationwide but have swallowed up more than two-thirds of it in parts of five states, including the Orlando, Florida, area, according to the data.

These expansions can lead to higher prices for patients, said Yashaswini Singh, a researcher at the Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins University.

In a study of 578 physician practices in dermatology, ophthalmology, and gastroenterology published in JAMA Health Forum in September, Singh and her team tied private equity takeovers to an average increase of $71 per medical claim filed and a 9{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} increase in lengthy, more costly, patient visits.

Singh said in an interview that private equity may develop protocols that bring patients back to see physicians more often than in the past, which can drive up costs, or order more lucrative medical services, whether needed or not, that boost profits.

“There are more questions than answers,” Singh said. “It really is a black hole.”

Jean Hemphill, a Philadelphia health care attorney, said that in some cases private equity has merely taken advantage of the realities of operating a modern medical practice amid growing administrative costs.

Physicians sometimes sell practices to private equity firms because they promise to take over things like billing, regulatory compliance, and scheduling — allowing doctors to focus on practicing medicine. (The physicians also might reap a big payout.)

“You can’t do it on a scale like Marcus Welby used to do it,” Hemphill said, referring to an early 1970s television drama about a kindly family doctor who made house calls. “That’s what leads to larger groups,” she said. “It is a more efficient way to do it.”

But Laura Alexander, a former vice president of policy at the nonprofit American Antitrust Institute, which collaborated on the Petris Center research, said she is concerned about private equity’s growing dominance in some markets.

“We’re still at the stage of understanding the scope of the problem,” Alexander said. “One thing is clear: Much more transparency and scrutiny of these deals is needed.”

‘Revenue Maximization’

Private equity firms often bring a “hands-on” approach to management, taking steps such as placing their representatives on a company’s board of directors and influencing the hiring and firing of key staffers.

“Private equity exercises immense control over the operations of health care companies it buys an interest in,” said Jeanne Markey, a Philadelphia whistleblower attorney.

Markey represented physician assistant Michelle O’Connor in a 2015 whistleblower lawsuit filed against National Spine and Pain Centers and its private equity owner, Sentinel Capital Partners.

In just a year under private equity guidance, National Spine’s patient load quadrupled as it grew into one of the nation’s largest pain management chains, treating more than 160,000 people in about 40 offices across five East Coast states, according to the suit.

O’Connor, who worked at two National Spine clinics in Virginia, said the mega-growth strategy sprang from a “corporate culture in which money trumps the provision of appropriate patient care,” according to the suit.

She cited a “revenue maximization” policy that mandated medical staffers see at least 25 patients a day, up from 16 to 18 before the takeover.

The pain clinics also overcharged Medicare by billing up to $1,100 for “unnecessary and often worthless” back braces and charging up to $1,800 each for urine drug tests that were “medically unnecessary and often worthless,” according to the suit.

In April 2019, National Spine paid the Justice Department $3.3 million to settle the whistleblower’s civil case without admitting wrongdoing.

Sentinel Capital Partners, which by that time had sold the pain management chain to another private equity firm, paid no part of National Spine’s settlement, court records show. Sentinel Capital Partners had no comment.

In another whistleblower case, a South Florida pharmacy owned by RLH Equity Partners raked in what the lawsuit called an “extraordinarily high” profit on more than $68 million in painkilling and scar creams billed to the military health insurance plan Tricare.

The suit alleges that the pharmacy paid illegal kickbacks to telemarketers who drove the business. One doctor admitted prescribing the creams to scores of patients he had never seen, examined, or even spoken to, according to the suit.

RLH, based in Los Angeles, disputed the Justice Department’s claims. In 2019, RLH and the pharmacy paid a total of $21 million to settle the case. Neither admitted liability. RLH managing director Michel Glouchevitch told KHN that his company cooperated with the investigation and that “the individuals responsible for any problems have been terminated.”

In many fraud cases, however, private equity investors walk away scot-free because the companies they own pay the fines. Eileen O’Grady, a researcher at the nonprofit Private Equity Stakeholder Project, said government should require “added scrutiny” of private equity companies whose holdings run afoul of the law.

“Nothing like that exists,” she said.

Questions About Quality

Whether private equity influences the quality of medical care is tough to discern.

Robert Homchick, a Seattle health care regulatory attorney, said private equity firms “vary tremendously” in how conscientiously they manage health care holdings, which makes generalizing about their performance difficult.

“Private equity has some bad actors, but so does the rest of the [health care] industry,” he said. “I think it’s wrong to paint them all with the same brush.”

But incipient research paints a disturbing picture, which took center stage earlier this year.

On the eve of President Joe Biden’s State of the Union speech in March, the White House released a statement that accused private equity of “buying up struggling nursing homes” and putting “profits before people.”

The covid-19 pandemic had highlighted the “tragic impact” of staffing cuts and other moneysaving tactics in nursing homes, the statement said.

More than 200,000 nursing home residents and staffers had died from covid in the previous two years, according to the White House, and research had linked private equity to inflated nursing costs and elevated patient death rates.

Some injured patients are turning to the courts in hopes of holding the firms accountable for what the patients view as lapses in care or policies that favor profits over patients.

Dozens of lawsuits link patient harm to the sale of Florida medical device maker Exactech to TPG Capital, a Texas private equity firm. TPG acquired the device company in February 2018 for about $737 million.

In August 2021, Exactech recalled its Optetrak knee replacement system, warning that a defect in packaging might cause the implant to loosen or fracture and cause “pain, bone loss or recurrent swelling.” In the lawsuits, more than three dozen patients accuse Exactech of covering up the defects for years, including, some suits say, when “full disclosure of the magnitude of the problem … might have negatively impacted” Exactech’s sale to TPG.

Linda White is suing Exactech and TPG, which she asserts is “directly involved” in the device company’s affairs.

White had Optetrak implants inserted into both her knees at a Galesburg, Illinois, hospital in June 2012. The right one failed and was replaced with a second Optetrak implant in July 2015, according to her lawsuit. That one also failed, and she had it removed and replaced with a different company’s device in January 2019.

The Exactech implant in White’s left knee had to be removed in May 2019, according to the suit, which is pending in Cook County Circuit Court in Illinois.

In a statement to KHN, Exactech said it conducted an “extensive investigation” when it received reports of “unexpected wear of our implants.”

Exactech said the problem dated to 2005 but was discovered only in July of last year. “Exactech disputes the allegations in these lawsuits and intends to vigorously defend itself,” the statement said. TPG declined to comment but has denied the allegations in court filings.

‘Invasive Procedures’

In the past, private equity business tactics have been linked to scandalously bad care at some dental clinics that treated children from low-income families.

In early 2008, a Washington, D.C., television station aired a shocking report about a local branch of the dental chain Small Smiles that included video of screaming children strapped to straightjacket-like “papoose boards” before being anesthetized to undergo needless operations like baby root canals.

Five years later, a U.S. Senate report cited the TV exposé in voicing alarm at the “corporate practice of dentistry in the Medicaid program.” The Senate report stressed that most dentists turned away kids enrolled in Medicaid because of low payments and posed the question: How could private equity make money providing that care when others could not?

“The answer is ‘volume,’” according to the report.

Small Smiles settled several whistleblower cases in 2010 by paying the government $24 million. At the time, it was providing “business management and administrative services” to 69 clinics nationwide, according to the Justice Department. It later declared bankruptcy.

But complaints that volume-driven dentistry mills have harmed disadvantaged children didn’t stop.

According to the 2018 lawsuit filed by his parents, Zion Gastelum was hooked up to an oxygen tank after questionable root canals and crowns “that was empty or not operating properly” and put under the watch of poorly trained staffers who didn’t recognize the blunder until it was too late.

Zion never regained consciousness and died four days later at Phoenix Children’s Hospital, the suit states. The cause of death was “undetermined,” according to the Maricopa County medical examiner’s office. An Arizona state dental board investigation later concluded that the toddler’s care fell below standards, according to the suit.

Less than a month after Zion’s death in December 2017, the dental management company Benevis LLC and its affiliated Kool Smiles clinics agreed to pay the Justice Department $24 million to settle False Claims Act lawsuits. The government alleged that the chain performed “medically unnecessary” dental services, including baby root canals, from January 2009 through December 2011.

In their lawsuit, Zion’s parents blamed his death on corporate billing policies that enforced “production quotas for invasive procedures such as root canals and crowns” and threatened to fire or discipline dental staff “for generating less than a set dollar amount per patient.”

Kool Smiles billed Medicaid $2,604 for Zion’s care, according to the suit. FFL Partners did not respond to requests for comment. In court filings, it denied liability, arguing it did not provide “any medical services that harmed the patient.”

Covering Tracks

Under a 1976 federal law called the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act, deal-makers must report proposed mergers to the FTC and the Justice Department antitrust division for review. The intent is to block deals that stifle competition, which can lead to higher prices and lower-quality services.

But there’s a huge blind spot, which stymies government oversight of more than 90{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} of private equity investments in health care companies: The current threshold for reporting deals is $101 million.

KHN’s analysis of PitchBook data found that just 423 out of 7,839 private equity health care deals from 2012 through 2021 were known to have exceeded the current threshold.

In some deals, private equity takes a controlling interest in medical practices, and doctors work for the company. In other cases, notably in states whose laws prohibit corporate ownership of physician practices, the private equity firm handles a range of management duties.

Thomas Wollmann, a University of Chicago researcher, said antitrust authorities may not learn of consequential transactions “until long after they have been completed” and “it’s very hard to break them up after the fact.”

In August, the FTC took aim at what it called “a growing trend toward consolidation” by veterinary medicine chains.

The FTC ordered JAB Consumer Partners, a private equity firm based in Luxembourg, to divest from some clinics in the San Francisco Bay and Austin, Texas, areas as part of a proposed $1.1 billion takeover of a rival.

The FTC said the deal would eliminate “head-to-head” competition, “increasing the likelihood that customers are forced to pay higher prices or experience a degradation in quality of the relevant services.”

Under the order, JAB must obtain FTC approval before buying veterinary clinics within 25 miles of the sites it owns in Texas and California.

The FTC would not say how much market consolidation is too much or whether it plans to step up scrutiny of health care mergers and acquisitions.

“Every case is fact-specific,” Betsy Lordan, an FTC spokesperson, told KHN.

Lordan, who has since left the agency, said regulators are considering updates to regulations governing mergers and are reviewing about 1,900 responses to the January 2022 request for public comment. At least 300 of the comments were from doctors or other health care workers.

Few industry observers expect the concerns to abate; they might even increase.

Investors are flush with “dry powder,” industry parlance for money waiting to stoke a deal.

The Healthcare Private Equity Association, which boasts about 100 investment companies as members, says the firms have $3 trillion in assets and are pursuing a vision for “building the future of healthcare.”

That kind of talk alarms Cornell University professor Rosemary Batt, a longtime critic of private equity. She predicts that investors chasing outsize profits will achieve their goals by “sucking the wealth” out of more and more health care providers.

“They are constantly looking for new financial tricks and strategies,” Batt said.

KHN’s Megan Kalata contributed to this article.

Health care workers deserve protection from violence

There is no position for violence in civil modern society. However stabbings, shootings, threats and other violent assaults have grow to be frighteningly widespread, which include in America’s hospitals and other wellbeing treatment settings.

As leaders of countrywide associations representing hospitals and emergency medical professionals, we know the intimidation and violence endured by medical industry experts each day. Building it a federal offense could aid avert it.

Nurses, doctors, and other employees on the entrance traces of care in U.S. hospitals, emergency departments, and well being care units experience large prices of violence. A new study from the American Faculty of Crisis Doctors (ACEP) located that a lot more than 8 in 10 emergency doctors feel the fee of violence in emergency departments has elevated, with 45{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} indicating it has considerably elevated above the previous five yrs. This has only been exacerbated by the pandemic.

ad

A study of registered nurses doing work in hospitals confirmed that, all through the pandemic, 44{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} described going through actual physical violence and 68{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} described going through verbal abuse. This produces a severely demanding atmosphere in what are supposed to be places of therapeutic.

Even with the in the vicinity of-everyday prevalence of abuse directed toward well being care personnel, there is no federal law that protects them.

advertisement

In late 2021, Legal professional Normal Merrick Garland acknowledged the stunning uptick in violence against airline personnel and directed the U.S. Section of Justice to prioritize prosecuting people today who have out assaults. Customers of Congress are now weighing a monthly bill to help safeguard America’s overall health care workforce.

The bipartisan Security From Violence for Health care Workers Act (H.R. 7961), sponsored by Reps. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) and Larry Bucshon (R-Ind.), would make assaulting or scary health treatment employees on the job a federal offense.

This monthly bill would also improve the potential of hospitals and health methods to avert and curtail violence towards workers. By creating a new grant program, the bill would motivate hospitals to enhance their safety programs, improved teach staff to react to violent incidents, and a lot more proficiently coordinate with regulation enforcement to curb threats.

Avoiding violence in hospitals is the proper point to do for everyone’s basic safety and has significant implications for treatment delivery. Place of work hostility helps make it challenging for overall health care employees to emphasis on their mission to deliver care to people.

It is specially about that the ACEP study found that just about nine in 10 crisis physicians believe that violence in emergency departments negatively influences individual treatment. When it will come to clinical emergencies — from injuries induced by gunshots and car mishaps to ruptured appendixes and overdoses — time is of the essence and each individual next counts. Medical personnel should really be 100{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} centered on delivering lifesaving care with out stressing about their individual basic safety.

Physical and verbal assaults also demoralize well being care staff. Even the threat of violence contributes to burnout and exacerbates higher degrees of employees turnover. Hospitals and health and fitness units are experiencing an unprecedented scarcity of medical doctors, nurses, and allied overall health pros. Unless of course violence is mitigated by utilizing protections, it will turn into progressively harder to keep and recruit staff members.

No 1 ought to have to operate in an surroundings in which they truly feel threatened and disrespected. We applaud the lawmakers who help the Help save Act and urge Congress to enact it. Crisis physicians, nurses, and all hospital-centered industry experts do the job close to the clock to give top quality treatment to all people who desires it, and they are entitled to to be protected from violence as they do it.

Mary Beth Kingston is a registered nurse, the main nursing officer at Advocate Aurora Wellness, and a member of the American Medical center Association’s board of trustees. Christopher S. Kang is an emergency medical professional centered in Tacoma, Clean., and president of the American Higher education of Crisis Physicians.

It’s health care, stupid – POLITICO

Welcome to POLITICO’s West Wing Playbook, your guide to the people and power centers in the Biden administration. With help from Allie Bice.  

Send tips | Subscribe here| Email Alex | Email Eli

The last half-decade of American politics has been defined by its seismic shifts. But one constant has emerged: Democrats do better when they run on health care.

Tuesday’s midterms were no different.

Despite a dour economic mood, displeasure with the president, and historic trends against them, Democrats delivered strong showings across the board, putting President JOE BIDEN in position to keep critical hold of the Senate (and according to some starry-eyed aides, potentially even the House).

As the party sifts through the results in search of what went right, an early conclusion is that for all the focus on inflation and debates over democracy, tens of millions of voters were motivated by everyday health concerns — and that sizable group trusted Democrats far more than Republicans to address them.

“If you look at these individual members and who succeeded, health care was a huge part of what they stood for and talked about,” said LESLIE DACH, chair of the Democrat-aligned health group Protect Our Care. “The American people completely reject the Republican plans on health care.”

In key races, vulnerable Democrats like Sen. MAGGIE HASSAN of New Hampshire, Rep. ABIGAIL SPANBERGER of Virginia and Rep. SUSAN WILD of Pennsylvania ran on cutting drug costs and making health care more affordable. Biden spent the midterm stretch run hammering Republicans for suggesting cuts to Medicare.

And looming over it all was abortion, where the threat to reproductive rights juiced Democratic enthusiasm and hardened opposition to GOP challengers. Among those who said the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade had a major impact on which candidate they supported, 65 percent voted for the Democrat, polling from the Kaiser Family Foundation shows.

Democrats have enjoyed a clear political advantage on health issues since 2017, when GOP attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act backfired spectacularly and pushed support for the law to new heights. Since then, party leaders have sought to make health care a centerpiece of their agenda because, well, it’s popular.

“It has been in some ways an organizing principle that really defined and divided the parties,” said former Obama-era health secretary KATHLEEN SEBELIUS. “And I think the Dobbs decision was just another piece of this puzzle.”

It’s a remarkable shift from 2014, when then-Sen. MARK UDALL (D-Colo.) was widely ridiculed for focusing so much of his unsuccessful re-election campaign on reproductive rights (Mark Uterus became the moniker of mockery). But inside the White House, there was little hesitation at leaning hard into health care, even as some aides acknowledged Biden’s own discomfort with making abortion a central pillar of his campaign message. A Biden adviser said officials crafting the president’s economic message centered it on cutting household costs in large part to make for an easy pivot to Democrats’ well-received moves to boost access to prescription medicines and health insurance.

Though some Democrats worried that meant the White House wasn’t talking about inflation enough, the strategy appeared to pay off, as literally any Biden official will now happily inform you.

As the White House prepares the next phase of its agenda, health care is likely to play an even larger role. The just-passed cap on insulin prices for Medicare beneficiaries officially kicks in next year, and Biden is eager to sell it as concrete evidence he’s lowering costs. Democrats have also discussed voting to expand that cap to all Americans as a way to further pressure Republicans, after the GOP blocked an initial attempt earlier this year.

“We’re just getting started,” Biden declared at a Democratic National Committee event Thursday.

On abortion, Democrats have floated a range of options, from holding a variety of show votes to pushing policies that pre-emptively protect other reproductive rights. There’s little that Biden can single handedly do, advisers acknowledged.

But at minimum, Tuesday’s results justified their belief that abortion has become just the latest in a long line of health issues that are surefire winners for Democrats.

“It’s a lesson the Republicans never learn when it comes to health care,” Dach said. “People don’t want their freedoms taken away.”

MESSAGE US — Are you JESSICA SCHUBEL, the White House director of the Affordable Care Act and health care? We want to hear from you! And we’ll keep you anonymous. Email us at [email protected].

This one is from Allie. What was WARREN G. HARDING’s childhood nickname?

(Answer at the bottom.)

SCOOP: State Department press secretary NED PRICE has told people he plans to leave his post sometime early next year, according to people familiar with the matter.

He has been press secretary since the beginning of the Biden administration. Price has also indicated to people that he intends to remain in the administration in some capacity but it’s unclear where. He previously worked as an analyst and spokesperson at the CIA.

Asked for comment, Price said: “I love this job, this team, and this mission — and they’re my focus.”

ON THE CALENDAR: The president will meet with Chinese President XI JINPING on Nov. 14 in Bali, Indonesia. The two plan to discuss “efforts to maintain and deepen lines of communication between the United States and the PRC, responsibly manage competition, and work together where our interests align,” according to a White House statement. But during a briefing room appearance, national security adviser JAKE SULLIVAN said not to expect many “deliverables.”

Our JONATHAN LEMIRE provides a curtain raiser on that meeting, along with Biden’s other activity in the next week as he heads abroad for the G-20 and two other international summits.

WHAT THE WHITE HOUSE WANTS YOU TO READ: The latest Consumer Price Index figures. Former Council of Economic Advisers Chair JASON FURMAN, not always the administration’s favorite left-of-center economist, tweeted Thursday morning that the latest report “was a pleasant surprise. Headline came in at an 5.4 percent annual rate in October. Core (excludes food & energy) was an 3.3 percent annual rate. And supercore, which also excludes shelter & used vehicles, was only 1.8 percent ar. Another 1 or 2 months like this and can relax a little.”

SEE ALSO: “Wall Street surges as S&P 500 soars 4{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} on cooling inflation,” by AP’s STAN CHOE

WHAT THE WHITE HOUSE DOESN’T WANT YOU TO READ: Biden’s planned victory lap Friday at the COP-27 climate summit in Egypt may not be all that warmly received. Yes, Biden got a major climate package through Congress when the Inflation Reduction Act passed in August. But as the NYT’s Lisa Friedman explains, other nations, including developing countries, are increasingly frustrated with the U.S., “the world’s richest nation and the largest historic emitter of greenhouse gasses [that] has been absent from discussions at the summit this week about a new ‘loss and damage’ fund” that would pay reparations to poorer countries ravaged by climate disasters.

SEE YOU NEXT YEAR: Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chair JOE MANCHIN (D-W.Va.) does not plan to hold a hearing this year on the nomination of Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chair RICHARD GLICK for another term, our JOSH SIEGEL and CATHERINE MOREHOUSE report for Pro subscribers. Glick’s term expired in June, but he can remain in the role until the end of the year. Without Glick’s confirmation for an additional term, the future of leadership at the FERC remains murky.

THE NEXT IRS CHIEF: Biden announced the nomination of DANIEL WERFEL to serve as the commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, a position that will open up once the term of current commissioner, CHARLES RETTIG, expires this weekend, our BRIAN FALER reports for Pro subscribers. Werfel has experience in both the Bush and Obama administrations, working at the White House Office of Management and Budget and the IRS, and stepped in as acting IRS commissioner back in 2013.

DEPT. OF WHAT HAVE YOU DONE FOR ME LATELY: Biden may have had an unexpectedly great night on Tuesday. Inflation may be cooling off a bit. Democrats may be slowly emerging from their protective shell of political panic. But that’s not stopping chatter about whether someone else should be the party’s standard bearer in 2024.

On CNN, BAKARI SELLERS, a fierce KAMALA HARRIS ally, definitively declared that Biden is “going to be primaried.” Sellers went on to add that he supports Biden but that a progressive challenger will take him on. That, he added, is “a fact.”

This talk may seem misplaced at a moment of triumph for Biden. And, frankly, the guy is likely to run and, if he does, almost assuredly get the nomination. But chatter around this has been simmering for months and was bound to burst into public view after the midterms, no matter how they went. Ironically, the better than expected showing by Democrats has sparked new enthusiasm about the party’s bench and the national potential of several winning governors and lawmakers. One party strategist who was beyond the moon about Tuesday’s results, DMed us later the next day: “I still think that Biden shouldn’t run. He now can go out on top!”

For more on these vibes, check out the New York Times’ FRANK BRUNI’s latest column.

RINGING THE ALARM: U.S. officials based in Europe are warning their Washington colleagues that allies are growing angry over economic pressures they’re facing because of the Russia-Ukraine conflict — and they’re putting the blame on the U.S., our ERIN BANCO and PAUL MCLEARY report. The pressure could result in European leaders pulling back their support for sanctions.

ROADBLOCKS AHEAD: The president is expected to highlight this administration’s efforts in addressing climate change through agriculture at the U.N.’s climate conference in Egypt Friday but the efforts may soon be challenged by a Republican-controlled House next year, our MEREDITH LEE HILL reports for Pro subscribers. Republican lawmakers are looking to cut spending on climate programs, mostly through the Agriculture Department.

Twitter privacy executives quit, sparking FTC alarm (WaPo’s Joseph Menn, Cat Zakrzewski, Faiz Siddiqui and Nitasha Tiku)

An Inflation-Driven Midterm Will Not Change Biden’s Economic Focus (NYT’s Jim Tankersley)

WARREN G. HARDING was nicknamed “WINNIE,” by his mother, according to the MIller Center.

A CALL OUT — Do you think you have a harder trivia question? Send us your best one about the presidents with a citation and we may feature it.

Edited by Eun Kyung Kim and Sam Stein.

Top 10 Healthcare Industry Predictions For 2023

The year 2022 is almost behind us and the healthcare industry is preparing for what promises to be a most interesting 2023.

Deals—big and small—and increasing regulatory scrutiny will make 2023 a year to remember for all.

Given the prescience and accuracy of my 2022 predictions, many of you have asked about my methodology.

If you must know (and seek to remove the mystery of it all), it’s pure clairvoyance—a divine gift with which I was born.

Joking aside, some predictions are pure hunch; others are extensions of trends observed in 2022 that will continue into 2023; and others still are a reflection of my deepest hopes—some of which I hope I will nudge into being by writing it here in this column.

Without further ado, I give you the year ahead in healthcare, 2023 edition:

1) Medicare Advantage Will Remain Under A Microscope

I predicted last year that that the Medicare Advantage debate that my mentors Don Berwick and Rick Gilfillan started in 2021 would intensify. The year 2022 didn’t disappoint as Don and Rick used the pages of the Health Affairs blog to spar with numerous Medicare Advantage defenders including heavyweights WellBe Medical CEO Jeff Kang, former Kaiser Permanente CEO George Halvorson, and former CAPG CEO Don Crane. New York Times writers Reed Abelson and Margot Sanger Katz followed on with a provocative set of articles on Medicare Advantage utilization management practices; revenue capture; and broker practices. The microscope is turned on and examining Medicare Advantage in high resolution—and this scrutiny will continue deep into 2023.

As the CEO of Medicare Advantage plans for 7 years running, I have strong conviction that the Medicare Advantage is an important program that enables innovation to serve older adults, but also acknowledge that there is significant room to improve it. To address some of the emerging skepticism of Medicare Advantage, plans should proactively implement more stringent revenue coding practices; commit to access-to-care “never events” to ensure beneficiaries always have access to care in a timely manner; and continue to enhance the quality of benefits delivered through their products. The best answer to the critics is to be irrefutably and consistently better for Medicare beneficiaries—and that is the challenge to all companies that operate plans.

Whether the pundits find value in the program or not, it is here to stay—as more than 40{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} percent of older adults rely on it for their care. Our focus should be on aligning on ideas to improve the program, not arguing whether it’s better or worse than traditional fee-for-service Medicare (as with most things, the answer is, it depends). The leadership of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the regulatory agency that oversees the Medicare program, might consider what it would take to build a modern health plan regulatory infrastructure to measure and risk-adjust care provided to Medicare Advantage beneficiaries in real time. The agency’s founding purpose was to administer fee-for-service payments and the growing popularity of the Medicare Advantage program has permanently broadened its mandate to include robust health plan regulation and oversight.

2) A Private Equity and Venture Capital Feeding Frenzy Of A Different Kind

Countless new ventures (with some clever names, I should add) were built over the past several years in an environment of easy money. With soaring interest rates and a rising cost of capital, companies that thought they would have unlimited runway will suddenly find themselves at an unexpected crossroads. Raise another round under unfavorable terms (a.k.a. a down round), perform layoffs to preserve cash, or sell the company. Look for private equity companies to begin vacuuming up sub-scale companies and consolidating them into bigger companies assembled around “themes” that have a better chance at survival.

Look for venture capital firms to dictate investor-friendly terms to companies that find themselves in the unfortunate position of having to raise capital in this environment. And look for some of the weaklings in the startup crowd to sell-cheap or disappear.

The first companies to find themselves in trouble will likely be single-condition companies who targeted a specific poorly managed disease—who in the well-intentioned frenzy to create a new solution missed the kindergarten class in which we learned that the “hip bone is connected to the leg bone…” Patients need solutions that own and address all of their complex conditions. Primary care, anyone?

Look also for failure among the wide-range of companies that were valued more on the total addressable market than on any real world impact on patient care.

3) More and More Customer Segmentation

While companies that focus on a single condition or subset of the population may struggle, all healthcare companies (big and small) are beginning to look at further segmenting their offerings to differentially serve and grow within diverse populations. Clever Care, a Medicare Advantage startup in Southern California, grew impressively in the Asian community through focused benefit offerings, a carefully curated network, and a grassroots model that engaged community members. Alignment Healthcare (NASDAQ: ALHC) began serving members through its “el Unico” option focused on the Hispanic population. And my company, SCAN Health Plan, partnered with Included Health to launch its Affirm product focused on the LGBTQ+ population. The products all provide differentiated service and benefits and also unlock growth that might not otherwise be attracted to the market or the company. Similar trends are present on the care delivery side where there are a growing number of startups focused on ethnic populations. Zocalo Health, for example, is a new clinical company founded by Amazon Care alumni Erik Cardenas and Mariza Hardin “by Latinos for Latinos.”

The idea that “all patients” should receive the same clinical model is being fundamentally questioned—and this is a very positive development. Whether these offerings will be viable in the long-run is an open question, but certainly worth watching as every company is looking to align with broader trends in diversity, equity, and inclusion and simultaneously drive results.

4) Toxic Positivity Around Value-Based Care Will Abate

“We need to stop paying for volume and start paying for value.” Snooze. It’s been the go-to healthcare industry talking point for more than a decade, prompted in part by my business school mentor, Michael Porter—and accelerated by policy changes introduced in the Affordable Care Act.

While no one can argue with the fact that paying for outcomes is superior to paying for volume, few are acknowledging that “value-based” care is often code for: pay me the same amount you always did in aggregate and let me manage utilization of services. Or it’s code for help me maximize my revenue and reduce my costs. Or it’s code for let me “share savings” for outcomes that I may or may not have played a role in producing. I say this as a leader of a company that almost exclusively pays provider groups in “value-based” global capitation and shared savings arrangements.

For “value-based” care to actually work to reduce healthcare costs, some part of the healthcare value chain will need to be paid less (imagine that?). That means global payments should decrease over time; the price of bundles should decrease as waste is eliminated from care; and when care doesn’t work—there should be no payments. That is not what is happening. If value-based care is going to be the driver of lower healthcare costs and better outcomes, please let me know who is going to be sacrificing their revenues? Hospital systems? Medical groups? Insurance companies? Pharmaceutical companies? Device manufacturers?

I’m waiting…and suspect I will be for a long time. For too many, “value-based” care is the a new hustle to get more of the healthcare dollar on one’s income statement, not a pathway to lower costs and better outcomes for society.

5) Home-Based Care Will Get A Closer Look

There isn’t a day that goes by that someone isn’t proclaiming the “home as the best place to deliver care” or the future of healthcare “is in the home.” Heck, I’ve been that someone many times—and, in fact, built and led several home-based care models at CareMore Health, my prior company, and created 3 home-based care divisions at SCAN.

That said, the home isn’t the best place for everyone. It was something I learned firsthand when my Dad transitioned to dialysis during the early part of the pandemic. While he liked some aspects of the convenience of getting dialysis at home, it imposed significant extra work on my Mom and his other caregivers. In fact, what it seemed like is that the work that was being done by the staff at my father’s dialysis center was being shifted to our family. While it is work we are willing and happy to do it, my thoughts turned to the many older adults who are socially isolated who don’t have significant social support (this latter point is one that Janet Simpson Benvenuti and ARCHANGELS Founder Alexandra Drane have been making for some time). Or the space in their homes to safely store medical equipment and supplies. To further complicate things, the dextrose-based peritoneal dialysis solution worsened management of my Dad’s underlying diabetes. It’s far more complicated than just “moving it to the home.” And in many cases, home-based care models substitute a facility-based doctor or a nurse-practitioner with a lesser-trained home-based clinician whose training level may be misaligned to the complexity of the patient (or no clinician at all!).

Home-based care’s surface logic will continue to make it quite appealing. Who wouldn’t want to receive care in the home instead of a sterile hospital or clinic setting? But we need to keep an extremely close eye on patient outcomes and experience as big corporates like Humana (NYSE: HUM), United/Optum (NYSE: UNH), and CVS (NYSE: CVS) continue to bet on the “home” alongside large delivery systems and countless startups. The home is not the right point of service for all patients—and we need more nuance in our dialog on the topic.

6) Biopharmaceutical Innovation Will Continue to Impress at Prices That Won’t

When I talk to my friends who work inside of pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies, I’m blown away by their pipelines. Would you be impressed to hear about an effective, non-addictive, non-opiate pain medicine? Or a cure for sickle cell disease or Type I diabetes? All of these interventions are under development by Vertex (NASDAQ: VRTX) (disclosure: I own stock in the company). How about a therapy to edit the human genome to treat heart attack? Cambridge, MA-based Verve Therapeutics (NASDAQ: VERV) is on it. The scope and scale of biopharmaceutical innovation is unprecedented —even breathtaking—in its potential impact. Conditions that were certain death sentences when I was in medical school are no longer. It can make anyone a believer again in American science and innovation.

Pricing of these interventions? That’s another matter altogether. Watching Pfizer (NYSE: PFE) signal its intent to potential quadruple the price of its COVID19 vaccination—and Moderna’s (NASDAQ: MRNA) likely follow-on price increase would make anyone and everyone cynical. As one of the remaining few pharmaceutical apologists who works in other sectors of healthcare, I don’t know what to say anymore when people badmouth biopharma.

7) Tech and Retail Will Continue to Inch Into Healthcare Delivery

Healthcare is an attractive marketplace for any non-healthcare company that is looking for a new source of top-line revenue growth. After all, nearly 20{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} of US GDP is healthcare-related. Everyone wants a piece of the action. That said, margins in most sectors of healthcare are lower than other industries. And the regulatory environment and rules of play are complicated. That’s why most-healthcare sector incursions by big tech and retail—despite the noise associated with them—have been relatively small.

That said, the prize is too big for anyone to stay away. Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) will close its One Medical (NASDAQ: ONEM) deal in 2023 and likely look to acquire an insurer (Oscar? Alignment? Bright?). Apple’s (NASDAQ: APPL) Sumbul Desai and Google’s (NASDAQ: GOOGL) Karen DeSalvo will keep making targeted moves. Walmart (NYSE: WMT), under Cheryl Pegus’s capable leadership will continue to march forward in retailing healthcare in rural healthcare. Walgreens Boots Alliance (NASDAQ: WBA) new president for healthcare, John Driscoll, will begin to move chess pieces of Walgreens Health, VillageMD, and CareCentrix. And CVS’s new president for healthcare, Amar Desai, will bring lessons he learned leading United Health Group’s Optum west region care delivery assets to a national scale through CVS’s Signify Health (NYSE: SFFY) acqusition. It’s going to be hard for any of them to move the revenue needle of the corporate parent, but that doesn’t mean they won’t try. As deal guru Ian Wijaya, managing director at Lazard told me, “There are a lot of targets, especially mid-sized and small. Everyone will be in the game of trying to vertically integrate to make their core businesses more valuable.”

I’m betting against any mega-acquisitions by tech or retail, but I still think that is the play to make. How potentially impactful would it be if Amazon, Apple, or Google acquired a large delivery system or medical group and applied technology and design thinking to revolutionize the patient experience? Talk about a possible quantum leap in US healthcare.

8) COVID’s Impact Continues

COVID will continue to make its way through unvaccinated populations and will remain a part of the national care delivery landscape even as “COVID fatigue” reins supreme. As confusion lingers on an optimal vaccination regimen, patients who otherwise might have been boosted, may contract moderate to severe COVID at higher than expected rates. The federal healthcare leadership of Presidential COVID Advisor Ashish Jha, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy will need to be at their creative best to keep a tired public focused on COVID—even when everyone is ready to turn the page.

Even if we are able to get clear messaging on COVID, we will continue to see the downstream effects of 2+ years of lower rates of preventative healthcare and chronic disease. Healthcare utilization will be increased across the board—so hospitals and managed care organizations should brace themselves for higher than usual volumes from people who are sicker than they otherwise needed to be on accounts of COVID-imposed delays in care.

On the bright-side, COVID-mediated innovations in the healthcare system—i.e. broad adoption of tele-health—will be here to say with continued reimbursement to support it.

9) Progress on the True Underlying Causes of Clinician Burnout

Healthcare organizations—forced to look at their failed human capital strategies in a highly competitive labor market—will begin to look at the underlying causes for burnout in their systems. They will realize what many of us have known for a long time. That being a worker on the frontlines of healthcare delivery is no longer as rewarding as it once was. Not just financially, but psychically. Being a doctor or nurse in 2022 means being buried in documentation. It means being perpetually apologetic for a suboptimal patient experience that you didn’t create. It means feeling like a invisible cog in a big, unwieldy machine. It means feeling like a hamster on a never-ending treadmill.

And because they finally have to, leaders of healthcare organizations will begin to fix it. Not with pro forma yoga classes or subscriptions to meditation apps or burnout seminars. I mean really fix it. By streamlining work. By eliminating unnecessary administrative tasks. By promoting and honoring people in a real and authentic way. By making people feel like they matter again. By remembering that the people in your employ are the product in most healthcare organizations.

10) Greater Recognition That We Have a Leadership Crisis in American Healthcare

I used to think that the pathway to better healthcare in the United States was better healthcare policies. Then, we passed numerous great healthcare policies that enabled organizations to succeed by doing more of the right things (i.e. value-based care). But their implementation has been uneven and even where it is implemented, not always aligned to the best interests of the patient or society. And then there’s the matter of predatory billing practices. And price gouging by biopharmaceutical companies. To say we have a leadership crisis in the healthcare industry may be the understatement of the decade.

The more I reflect on it, the intervention that will improve healthcare the most won’t be more startups or better healthcare policy. Instead, it will be leaders who fight to make the words in the organization’s mission statement really mean something. Leaders who are able to speak beyond platitudes and take action that align with core values. Leaders who believe that the pathway to better healthcare means healthier people—which may obviate the need for the organization in its current form. Leaders who will reliably put patients before profit regardless of whether an organization’s tax status is for-profit or not-for-profit. We don’t have many leaders like that in American healthcare. We have title-holders. We have executives. And we have administrators. But we have few leaders. And I suspect that it’s because what it takes to climb the ranks of healthcare organizations of all kinds—corporate guile, political acumen, and ambition—doesn’t often align with the kind of idealism and mission-driven focus that one must have to lead change when they are atop that organization.

And so the work to make American healthcare better won’t be the next startup or the next big initiative or acquisition. It might be a leadership academy to train people to hold on to their idealism and vision even in the face of industry forces that seem to conspire to rob you of it. It might be a new strategy to cultivate organizational talent. The year 2022 will be the year in which we begin to have this important conversation about what it will take to really move the needle: namely, changing the culture of leadership in US healthcare.

…

In the past, I’ve been accused of being too much of a cynic in my outlook on the US healthcare industry. To which I respond with the Alain de Botton quotation, “Cynics are only idealists with awkwardly high standards.”

To a great 2023, hoping it is a year in which we restore our idealism, even if just a little bit.