Now the real work begins.
Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:10 pm
On Wednesday 6 million people will begin to have coverage who didn't before and the real work of providing care will start. The temporary glitches in the signup process are past and ahead many states will be finding out whether they have enough qualified MDs, Nurse Practitioners, PAs, RNs and so forth to provide basic care to an expanded base. Will we have enough clinics? Medical Assistants? There is already a lot of work-shifting going on as more duties are devolved from MDs to other, and less limited, resources.
Kaiser-Permamente and the various local Permanente Medical Groups have been doing a lot of advance planning over the past 3 years to try to be ready but there is a lot of uncertainty and nervousness about emergent phenomenon. Most physicians are hearing that if they are on less than 100% schedule now that they'll be working extra units to keep up. This was already started this fall for The Permanente Medical Group (the Northern California partnership) but I have not heard from the NW or SoCal. groups yet. A lot of people are saying that the longer hours will push more MDs into early retirement. I'm not sure how they can be effectively induced to keep working. I don't think material incentives will be very efficient.
The University of California just enrolled the first class in the first new medical school in California in many decades; at UC Riverside. But it will be years before the first class are licensed and through residencies and even then it will be only ca 100 new MDs per year once it gets going (50 for the inaugural class). But the supply of MDs cannot be expanded very quickly and Mass. has already pulled in a lot of English-speaking (and hence licenseable) MDs from the Caribbean, India and elsewhere.
The answers will only be known gradually over the next 6-18 months as the momentum of change increases.
One incremental advantage will be far better tracking of public health issues in something closer to real time; something countries like Denmark have been able to do for decades. Better metrics allows for more timely and focussed responses to changes in vaccination rates, for example. We can target public health education on the groups most in need of it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... goes-live/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... ors-ready/
But these are all good problems to have. And inevitable if we are to stop being the worst in the G-20 and reverse the decline in care.
yrs,
rubato
Kaiser-Permamente and the various local Permanente Medical Groups have been doing a lot of advance planning over the past 3 years to try to be ready but there is a lot of uncertainty and nervousness about emergent phenomenon. Most physicians are hearing that if they are on less than 100% schedule now that they'll be working extra units to keep up. This was already started this fall for The Permanente Medical Group (the Northern California partnership) but I have not heard from the NW or SoCal. groups yet. A lot of people are saying that the longer hours will push more MDs into early retirement. I'm not sure how they can be effectively induced to keep working. I don't think material incentives will be very efficient.
The University of California just enrolled the first class in the first new medical school in California in many decades; at UC Riverside. But it will be years before the first class are licensed and through residencies and even then it will be only ca 100 new MDs per year once it gets going (50 for the inaugural class). But the supply of MDs cannot be expanded very quickly and Mass. has already pulled in a lot of English-speaking (and hence licenseable) MDs from the Caribbean, India and elsewhere.
The answers will only be known gradually over the next 6-18 months as the momentum of change increases.
One incremental advantage will be far better tracking of public health issues in something closer to real time; something countries like Denmark have been able to do for decades. Better metrics allows for more timely and focussed responses to changes in vaccination rates, for example. We can target public health education on the groups most in need of it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... goes-live/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... ors-ready/
But these are all good problems to have. And inevitable if we are to stop being the worst in the G-20 and reverse the decline in care.
yrs,
rubato


