IBJNews

BURTON: Accountability care organizations need good data

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

focus-voices-burton-michelle.jpgIf you work in health care, you likely have heard the term accountable care organization, or ACO, and probably have a general idea how one operates.

The question, though, is whether ACOs have what it takes to be successful. With so many different deadlines around the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act and its guidelines, do ACOs even have a chance or are they a great concept that may be slightly before their time?

It is really all about the data.

So many computer systems are used in health care, and each area—registration, billing, pharmacy, patient care—requires a system. It’s a never-ending list. To add to that, each physician, hospital and specialist uses a different system. The kicker: Many of these systems have a difficult time talking to one another.

Has your primary care physician ever ordered tests and then referred you to a specialist only to have that specialist order the exact same tests? Many times, physicians have access only to the data housed in their system, making treatment difficult and frustrating for both the patients and the providers.

Technically speaking, an ACO is a group of doctors, hospitals and other health care providers who come together voluntarily to coordinate high-quality care to their Medicare patients. Currently, participation in an ACO is voluntary. But the law states that by July 2012 doctors and hospitals are encouraged to legally form groups, covering at least 5,000 patients each, that will be “accountable” for cost, quality and overall care.

Look at an ACO the way you would look at buying a car. As the consumer, you don’t want to track down and purchase each piece of the car separately. You want to buy the car in one piece, ready to drive off the lot. This is how an ACO should operate. It is designed to be a one-stop shop for the patient.

In other words, an ACO is a single organization, like an integrated medical group, that is accountable for patients and complete coordination of their treatment and care.

If the premise of the ACO is to be a one-stop shop accountable for patient care, we should start by making patient data accessible by everyone. Many of the pieces for meaningful use need to be in place before the model can be successful and sustainable.

Initial focus needs to be on sharing information. Sharing data not only between physicians, but also across multiple physician systems is key to the overall concept of the ACO.

With so much work to be done around the sharing of patient data, we can’t expect the ACO model to succeed when we are all still trying to figure out how to get access to the information.

And the even bigger question: What happens if we implement an ACO without a solid framework for accessing the data? In a nutshell, frustration.

Have you ever worked for a company rolling out a new system or process, with the promise that “this will fix our problems?” If you have, you know what happens when everyone experiences the exact same problems with the new system—frustration, confusion and disappointment.

So what happens if an ACO goes live without resolving the underlying data access and connectivity issues?

There will be expectations, by providers and patients, that their care and treatment plans will be improved. Expectations that physicians are talking to one another and sharing patient information. Expectations that patients won’t need to have the exact same test run three different times, by three different physicians.

These expectations will likely be let down, and in place of these expectations you will find frustration, confusions and disappointment caused by failed promises.

Ultimately, I believe ACOs can be successful. Just imagine what a beautiful world it would be if physicians worked as a team to treat their patients—talking, communicating with and understanding one another.

Unfortunately, as a health care technology professional and a longtime project manager, I’m afraid it seems unlikely that we will see the benefits of an ACO in 2012. ACOs will exist, but they will likely not be the silver bullet patients and health care providers are hoping for.

We need access to our data. Clean, useful, easy-to-access data. Once we find a way to truly solve this problem—everything else is about developing processes to work with that data.•

__________

Burton owns CoreTech Revolution LLC, a health care technology consulting firm in Indianapolis. Views expressed here are the writer’s.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am also a "vet" of several Cirque shows and this one left me flat. It didn't have the amount of acrobatic stunts as the others that I have seen. I am still glad that I went to it and look forward to the next one but I put Varekai as my least favorite.

  2. Looking at the two companies - in spite of their relative size to one another -- Ricker's image is (by all accounts) pretty solid and reputable. Their locations are clean, employees are friendly and the products they offer are reasonably priced. By contrast, BP locations are all over the place and their reputation is poor, especially when you consider this is the same "company" whose disastrous oil spill and their response was nothing short of irresponsible should tell you a lot. The fact you also have people who are experienced in franchising saying their system/strategy is flawed is a good indication that another "spill" has occurred and it's the AM-PM/Ricker's customers/company that are having to deal with it.

  3. Daniel Lilly - Glad to hear about your points and miles. Enjoy Wisconsin and Illinois. You don't care one whit about financial discipline, which is why you will blast the "GOP". Classic liberalism.

  4. Isn't the real reason the terrain? The planners under-estimated the undulating terrain, sink holes, karst features, etc. This portion of the route was flawed from the beginning.

  5. You thought no Indy was bad, how's no fans working out for you? THe IRl No direct competition and still no fans. Hey George Family, spend another billion dollars, that will fix it.

ADVERTISEMENT