IBJOpinion

Health care reform: Prepare for change

September 26, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
IBJ Letters To The Editor

[In response to a Sept. 14 story on health insurance exchanges] With the uncertainty surrounding health care reform, only one thing seems definite: Some level of change is coming. In that light, employers have two options: Fret over the impact these changes might have on their businesses, or act now, meeting the needs of today while forging a plan for addressing a changed landscape.

The nation is too far along in the reform debate for things to remain as they are, but we believe key aspects of the current system will survive. Most people will continue to receive benefits and benefits information from employers, and employers will continue to play a key role in the provision, distribution and communication of benefits. And they’ll certainly continue to have a vested interest in employees’ health, since it’s so directly linked to productivity.

As we see it, employers face two challenges: managing through this period of uncertainty, and preparing for a changed benefits environment. They can do both by focusing on the practices that have served them well in the past: Emphasize thorough and practical benefits communication. Encourage employees to be better health care consumers. Focus on wellness and invest in prevention (each offers significant return on investment). Be sensitive to your work force’s demographics and benefit expectations. And “reform” your own policies to meet the new challenge, seeking innovative ways to communicate with employees and to encourage wellness and efficient benefits use.

Commit to these practices and you’ll not just survive the period of uncertainty; you’ll also be well-positioned for the future.

__________


Bryan K. Brenner,

CEO

Russ Stuart,

President

Benefit Associates/Benefit Consultant


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. So, Pence wants the federal government to ignore the 2008 law that allows children from these countries to argue for asylum in front of a judge. How did this guy become governor? And how is that we'll soon be subjected to repeatedly seeing him on TV being taken seriously as a presidential candidate? Am I in Bizzaro-U.S.A.?

  2. "And the most rigorous studies of one-year preschool programs have shown short-term benefits that fade out in a few years or no benefits at all." So we are going down a path that seems to have proven not to work very well. Right intention, wrong approach?

  3. Well for Dunkin Donuts it might say that even a highly popular outlet can't make a poorly sited location work. That little strip has seen near constant churn for years.

  4. Years ago, the Pharmaceutical and Medical Device companies shifted their research investment away from Medical Institutions to focus more on private research centers, primarily because of medical institution inefficiencies in initiating clinical studies and their inability/commitment to enroll the needed number of patients in these studies. The protracted timelines of the medical institutions were prompting significant delays in the availability of new drug and medical device entities for patients and relatedly, higher R and D expenditures to the commercial industry because of these delays. While the above stated IU Health "ratio is about $2.50 in federal funding for every $1 in industry funding", the available funding is REVERSED as commercial R and D (primarily Phase I-IV clinical work)runs $2.50 to $1 for available federal funding ($76.8B to $30.9B in 2011). The above article significatly understated the available R and D funding from industry......see the Pharma and Medical Device industry websites. Clearly, if medical institutions like IU Health wish to attract more commercial studies, they will need to become more competitive with private clinical sites in their ability to be more efficient and in their commitment to meet study enrollment goals on time. Lastly, to the reference to the above Washington Post article headlined “As drug industry’s influence over research grows, so does the potential for bias", lacks some credibility as both FDA and Institutional Institutional Review Boards must approve the high proportion of these studies before studies are started. This means that both study safety and science must be approved by both entities.

  5. ChIeF and all the other critics – better is better no matter what. Get over it; they are doing better despite you ?

ADVERTISEMENT