Posts Tagged ‘Healthcare’

Trick question: To patients, what’s the price of free healthcare?

August 22, 2012

OK, everybody knows that ObamaCare largely wipes out co-pays and deductibles for preventive medicine.

In other words, patients don’t have to shell out any money … the definition of “free’”, right?

Not so fast.

I always assert to my students that people always, always, always under value their time

See archive post “Time is Money”

Think of the bargain entertainment center you can buy at IKEA for $299.

The purchase price is a steal compared to the fully assembled entertainment center at a furniture store.

But, it takes you two days to assemble it.

At, say $20 per hour, the implicit economic cost of your time is over $200.

Suddenly, it’s no bargain at all.

If you value your time higher than $20 per hour then then economics get even worse.

The principle: “price” is more than the money expended to acquire a product … it also includes the economic cost or searching, acquiring and putting a product into use …  and any on-going costs to keep the product maintained and operating.

What does that have to do with preventive medicine?

Simple connection.

According to an article last week in the WSJ: “To meet the promise of free preventive care nationwide, every family doctor in America would have to work full-time delivering it”.

In other words, demand is twice the capacity to supply.

“When demand exceeds supply in a normal market, the price rises until it reaches a market-clearing level.”

That’s Econ 101.

When a price is fixed below the natural “clearing price” then either the product has to be rationed or other economic costs kick in … like the implicit cost of of the time required to acquire the service.

Think about the time involved to get to see a doctor.

First is the scheduling call.

Ever been put on hold or forced to call back?

I have.

Ever been disappointed when told that the first available appointment slot is weeks off?

I have.

Note: For patients in need of services covered by Medicare, the typical wait to see a doctor was two or three weeks

Ever waited for an hour or two or more waiting to see the doctor?

I have.

Note: Studies report that 20% of the patients who come to an emergency room leave without ever seeing a doctor, because they get tired of waiting.

When demand exceeds supply, doctors have a great deal of flexibility about who they see and when they see them.

In marketing economics, it’s called “demand management”.

Demand management has a couple of underlying principles.

One is “Whenever demand exceeds supply take care of loyal customers first, then take care of the other customers willing to pay the most”.

So, if you’re a doctor facing demand that far exceeds your capacity, what do you do?

First, take care of longstanding patients … then service the patients that pay the most – those who pay out-of-pocket or have private insurance.

Who’s last on the list?  Government insured patients: MediCare and Medicaid.

How can they possibly do that?

Simple. They can simply act like airlines, restaurants, credit card companies  and banks.

For example, once a Medicaid patient’s phone number is in the system, their phone calls can be queued behind any calls from higher paying patients.

Financial service companies have been doing that for years.  Whales’ calls get priority routing and faster answers.

Similarly, appointment slots can be capacity constrained by payment type … with relatively few slots per day allocated to low price patients.

Airlines have capacity controlled low priced “leisure” seats for decades.

Once at the office, doctors can keep advancing high pay patients in the waiting queue.

What’s the worse that can happen? A patient that you’re going to lose money serving ups and leaves.  Oh well.

The bottom line: free isn’t really free … when you factor in your time … and the possibility of not being served at all.

It’s basic demand management economics.

>> Latest Posts

In the UK, it’s better to be fat than to be old.

April 6, 2012

Recent editorial in the UK’s  Telegraph pointed out that the National Health Service (NHS) discriminates against elderly folks … rationing their care by dealying or denying medical services.

According to the Telegraph, the elderly are displaced in the medical queue by overweight folks whose “conditions, though, are the direct result of bad habits, poor diet, and the wrong choices. These conditions range from obesity and diabetes to smoking-related diseases like emphesema.”

If a 20-stone, 30-something woman comes into hospital with a bad diabetic attack, does she deserve to be at the front of the queue or the back?

She has chosen to stuff her face with Mars bars and Coke, and is now suffering the consequences of her choice.

She cannot claim ignorance of the dangers of her diet: the Government has carpet-bombed us with health advice, from schools to GP practices.

Class no longer regulates access to healthy living: everyone who can watch the telly, let alone read the magazines, knows that a high-fat diet will make you look bad and feel worse.

So what?

The Telegraph’s view:

The septuagenarian who develops breast cancer has done nothing wrong – except grow old.

The NHS has to consider that there are deserving cases and undeserving ones.

Age should not be a barrier to optimum care; but bad habits should be.

As my personal odometer races forward, I gotta agree with the Telegraph.

>> Latest Posts

How much healthcare do free-riders “take”?

December 21, 2011

Interesting tidbit from the WSJ

On average, people without health insurance consume only about half as much health care as everyone else.

Of the amount of care they consume, they pay for about half.

Thus the “free ride” for the average uninsured person is about one-fourth of what everyone else spends on health care.

Raises an interesting question: do free-riders consume too little health care, or do riders consume too much?

Hmm …

>> Latest Posts

US Healthcare: Ripe for Disruption

December 9, 2011

Punch line: Clayton Christensen – the guru of disruptive innovation – says that the US healthcare system needs some seriously disruption … to improve quality and cut costs.

Here’s a summary of his prescription.

Excerpted from MIT Sloan Review: Good Days for Disruptors – An Interview with Clayton Christensen Spring 2009

Every disruption has three components to it: a technological enabler, a business model innovation and a new commercial ecosystem.

In health care, the enabling technology is the ability to diagnose diseases precisely.

Now, through molecular diagnostics, enabled by our understanding of the genome, and through imaging technology that allows people to look inside the body with remarkable clarity, we are acquiring the ability to precisely diagnose more diseases by their cause, not by their symptoms.

That ability then enables us to develop rules-based treatment and a predictably effective therapy.

Our hospitals are, like mainframe computer companies, hopelessly complicated and very expensive.

To ever expect today’s hospitals to become cheap is a pipe dream.

Instead, we need to bring technology, in the form of precise diagnostics and predictably effective therapy, to outpatient clinics so you can do more and more and more of the things there that in the past required a hospital.

And then we need to bring better diagnostic technology to doctors’ offices, so you can do more and more things there that previously required a clinic.

And to nurse practitioners, so they can take on more and more of the things that in the past required a doctor.

Yes, I’m a big fan of MinuteClinics — walk-in clinics that inexpensively treat common disorders such as strep throat and bladder infections.

The hospital is really not a viable business model because, in general, its costs are driven by overhead, which is driven by complexity.

In a large general hospital, much of the cost is overhead cost that’s not expended in the direct care of a patient.

While cost is driven by complexity, quality is driven by integration. It’s when we don’t integrate things correctly that problems fall through the cracks.

Specialized health care institutions, whether they are focused hospitals or focused diagnostics clinics, can integrate correctly, and because of their focus, they have much lower overhead costs.

You get better quality and lower cost.

>> Latest Posts