<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: P4P will lead to avoidance of high-risk patients</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/04/p4p-will-lead-to-avoidance-of-high-risk.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/04/p4p-will-lead-to-avoidance-of-high-risk.html</link>
	<description>medical blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:59:44 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: gibbon1</title>
		<link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/04/p4p-will-lead-to-avoidance-of-high-risk.html/comment-page-1#comment-73778</link>
		<dc:creator>gibbon1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 07:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/04/p4p-will-lead-to-avoidance-of-high-risk-patients.html#comment-73778</guid>
		<description>What bothers me about P4P is that it attacks the problem from the wrong angle.  Looks to me that the end result will be insurance companies and doctors each trying to game the system to their advantage.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Short office visits, over reliance on emergency rooms to provide care, treatment divided up among a host of providers most of whom don&#039;t really talk to each other and high patient turnover all seem to me to add up to little or no effective feedback.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;With all of the above, how can you have P4P that is at all meaningful?  All it look like to me is an attempt to close the loop between the doctor and the insurance company, not between the patient and the doctor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What bothers me about P4P is that it attacks the problem from the wrong angle.  Looks to me that the end result will be insurance companies and doctors each trying to game the system to their advantage.</p>
<p>Short office visits, over reliance on emergency rooms to provide care, treatment divided up among a host of providers most of whom don&#8217;t really talk to each other and high patient turnover all seem to me to add up to little or no effective feedback.</p>
<p>With all of the above, how can you have P4P that is at all meaningful?  All it look like to me is an attempt to close the loop between the doctor and the insurance company, not between the patient and the doctor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
