Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

A far more interesting lesson from the Oregon experiment

Ashish Jha, MD, MPH
Policy
June 21, 2013
29 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share

It has been a couple of weeks since the landmark Oregon experiment paper came out, and the buzz around it has subsided.  So what now?  First, with passage of time, I think it is worth reflecting on what worked in Oregon.  Second, we should take a step back, and recognize that what Oregon really exposed is that health insurance is a small part of a much bigger story about health in general.  This bigger story is one we can’t continue to ignore.

So let’s talk quickly about what worked in Oregon.  Health insurance, when properly framed as insurance (i.e. protection against high, unpredictable costs) works because it protects people from financial catastrophe.  The notion that Americans go bankrupt because they get cancer is awful and inexcusable, and it should not happen. We are a better, more generous country than that.  We should ensure that everyone has access to insurance that protects against financial catastrophe.  Whether we want the government (i.e. Medicaid, Medicare) or private companies to administer that insurance is a debate worth having.  Insurance works for cars and homes, and the Oregon experiment makes it clear that insurance works in healthcare.  No surprise.

The far more interesting lesson from Oregon is that we should not oversell the value of health insurance to improving people’s health.  While health insurance improves access to healthcare services (modestly), its impact on health is surprisingly and disappointingly small.  There are two reasons why this is the case.  The first is that not having insurance doesn’t actually mean not having any access to healthcare.  We care for the uninsured and provide people life-saving treatments when they need it, irrespective of their ability to pay.  Sure – we then stick them with crazy bills and bankrupt them – but we generally do enough to help them stay alive.  Yes, there’s plenty of evidence that the uninsured forego needed healthcare services and the consequences of being uninsured are not just financial.  They have health consequences as well.  But, claims like 50,000 Americans die each year because of a lack of health insurance? The data from Oregon should make us a little more skeptical about claims like that.

So what really matters?  Right now, we are pouring $2.8 trillion into healthcare services while failing to deliver the basics.  To borrow a well-known phrase, our healthcare system is perfectly designed to produce the outcomes we get – and here’s what we get: mediocre care and lousy outcomes at high prices.  Great.

Let’s use cardiovascular disease as an example.  We know it kills more Americans than any other condition.  The CDC estimates that we spend about $500 billion on CV disease.  With that kind of spending, you’d think we would be really good at managing it.  When it comes to cardiovascular disease, management is relatively straightforward: there are four risk factors worth thinking about: hypertension, diabetes, high cholesterol, and smoking.  But guess what?  We’re really not that good at managing these conditions, and evidence suggests that health insurance has almost nothing to do with it.  Here’s the evidence:

  1. Hypertension: Nearly 70 million adults (1 in 3) have it.  More than half of these Americans’ blood pressure is poorly controlled.  Rates of poor control are only marginally worse among the uninsured (58%) than among the insured (51%).
  2. Diabetes: Nearly 26 million people have it. Rates of poor control?  You guessed it: about half, and the same between the uninsured (46%) and the insured (44%).
  3. High cholesterol:  Again, about 70 million adults (1 in 3) have it.  Rates of control?  Even worse!  About 1/3 have their cholesterol under control.  The proportion with poor control is lower among the insured (60% versus 77%) than the uninsured, but even among the insured, frankly, cholesterol management is terrible.
  4. Smoking: About 50 million people smoke.  None of them have it under adequate control (by definition).  Most of these people have health insurance.

Type of insurance really doesn’t matter. A landmark New England Journal of Medicine paper in 2003 found that the quality of care for privately insured Americans was about as bad as it was for those on government insurance or who were uninsured. On a global measure of how often patients get the right care, insurance really doesn’t make a big difference.See below:

Adjusted Percentage of Recommended Care Received by Participants

P- value

Uninsured

53.7

Medicaid

54.9

0.50

Medicare

56.9

0.03

Managed Care

55.2

0.27

Private non-managed care

53.6

0.94

*From: Asch SM, Kerr EA, Keesey J, Adams JL, Setodji CM, Malik S, et al. Who Is at Greatest Risk for Receiving Poor-Quality Health Care? New England Journal of Medicine. 2006;354(11):1147-56. PubMed PMID: 16540615.

This, of course, begs the question: how can we be spending so much money and not doing better on cardiovascular disease management?  How can this be?  The knee-jerk reaction that I hear over and over again is to blame the patient – they are not compliant with their medications.  They don’t follow up.  They don’t understand their condition.  But these are weak excuses for a healthcare system that only pays when a patient visits a doctor’s office or an ER or a hospital.  We have a supply driven healthcare system because of a failure of imagination – we only seem to know how to pay for visits and medications and tests and procedures.

If we’re going to get healthcare to improve health, we have to seriously rethink the way we pay for it.  I don’t mean adding a 1% incentive to a doctor’s reimbursement for measuring blood glucose.  That doesn’t do much and is usually just insulting.  I mean adding incentives to make providers focus on managing patients’ health.  The problem right now is that no one gets paid if they figure out how to get patients to take their medications regularly.  No one gets paid to communicate more effectively with their patients or get them to quit smoking.  We don’t financially reward providers who improve health.  In fact, we punish them: because as people get healthier, they will have fewer visits, decreasing provider revenue.

This is more than a diatribe against fee-for-service.  It’s a diatribe against paying for healthcare. We need to find a way to pay for health.  Yes, it sounds naïve, but we have to start thinking outside the box if we want transformative changes rather than iterative ones.  For instance, what if we paid for better blood pressure control?  Instead of getting paid to measure every patient’s blood pressure (as many pay-for-performance schemes do), what if we paid for lowering blood pressure among those with severe hypertension?  Yes, there are issues of case-mix adjustment, but those are solvable.  For each one of us, the things that would improve our health surely vary.  What if the payment system could take patient preference into account, paying for things that we each individually valued as important to our health and well-being?  None of this is easy.  But we surely haven’t built this insanely complex and dysfunctional payment system because it’s the easiest way to pay for healthcare.  We got here despite ourselves.

My lesson from the Oregon experiment is that our system pours hundreds of billions of dollars into stuff, but pays little attention to whether any of that stuff is improving people’s health.  Adding more people to the insurance rolls –pouring more money into a low value healthcare system – isn’t going to improve people’s health.  Will it help the uninsured financially?  Sure.  Is providing financial security to poor Americans a good thing to do?  Absolutely.  No American should be one car accident away from bankruptcy.  But until we improve the underlying functioning of the healthcare delivery system, we shouldn’t expect any intervention that improves access to more healthcare services to have a meaningful effect on people’s health.

Ashish Jha is an associate professor of health policy and management, Harvard School of Public Health.  He blogs at An Ounce of Evidence and can be found on Twitter @ashishkjha.

Prev

There’s not much to do but wait

June 21, 2013 Kevin 8
…
Next

A cautionary tale of employing doctors

June 21, 2013 Kevin 20
…

Tagged as: Cardiology, Primary Care, Public Health & Policy

Post navigation

< Previous Post
There’s not much to do but wait
Next Post >
A cautionary tale of employing doctors

More by Ashish Jha, MD, MPH

  • Ranking the world’s health systems: These results may surprise you

    Ashish Jha, MD, MPH
  • How much does it matter which hospital you go to?

    Ashish Jha, MD, MPH
  • Men and women doctors versus correlation and causation

    Ashish Jha, MD, MPH

More in Policy

  • Why affirmative action is crucial for health equity and social justice in medicine

    Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH
  • The untold story of Hispanic/Latino health: Why subgroup data matters

    Matthew B. Alonso
  • Unmasking the brutal reality of gun violence in America: a call to action for unity and meaningful change

    Osmund Agbo, MD
  • Family physicians unite at the U.S. Capitol, seeking congressional support for Medicare reform and health care transformation

    Tochi Iroku-Malize, MD, MPH, MBA, Sterling N. Ransone, Jr., MD, and Steven P. Furr, MD
  • Breaking down barriers: Illinois bill calls for cultural competency training for physicians to improve health care for LGBTQ+ community

    Michael Pessman
  • Breaking the cycle of racism in health care: a call for anti-racist action

    Tomi Mitchell, MD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • A patient’s perspective on the diminishing relationship between doctors and patients

      Michele Luckenbaugh | Conditions
    • Unmasking wage disparity in health care: the truth behind the Elmhurst Hospital physician strike

      Kevin Pho, MD | KevinMD
    • Why affirmative action is crucial for health equity and social justice in medicine

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Policy
    • How electronic health records preserve patients’ legacies in the words of oncologists

      Marc Braunstein, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Unmasking the brutal reality of gun violence in America: a call to action for unity and meaningful change

      Osmund Agbo, MD | Policy
    • Emulating Michael Jordan’s winning mindset: a path to success for health care professionals and entrepreneurs

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • The growing threat to transgender health care: implications for patients, providers, and trainees

      Carson Hartlage | Policy
    • Breaking point: the 5 reasons American doctors are dreaming of walking away from medicine

      Amol Shrikhande, MD | Physician
    • “Is your surgeon really skilled? The hidden threat to public safety in medicine.

      Gene Uzawa Dorio, MD | Physician
    • It’s time to replace the 0 to 10 pain intensity scale with a better measure

      Mark Sullivan, MD and Jane Ballantyne, MD | Conditions
    • Breaking the cycle of racism in health care: a call for anti-racist action

      Tomi Mitchell, MD | Policy
    • Revolutionize your practice: the value-based care model that reduces physician burnout

      Chandravadan Patel, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • The hidden factor in physician burnout: How the climate crisis is contributing to the erosion of well-being

      Elizabeth Cerceo, MD | Physician
    • The surprising medical mystery of a “good” Hitler: How a rescued kitten revealed a rare movement disorder

      Teresella Gondolo, MD | Conditions
    • The power of coaching for physicians: transforming thoughts, changing lives

      Kim Downey, PT | Conditions
    • Why doctors aren’t to blame for the U.S. opioid crisis [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Raw humanity on night float: inspiring patient encounters and overcoming challenges

      Johnathan Yao, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Is AI the solution for the shortage of nephrologists? ChatGPT weighs in.

      Amol Shrikhande, MD | Tech

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 22 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

CME Spotlights

From MedPage Today

Latest News

  • Want to Solve the Nurse Shortage?
  • Why Are Female Doctors Sued Nearly Half as Often as Male Doctors?
  • What Drug Did FDA Just Approve for COVID?
  • PET Scan for Alzheimer's Dx; Predicting Colon Cancer Survival
  • What Happens When We Classify Kids' Weight as a 'Disease'?

Meeting Coverage

  • No Access to Routine Healthcare Biggest Barrier to HPV Vaccination
  • Trial Results Spark Talk of Curing More Metastatic Cervical Cancers
  • Cross-Border Collaboration Improves Survival in Pediatric Leukemia Patients
  • Monoclonal Antibody Reduced Need For Transfusions in Low-Risk MDS
  • Less-Invasive Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer Proves Safe, Effective
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • A patient’s perspective on the diminishing relationship between doctors and patients

      Michele Luckenbaugh | Conditions
    • Unmasking wage disparity in health care: the truth behind the Elmhurst Hospital physician strike

      Kevin Pho, MD | KevinMD
    • Why affirmative action is crucial for health equity and social justice in medicine

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Policy
    • How electronic health records preserve patients’ legacies in the words of oncologists

      Marc Braunstein, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Unmasking the brutal reality of gun violence in America: a call to action for unity and meaningful change

      Osmund Agbo, MD | Policy
    • Emulating Michael Jordan’s winning mindset: a path to success for health care professionals and entrepreneurs

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • The growing threat to transgender health care: implications for patients, providers, and trainees

      Carson Hartlage | Policy
    • Breaking point: the 5 reasons American doctors are dreaming of walking away from medicine

      Amol Shrikhande, MD | Physician
    • “Is your surgeon really skilled? The hidden threat to public safety in medicine.

      Gene Uzawa Dorio, MD | Physician
    • It’s time to replace the 0 to 10 pain intensity scale with a better measure

      Mark Sullivan, MD and Jane Ballantyne, MD | Conditions
    • Breaking the cycle of racism in health care: a call for anti-racist action

      Tomi Mitchell, MD | Policy
    • Revolutionize your practice: the value-based care model that reduces physician burnout

      Chandravadan Patel, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • The hidden factor in physician burnout: How the climate crisis is contributing to the erosion of well-being

      Elizabeth Cerceo, MD | Physician
    • The surprising medical mystery of a “good” Hitler: How a rescued kitten revealed a rare movement disorder

      Teresella Gondolo, MD | Conditions
    • The power of coaching for physicians: transforming thoughts, changing lives

      Kim Downey, PT | Conditions
    • Why doctors aren’t to blame for the U.S. opioid crisis [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Raw humanity on night float: inspiring patient encounters and overcoming challenges

      Johnathan Yao, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Is AI the solution for the shortage of nephrologists? ChatGPT weighs in.

      Amol Shrikhande, MD | Tech

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

A far more interesting lesson from the Oregon experiment
22 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...