As politicians work to reform the U.S. healthcare system, healthcare itself should be viewed as a "national resource," not simply as a business or a commodity, said a keynote speaker Wednesday at ANI 2008, the annual conference of the Healthcare Financial Management Association.
Richard Umbdenstock, president and CEO of the American Hospital Association, said viewing healthcare as a national resource would "change the debate" on reform and could be a way to span contending ideological positions in Congress and industry.
"The debate over reform will be highly charged in this political year," said Umbdenstock. "I'm not sure what the outcome will look like, and I won't compare one bill against another at this point. What we need to do is build a broader private sector coalition and think about what's best for patients and communities."
The AHA chief laid out two broad frameworks for reform that he said contained necessary principles that all stakeholders should unite around. The first framework Umbdenstock endorsed was that outlined in "Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century," a 2001 report by the Institute of Medicine. The report delineated six "Aims for Improvement" for healthcare.
Umbdenstock said stakeholders in the healthcare debate should construct their reform programs around the six aims, which are:
• Safety - Avoid injuries to patients from the care that is intended to help them. Safety must be at the forefront of patient care;
• Effectiveness - Match care to science; avoid the overuse of ineffective care and the underuse of effective care;
• Patient-Centeredness - Honor the individual and respect choice. Each patient's culture, social context and specific needs deserve respect, and the patient should play an active role in making decisions about her own care;
• Timeliness - Reduce waiting for both patients and those who give care. Prompt attention benefits both the patient and the caregiver;
• Efficiency - Reduce waste. The healthcare system should constantly seek to reduce the waste and the cost of supplies, equipment, space, capital, ideas, time and opportunities;
• Equity - Close racial and ethnic gaps in health status. Race, ethnicity, gender and income should not prevent anyone from receiving high-quality care.
The AHA has also defined its own principles for healthcare reform - a "national framework for change," which the organization has labeled "Health for Life." According to Umbdenstock, the six principles in the framework are:
• A focus on Wellness
• Most efficient and affordable care
• Highest quality care
• Best Information
• Health coverage for all, paid for by all
Umbdenstock speculated that an initial focus on these "shared principles" could drive the healthcare reform debate in a more constructive direction than an immediate emphasis on the details of contending plans.
Do you agree with Umbdenstock that it is possible for different interest groups and political parties to unite around a set of principles for the reform of the U.S. healthcare system? Are Umbdenstock's principles the right ones, or would you add or delete from his list? Email your thoughts to Associate Editor Richard Pizzi at richard.pizzi@medtechpublishing.com.