<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: health care consumers</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'health care consumers'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22health+care+consumers%22&t=%22health+care+consumers%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:53:52 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Members and Patients, part two – Obesity</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2774706&amp;cid=t_189953_114_f&amp;fid=35410&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fletstalkhealthcare%2F%7E3%2Fsbk88YG3gPM%2F</link>
            <description>Last week I drew a distinction between health plan members and patients. Members are not always patients. In fact, 9% of our members account for 60% of the plan’s medical spending. I argued that a good health plan has a unique opportunity, whether its members are involved with the health care system or not, to help them make lifestyle decisions that would improve their health and wellbeing.
A case in point is the problem of childhood obesity. It is well understood that obesity increases the risk of coronary heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and hypertension. A recent post on “The Health Care Blog” by Dr. James S. Marks, a senior vice president at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, argued that we need to “look beyond health care…and focus on our health” and used as an example th...</description>
            <author>HPHC</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2774706</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 14:05:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2774706</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Economic Case for Health Care Reform</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2452384&amp;cid=t_189953_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F0Id0gvZR0s0%2F</link>
            <description>There&amp;#8217;s an old Yiddish saying that, “If my bubba had wheels she&amp;#8217;d be a trolley.” So goes the logic of the Obama administration in their paper released yesterday, “The Economic Case for Health Care Reform.” Their claim is that reducing health care costs would help the economy. Yes, if health care costs were reduced it would likely help the economy, though we should remember that the health care industry is part of the economy.
There is nothing in Obamacare, however, that will reduce costs. In fact, expanding coverage may cause costs to rise. One study by MIT&amp;#8217;s Amy Finkelstein suggests that the prevalence of insurance itself has roughly doubled the cost of health care. So, if Obama succeeds in expanding insurance coverage, it&amp;#8217;s very likely to increase the cost...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2452384</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 17:31:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2452384</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>2009 Survey of Health Care Consumers out</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2341852&amp;cid=t_189953_150_f&amp;fid=38374&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FePharmaSummit%2F%7E3%2FVKbRHyEamuI%2F2009-survey-of-health-care-consumers.html</link>
            <description>I recently found the 2009 Survey of Health Care Consumers which may be pointing towards health care consumers looking to electronic health records and online access to medical care as a future part of their medical care.Some of the key findings:42 percent want access to an online personal health record connected to their doctor’s office65 percent of consumers are interested in home monitoring devices that enable them to check their condition and send the results to their doctorThe summary can be downloaded here. (Source: ePharma Summit)</description>
            <author>ePharma Summit</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2341852</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 14:38:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2341852</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Narrow Networks, Part II…</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2289397&amp;cid=t_189953_114_f&amp;fid=35410&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fletstalkhealthcare%2F%7E3%2FR1TIY61Vvzo%2F</link>
            <description>I wrote a post a few weeks ago about Narrow Networks that generated a lot of chatter on the blog - and a lot of commentary off it as well.  What the heck - let&amp;#8217;s stick with what works, and put some real life into the debate.  For the past six years, Harvard Pilgrim has offered a limited network product to our New Hampshire members called &amp;#8220;New Hampshire NetOption.&amp;#8221;  Simply put, all New Hampshire providers are Tier One providers - lowest co-pays - and so are all Massachusetts community hospitals.  Tier Two providers are MA-based teaching hospitals (members have a higher co-pay for services there).  That&amp;#8217;s it.  Two tiers - one for NH hospitals and MA community hospitals, and a different one for MA-based teaching hospitals.
There is, however, one catch.  All ...</description>
            <author>HPHC</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2289397</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:13:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2289397</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Narrow Networks - Yes or No?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2210637&amp;cid=t_189953_114_f&amp;fid=35410&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fletstalkhealthcare%2F%7E3%2FjAHmRB23CBg%2F</link>
            <description>The other day I got into a loud discussion (also known as an &amp;#8220;argument&amp;#8221;) with a friend of mine who&amp;#8217;s the CEO of a community hospital.  He&amp;#8217;s a good guy - and I hope he feels the same way about me.  We were arguing about Willie Sutton.  You know, the guy who said he robbed banks because that&amp;#8217;s where the money was.  I was saying that the big money savings in health care - if we ever have any - will come from three places&amp;#8230;
1) Reductions in practice pattern variation (Misuse, Underuse &amp; Overuse of services &amp; technology),
2) Reductions in the differences different providers get paid to do the same thing with the same outcome - or uniform pricing - at least for the blocking and tackling stuff,
3) More attention - make that any attention - on co...</description>
            <author>HPHC</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2210637</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 16:59:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2210637</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Cost of Health Insurance Mandates</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1806333&amp;cid=t_189953_114_f&amp;fid=35410&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2Fletstalkhealthcare%2F%7E3%2F395507274%2F</link>
            <description>A few months ago, the MA Division of Health Care Finance and Policy (DHCFP) released a study that showed that mandated health insurance benefits cost insurance purchasers about $1.3 billion - or 12% of their premiums - each year. Thanks to DHCFP for publishing the study. This issue is always the source of heated debate, and it’s nice to have a piece included on it that tries to inform the discussion.
Business people read the study and said, &amp;#8220;Ah ha! Mandates cost a lot of money!&amp;#8221; That would be correct. Health care advocates read the study and said, &amp;#8220;Ah ha! Mandates don’t cost that much money!&amp;#8221; That’s correct too - sort of.  As usual, where you stand depends on where you sit, how much twelve percent is worth to you for what you’re getting, and who pays the bi...</description>
            <author>HPHC</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1806333</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:45:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1806333</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health Care Consumers</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1560904&amp;cid=t_189953_114_f&amp;fid=35410&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2Fletstalkhealthcare%2F%7E3%2F324300827%2F</link>
            <description>Earlier this year, the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions published a survey of health care consumers that covers a lot of ground. In fact, I would recommend it to anyone who&amp;#8217;s interested in learning about what&amp;#8217;s on consumers&amp;#8217; minds these days. The report itself is quite long, so I won&amp;#8217;t try to capture everything it says here, but it does make some important points that are worth repeating.
First, the health care consumer is not monolithic. He or she is a bunch of different types of people - with very different views of the system, and how to approach it. Deloitte breaks the consumer up into six categories&amp;#8230;
1) Content and Compliant (29%) - While not regular users of the system, these folks do what they&amp;#8217;re told by their physician, have a traditional vie...</description>
            <author>HPHC</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1560904</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:50:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1560904</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

