Primary Care Versus the Rest

Recent postings have defended primary care versus urgent care and other care venues. These posts tend to exaggerate the benefits of primary care while pointing out the flaws of urgent, retail, corporate, concierge, emergent, and other venues.

 Primary care should take a realistic hard look at the competition and the many serious issues facing primary care. It is hard as a primary care and health access advocate to post this - but real change begins with Primary Care Versus the Rest across Specific Measurable Achievable Realistic and Timely.

It is common for primary care to defend itself for areas such as continuity and integration – but insurance companies, employer preferences, and other changes insure patient migrations, lack of continuity, and disintegration.

Access Issues Facing Primary Care More (and less for others)
  1. Primary care has largely refused to adapt to consumers (evening, weekend, phone, internet)
  2. has increasing delays until patients can be seen
  3. is moving from most experienced to least experienced workforce in the next decades
  4. has substantial clinicians near retirement or departing primary care in the next few years
  5. has shrinking proportions of all sources entering primary care
  6. may well be less responsive to part time or other emerging graduate preferences
  7. is forced by insurance contracts and habit patterns to see the most complex patients while the least complex and most profitable are stolen away


Finance Issues Facing Primary Care More
  1. Primary care has rapidly increased in cost of delivery with no end in sight - HIT, techs, MU, updates of software and hardware, ICD-10
  2. is forced to hire more personnel or consultants to save costs for someone else - government or insurance
  3. has payment too low where most Americans live and need care (and are more complex)
  4. may have cost issues locating a practice where best for revenue generation
  5. is being strung along with the hope of more pay by government and by insurance (and by associations), but for decades the costs and responsibilities go up more than the rare if any pay increase
  6. is also facing more funds extracted by associations (dues, certifications) and increasing requirements for certifications that also are more costly and cut into revenue

And paying dues and other costs and investments does not protect, preserve, profit, promote, or otherwise benefit the primary care clinician or practice

The Primary Care Priority remains far too low
  1. PC has not been spared the rigors of cost cutting
  2. has not been spared stagnation in revenue
  3. has not been spared sequestration cuts and other across the board cuts – cuts resulting from other parts of government and health care that spend too much
  4. PC associations have not been effective in improving revenue for decades
  5. PC association lobbying and political attention is actually higher for non-primary care, because the nurse practitioner, physician assistant, internal medicine, and pediatric graduates are more likely to be found outside of primary care and more members and higher pay shapes the political focus
  6. NP Associations are focused on independence as a top priority which is why retail, convenience, urgent, and emergent workforce increasingly arise from nurse practitioner graduates
  7. PC associations receive no negative attention for failing in primary care – they are allowed to claim primary care while benefiting from non-primary care to a much greater degree
  8. Family Medicine remains 90% primary care, but is dominated by academic interests and various favored projects – such as Primary Care Medical Home Nirvana - not attending to the failures of payment and more members who are dedicated lifelong to primary care (family medicine had devoted an entire floor and millions to PCMH - mainly benefiting consultants
  9. Public Primary Care, academic training, and other public supported venues can undercut private primary care - including some of the most profitable locations

Those most devoted to primary care receive little recognition or respect
  1. While their association leaders broadly proclaim the primary care benefits that only their small and dedicated proportion provides
  2. While all manner of primary care solutions or cures are proposed - other than the actual cure which is more support for them and for their kind and what they do
  3. While also forced to be subjugated as employees to employers that often do not understand or appreciate primary care, or to become a small portion of a large operation with little visibility or priority 

The actual cure for primary care remains funding specific to more clinicians who stay in primary care permanently and deliver more services to more Americans including those most rapidly increasing in numbers and in need of primary care

Global Fails Local But Local Focus Succeeds Globally

Domino Decline By Design - as ERs Close, Those Nearby Face Challenges, as Small or Rural Hospitals Close or Practices Where Needed...

Declines in Health Care Delivery Despite Increases in Health Spending - If We Keep Accelerating Non-Delivery Costs, We Can Continue to Remain Behind Health Care Demand


Blogs indicate that primary care can be recovered and should be recovered.

Dr. Bowman is the North American Co-Editor of Rural and Remote Health. He was the founding chair of the Rural Medical Educators Group of the National Rural Health Association and the long term chair of the STFM Group on Rural Health.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Another Fine CMS You Have Gotten Us Into

Perhaps we are indeed back to the time of Another Fine Mess (Laurel and Hardy). In a mad rush to implement innovation and to save all possible costs, CMS is creating complications for people that it is most responsible to protect. As PBS and Ken Burns celebrate the legacy of The Roosevelts, it is tragic to see what has become of over a century of effort involving Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and health care equity. The United States has one of the most complex health designs and clearly the various designers often know not what they are doing to others. More cartoons and comedians would find this a ripe area for material if not for the suffering involved. Health and Human Services has a huge role across Social Security and US health care. CMS or the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has a dominant role to play in the design of health care in the United States.  CMS can be progressive or regressive. Interestingly CMS has chosen to appear to be progressive and in
Read more

The Essential True Reform Restores Primary Care and Much More

The list of distractions from True Reform are impressive. For decades True Reform has been specifically avoided as primary care worsens within practices and from outside. The demise is most specifically about the financial design. Unless there is a focus on True Reform, there is little hope for Basic Health Access. This may not make as much sense to those outside of family medicine. Family physicians not familiar with AAFP may also be clueless. If you think that you can fix primary care with more technology, more rearrangements, more types of health professional graduates, or more expansions of training - think again. None of these have any hope of working without financial design changes - major changes. The following are various concepts that dominate the discussions at AAFP and primary care meetings and media releases of associations and foundations and institutions. Members, staff, media releases, programs, and personnel have been reviewed.  There is little about Tru
Read more

Innovation Is the Problem Not the Solution for Worsening Health

Image
Innovation is good. Innovation worship is not good. Innovation application without scientific testing or clinical trials is unethical regarding clinical interventions and should be just as prohibited with regard to health policy. Clinical trials can harm hundreds or thousands. Innovative policies can harm millions. It takes a reasonable understanding of health care, health care outcomes, social determinants, and the investments that most improve social determinants to understand the consequences arising from the innovative nightmares past, present, and future. If you review the information sources with a critical eye, you too may find that the innovative policy designs have been disruptive to care, have hurt health care where health care is most needed, have reduced access to care, and have resulted in distortions in the literature. Indeed what is accepted and published in journals seriously lacks consideration of alternative hypothesis, lacks inclusion of many pages of limitatio
Read more