This post was authored by Eric Stecker, MD, FACC, member of the ACC’s Clinical Quality Committee.

Last week I made the argument that value (efficient provision of quality care) is a critical but under-recognized component of successful health care reform. Today we’ll briefly address several potential elements of health care reform that cardiologists should be facile with.

How do you measure quality care? It is no longer sufficient to say we provide high quality care; we must demonstrate it objectively. Quality metrics remain imperfect but will improve over time and provide important information for patients and policymakers. Patients who see cardiovascular physicians participating in programs like ACC’s Imaging in FOCUS, and using registries such as those that fall under the ACC’s NCDR^® umbrella, can be assured the appropriateness and quality of their inpatient and outpatient care is being monitored and in most cases continuously improved.  The ACC’s clinical publications, including practice guidelines, consensus documents, appropriate use criteria, data standards and health policy statements are also excellent resources when it comes to guiding the most appropriate, evidence-based care.

Financial incentives for providers and patients Medicare has initiated “value-based purchasing” programs to incentivize health care systems to improve quality. These programs could expand considerably in the future if proven successful. Individual health systems and insurers have experimented for many years with various financial programs to incentivize physicians to improve quality metrics or outcomes. The impact of these pay-for-performance programs has been mixed, but as pointed out by Ryan and Blustein, appropriately targeted and scaled monetary incentives are likely to have an impact.  Programs to incentivize patients by lowering or eliminating copayments (“Value-Based Insurance Design”) have proven very effective and are critical to aligning both the “supply” and “demand” aspects of high value care.

Managing individuals versus managing populations Physicians are accustomed to caring for individual patients who engage them in the clinic, emergency department or procedural suite. However, by necessity the measure of a population’s health is made at the population level, not the individual level. Federal, state and local governments as well as businesses and employers have become more sophisticated and motivated to track aggregate health measures.  As a result cardiologists will become increasingly responsible for reporting and improving the health of all of the patients in their practice as a whole.  It will be important for cardiologists to gain the familiarity and skill to manage populations, but also retain sensitivity to issues that could harm individual patients so that policies and metrics can be modified accordingly.

If health care reform efforts are appropriately structured, cardiologists can thrive by focusing on efficient provision of high quality care for individuals and populations.  This will be best achieved when cardiologists align with and achieve leadership roles in health systems that focus on and incentivize quality systems of care.

< Back to Listings