|Finding the "just right" middle|
But it also makes a important point that appears to have been missed by the Editors.
The Population Health Blog explains.
The case revolves around a fragile cancer patient with abnormal blood chemistries and distributed locations of care. The author describes how care management successfully improved the patient's safety, required a lot of physician-to-physician communication and relied on care management's "reach" outside the four walls of the primary care clinic.
All good points.
However, what's also true is that prior to the cancer diagnosis, this was an otherwise well patient with post-discharge needs that were amenable to care management intervention. In other words, this patient was "high risk, high impact." These individuals make up the narrow middle in the span of patients who range from otherwise well (destined to do OK) to disastrously complicated (destined to do poorly no matter what).
The Population Health Blog doubts the case would have been so meaningful or successful with a routine surgery patient (stable and OK) or someone with metastatic spread of the cancer (a disaster).
The Population Health Blog is all for patient safety, doc-to-doc communication and distributed care management. However, they're not going to be of equal benefit for every patient. If the intent is to "save money" by reducing avoidable health care utilization, it's best aimed at the patients in the middle.
Like this one.