Week In Review
Our 20 most recent "Weeks in Review"
Latest
13   15   15   05   22   21   18   
expand / collapse all posts
how this works

December 2003
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Aug   Jan



Common Links

Week In Review




>

Wednesday, August 13, 2003
> Parallel, sequential, distributed, or ORGANIC?.

Imagine this. You are asked to create a human body. You choose a hospital in California to create a gastrointestinal system,  a health system in New York to create a heart and blood vessels, a city in Vermont to create a brain, a hospital Iowa a peripheral nervous system, group of hospitals in Illinois the lungs, etc., etc.

Enough. Some things can't be done separately, some can. Organic things typically cannot. Some complex things can be "componentized" and assembled, some things must interact to even come into existence.

Some people at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation read the Institute of Medicine Report, Crossing the Quality Chasm and ask organizations to make proposals to radically improve American health care.

Experienced people in organizations in Whatcom County took the request very seriously. We had the same hopes and desires and we had been working separately and collectively for the same goal for more than ten years.

With much thought and discussion and with collaboration with patients we developed a radical plan for radical change--no piece of it was radical, it was the understanding that it all had to be done together that was radical, in the history of US healhtcare. To extend the analogy started above we understand the we needed a small GI system, a small cardiovascular system, a small nervous system etc for any of it to work. And that with all the essential systems working to support each other they could grow together to a mature effective health system of care--better than anything in existence.

The minimum "parts" we have are: 1) direct patient involvement in all teams and in governance, 2) using evidence as the basis for care design, 3) starting with two diseases [heart failure and congestive heart failure] and then moving to all others over a few years, 4) information systems designed and deployed so that everyone including the patient has the information that the patient wants them to have when and where they need it, 5) clinical office and hospital work flow reconfiguration so that the new work is integrated into the old and the old is made less frustrating and more efficient for everyone, and finally 6) modeling of the health care benefits and the economic impact on all of the stakeholders so that winners and losers can cooperate for the good of the patients and the whole community.

We have been at this for just over one year. It no longer seems unattainable. It is clearly attainable. What is difficult is getting all of this done in less than two years so that it is self-sustaining.

We are hopeful that some of the agencies and foundations that fund parallel, sequential, or distributed "demonstration" "projects" can see the difference here and fund an organic, systematic approach. Nothing less will create the radical transformation called for by the IOM Chasm Report and the American public.

Reductionist approaches can do much. They cannot build an organism, not yet, perhaps never. Supporting the growth of a small, complete, organism may be the right approach to radical transformation of US healthcare. We believe it is. Do you?

>

Saturday, February 15, 2003
>

Thursday, December 5, 2002
>

Friday, November 22, 2002
>

Thursday, November 21, 2002
>

Monday, November 18, 2002
>

Tuesday, November 12, 2002


Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website.
Click to see the XML version of this web page.
© Copyright 2003 WWPPreviewCollector .
Last update: 12/9/03; 2:47:11 PM .
This theme was created for WWPP by Jack F. Mancilla

WWPPreviewCollector
Subscribe to "Week In Review" in Radio UserLand. Click on the coffee mug to add the WWPPreviewCollector Instant Outline to your Radio UserLand buddy list.