SAMED Date: 5 August 2014 Agenda Acronyms DSP- Designated Service - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

samed
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

SAMED Date: 5 August 2014 Agenda Acronyms DSP- Designated Service - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

SAMED Date: 5 August 2014 Agenda Acronyms DSP- Designated Service Provider PP Preferred Provider PMB Prescribed Minimum Benefit DTP Diagnostic/Treatment pairs PMB LOC PMB Level of Care CDL- Chronic Disease


slide-1
SLIDE 1

SAMED

Date: 5 August 2014

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Agenda

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Acronyms

  • DSP- Designated Service Provider
  • PP – Preferred Provider
  • PMB – Prescribed Minimum Benefit
  • DTP – Diagnostic/Treatment pairs
  • PMB LOC – PMB Level of Care
  • CDL- Chronic Disease List
  • PBM – Pharmacy Benefit Management
slide-4
SLIDE 4

Don’t Shoot the Messengers

DSTM

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Motivations

Doctors know their patients and the clinical history What is the expected outcome? What is the potential cost? What alternatives have been tried? What co morbidities are relevant?

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Scheme Limits

  • Each scheme has multiple benefit options

each with their own limits

  • Consistency of decision making is not

possible because different members have different benefits

  • PMB conditions always change the picture,

provided it is a PMB. Always consider PMB level of Care

slide-7
SLIDE 7

DSP

  • Pre selected each benefit year – Hospitals

and Specialists

  • Benefit option specific
  • Applies to PMB or non PMB conditions
  • Co payments for not using DSP (Up to 40%)
  • 50km rule applies
  • PMB will not be paid at cost if DSP is not

used

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Case Manager

  • Funder / Hospital case manager
  • Have a relationship with the doctors,

schemes and the medical advisors

  • Facilitates the authorisation process
  • Facilitates communication with patient and

family

  • Co Ordinates any discharge planning

required

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Which Link is Broken?

Patient

Hospital Doctor

Scheme Family

slide-10
SLIDE 10

The Way Forward

Communicate Communicate Communicate Together we can achieve more and the patient will be the biggest beneficiary

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Dr Thys Kruger Medical Advisor

slide-12
SLIDE 12

The South African Joint Outcome Study (SAJOS1)

Protocol Number: SAJOS1-02 PharmaEthics Approval Number: 10043675 Final Ethics Approval Date: 25 May 2010

A descriptive study assessing the care provided to a cohort of beneficiaries who received funding for an arthroplasty of a major weight bearing joint in a group of more than 654, 000 beneficiaries with medical scheme cover in the private healthcare environment in South Africa.

slide-13
SLIDE 13

SAJOS1 Outcomes

  • Assessing the two year quality of life (QoL) (SF20) and

functional impairment (Barthel) of patients who received funding for hip or knee arthroplasty surgery.

  • Identifying factors that could influence future funding decisions

and/or contracting.

  • Assessing the level of care provided to the cohort.
slide-14
SLIDE 14

Methodology

  • A group of beneficiaries of medical schemes (>654,000) who

contracted hospital benefit management services from MSO received funding for a major joint arthroplasty (1393). – The beneficiaries (1393) were contacted within 2 weeks of the initial procedure date after a period of 2 years to assess the current quality of life and possible impairment. – A meaningful population (227) agreed to completed the questionnaires (SF20 and Barthel Index. – Whilst 55 beneficiaries were confirmed dead after 2 years.

  • The financial outcomes of the 1393, QoL and functional impairment in

addition to adverse events reported, in addition to drivers of high risk

  • utcomes were assessed and reported on.
slide-15
SLIDE 15

Financial Results

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Indications & Surgeon Experience

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Qi and Barthel

1. Both the SF-20 and the Barthel Index were found suitable for use in the study group 2. Most patients reported: able to walk (97%), straighten their legs completely (99%), bend their legs completely (89%), no difficulty in getting moving after they had been sitting or lying down for some time (63%), and never walked with a limp (56%). This indicates a high level of functioning two years after surgery. 3. Poor functional outcomes in the age group 75 years and older 4. Females and the obese population reported poorer general health

  • utcomes especially with the presence of respiratory symptoms.

5. Over 90% said that they would choose to have a joint replacement again.

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Subsequent Admissions

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Serious Adverse Events

slide-20
SLIDE 20

High Risk Outcomes

slide-21
SLIDE 21

SAJOS1

Main Conclusions

Most beneficiaries enjoy a good quality of life post procedure

  • Surgeon experience is a major factor considering

cost and high risk outcomes

  • Re-admissions and complications is a concern
  • Centre’s of excellence will be ideal (DSP/PP)
  • There is an urgent need for a registry in South Africa
slide-22
SLIDE 22

SAJOS1 Study Publication

Available at www.mso.co.za

  • r

e-mail thys@mso.co.za

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Way Forward

  • Centre’s of excellence
  • Multidisciplinary team approach
  • Risk sharing – Global fee structures
  • Health economic modelling and impact studies
  • Sustainable business structures - ? Societies – collusion
  • Transparent communications
slide-24
SLIDE 24

Thank You