The Health Economy Simulator is set up so that the participants go through three years of Healthcare Planning, adjusting costs along the way and choosing investments that will pay off in terms of profitability for stakeholders and value for consumers. At the end of each segment the organization in charge of running the simulation goes through the results in a fun and engaging way. First they wrote some scandal headlines about how a few of the teams decided to cut costs. Other headlines related to the overconfidence some of the groups expressed. Finally we got to the results.
The team that won: Pearl Jam by quite a large margin (not that this means anything to you…). However, this is just the end of year one. Many of the teams chose a long-term strategy—spend more on IT, infrastructure, and Research into wellness programs, and save money now. Those teams aren’t doing so well in year one. Others chose to cut costs and improve savings. Some teams chose to increase taxes. Those teams would be on top in year one. But over time, consumer satisfaction, quality of care, and unforeseen costs could come back to bite them.
The best example of long term vs. short term strategized related to IT investment. Those that put money towards standardization of health records might have experienced cost issues in year one. But when the government comes up with some form of standardization that forces the teams that didn’t invest in year one to scramble, they’ll end up losing a lot more money.
The teams that did best had a value-based insurance policy. They were looking at the value of your treatment to you and priced based on that. For example, something that would save your life would be free. But your RLS drugs might be more expensive, because those drugs aren’t keeping you alive.
The specific criteria for winning were listed for the participants at the beginning of the program:
- Population Wellness – improved overall health and fewer chronic conditions.
- Public Satisfaction – increased consumer engagement and satisfaction.
- Health Outcomes – improved health outcomes and quality of life for patients including better managed chronic conditions.
- Cost/Capita – reduced health expenditures.
- Economic Growth – A better local health system with healthier, more satisfied people and more profitable companies will attract more employers and promote economic growth.
In the end, how much hospitals, insurers, doctors, and payers made, plus how good the quality of care was, how low the cost was for consumers, and how satisfied the consumers were balanced the points out. As the “years” go on, the participants learn more about the consequences of their decisions and have to figure out how to fix some of the mistakes they may have made at the beginning of the simulation.
For me, the most interesting aspect was that the teams with the most focus on wellness in their communities did the best overall. I think that is a great sign of things to come.
Image from Flickr User PixelPlacebo
So who is winning? It isn’t necessarily team Pearl Jam. Everything could change in year three. We’ll just have to wait to see what will work best for the health economy.
