CLINICAL TECHNOLOGY AIDS IN PATIENT CARE. AND THAT MUST BE THE FOCUS

THIS MONTH, OM presents its annual Clinical Technology issue. The importance of these technological advances cannot be underestimated. On the patient care side, for example, we can make definitive diagnoses early, enabling fast intervention and, thus, better patient outcomes. When it comes to practice management, such technology has also facilitated practice efficiency — something practice owners, their employees and patients appreciate.

Through the last five years, OM has covered many, if not most, aspects of technology: how to select it; how to purchase it; how to integrate it; how to implement it and more. This month’s annual clinical technology Issue continues the tradition of “how to” education with a focus on patient care and practice management with retinal diagnostic technology, innovations in OCT, visual electrophysiology testing and more.

ONE THING HASN’T CHANGED

While OM discusses many aspects of clinical technology, including current issues that impact finance, one lesson remains consistent: Patient care is the reason for performing any medical service or diagnostic test.

THE SIMPLE RULE

Yet, as our margins get tighter, competition increases, the healthcare world changes, etc., it might be tempting to think otherwise. I recently heard a speaker commenting on how to utilize “the fee-for-service environment” in which we practice.

My immediate internal response to this was, “Wait a minute! What does a fee-for-service environment, or any of the other challenges we face, have to do with patient care?” The answer, of course, is nothing. The simple rule when it comes to performing any medical service, diagnostic test, or medical procedure is: A service, test or procedure should only be ordered or performed if it provides the physician(s) with information that will positively affect the diagnosis and/or treatment of a condition or condition(s).

Notice I did not mention “reimbursement.” This is mostly because how much we get paid, or even if we do get paid, has nothing to do with why we should order a test or perform a service. Practicing otherwise is unethical at best and illegal in some cases.

LOOKING FROM ANOTHER ANGLE

Another way to think of this is that if we, the provider, had to pay for the test out of our reimbursement, instead of the patient or a third party having to pay, would we actually perform the test, service or procedure? The reason that I position such decision making this way is that the future of value-based medicine is planted on exactly this thought. The day will come when there is no reimbursement for a service or a test, but, instead, for individual diagnoses and successful management, however that will be defined.

More simply put, if we need to do a test or service to provide better patient care, then we should do it. If we don’t, then we shouldn’t. It’s all about patient care. OM