Week 3; Response 2
Patient empowerment, engagement, and involvement seem to be where the future of healthcare needs to focus and I do agree. In order to achieve this patient’s must claim culpability for their health. According to Watson, Bluml, and Skoufalos (2015),
Key determinants of health (including education, stress levels, mental and emotional state, financial, and/or food insecurity), in addition to disease-related factors, have a direct bearing on quality of life and health status for individuals. These determinants can influence treatment choices, affect an individual’s ability to interact with health care providers, and prevent a person from adhering to c omplex dietary and medication protocols. (p. 179)
Watson, Bluml, and Skoufalos suggest the concept of credentialing patients as a means to attain patient accountability. According to Watson, Bluml, and Skoufalos (2015),
Credentialing ‘‘meets people where they are’’ in that it can be adapted to accommodate sociodemographic factors, including reading level and language preference, and it identifies gaps in patient understanding and proficiency so that appropriate education may be tailored to meet individual needs….Patient credentialing has the ability to standardize the process for determining core focuses for care delivery and health goals, which may reduce health disparities among patient populations, as each patient’s specific needs are identified through the patient credentialing process regardless of other confounding factors. This customization will serve to standardize and elevate the quality of care provided across practice settings and provider types. (p. 180)
Patients are classified as beginner, proficient, or advanced based on their understanding, skill, and involvement in addressing and maintaining their chronic health condition and are credentialed according to their ability. It is the same concept as a credentialing a worker/student as they learn and advance. This credentialing can impact the design of healthcare plans and the way payers work with the patient population. Watson, Bluml, and Skoufalos (2015) explain this by stating,
Payers can recognize various levels of achievement by reducing or eliminating co-payments; providing free preventive services, home monitoring devices, and value-added services that would not otherwise be accessible; or modifying health plan costs. For example, patients achieving a level of proficient in the PSMC for Diabetes skills assessment related to insulin use may receive waived co-payments for their insulin medication and associated supplies. Payers also may choose to provide incentives for patients based simply on their continued engagement in the patient credentialing process, which will drive people to stay engaged in the health care system and increase the number of touch points for preventive care and health education. (p.182)
I find this an interesting way in which to engage patients in actively partaking in their health care. What do you think?
REFERENCE
Watson, L. L., Bluml, B. M., & Skoufalos, A. (2015). Patient Credentialing as a Population
Health Management Strategy: A Diabetes Case Study. Population Health Management, 18(3), 179-185. doi:10.1089/pop.2014.0069
Type II Diabetes Mellitus Case Study Questions Answers
Type II Diabetes Mellitus Case Study Questions . M. K. is a 45-year-old female measuring 5’5″ and weighing 225 lbs. M. K. has a history of smoking about 22 years along with a poor diet. She has a history of type II diabetes mellitus along with primary hypertension. M. K. has recently been diagnosed with […]
