“The SDPR will consolidate geographically fragmented EMR, PAS, and LIMS systems to create a detailed lifelong patient record and deliver cost savings,” NSW Health said in a news release.
NSW Health is the largest public health system in Australia with more than 220 public hospitals, 16 Local Health Districts, and three Specialty Networks. NSW Health Pathology operates more than 60 pathology laboratories (clinical laboratories in the US) and has 150 patient service centers.
“While this initiative will provide untold benefits to all the patients of NSW, we are excited about its potential for improving the health outcomes of our regional patients,” said Andrew Montague (above), former Chief Executive, Central Coast Local Health District in a press release. “By enabling greater collaboration across all local health districts and specialty health networks, the Single Digital Patient Record will provide clinicians with even better tools to keep the patient at the center of everything we do.” This project is more market evidence of the trend to bring clinical laboratory test results from multiple lab sites into a single data repository. (Photo copyright: Coast Community News.)
Cloud-based Realtime Access to Patient Records
Australia has a population of about 26 million and New South Wales, a state on the east coast, is home to more than eight million people. Though the scale of healthcare in Australia is much smaller than in the US, this is still a major project to pull patient data together from all the NSW hospitals, physicians’ offices, and other healthcare providers such as clinical laboratories and pathology practices.
With the change, NSW clinicians will benefit from a cloud–based system offering up real-time access to patients’ medical records, NSW Health Pathology Chief Executive Tracey McCosker told ITnews.
“Patients and our busy staff will benefit from clinical insights gained from the capture of important new data. Our work in pathology is vital to the diagnostic process and developing a statewide laboratory information management system will ensure we provide the best possible services,” McCosker told ITnews.
The KLAS Research report, “US Hospital Market Share 2022,” states that Epic, located in Verona, Wisconsin, has the largest US electronic health record (EHR) market share, Healthgrades noted. According to KLAS:
NSW Health’s decision to engage Epic came after a process involving 350 clinicians, scientists, and technical experts, Zoran Bolevich, MD, Chief Executive of eHealth NSW and NSW Health’s Chief Information Officer, told ITnews.
NSW Health’s Goal for Statewide Digital Patient Record
It was in December 2020 when NSW Health announced its plan to create the SDPR.
“Our vision is to be able to provide a single, holistic, statewide view of every patient—and for that information to be readily accessible to anyone involved in the patient’s care,” Bolevich said in the news release.
The SDPR, according to NSW Health, will address the following:
Challenges:
Current systems not connected statewide.
Inaccessible patient data.
Duplicative data collection.
Gaps in decision-making.
Goals:
Improve health outcomes.
Create patient centricity.
Leverage insights.
NSW’s government has already invested more than $106 million in the SDPR, Healthcare IT News reported.
Other Large EHR Rollouts
NSW Health is not the only large organization to take on such an ambitious project of creating a large-scale digital patient record. And not always to a successful conclusion.
The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)—also intent on EHR modernization—recently announced it is suspending roll-out of the Oracle Cerner EHR at VA centers until June 2023 to address technical issues affecting appointments, referrals, and test results.
Four VA centers in Washington, Oregon, and Ohio already went live with the system in 2022.
“We are delaying all future deployments of the new EHR while we fully assess performance and address every concern. Veterans and clinicians deserve a seamless, modernized health record system, and we will not rest until they get it,” said Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs Donald Remy, JD, in a news release.
For its part, Oracle Cerner wrote federal lawmakers noting the importance of continuing the project, which will move the VA away from its former VistA health information system.
“Modernization requires change and some short-term pain for the long-term benefits of a modern technology infrastructure,” noted Oracle Cerner Executive Vice President Ken Glueck in the letter, Becker’s Health IT reported. “A modernization project of this scale and scope necessarily involves time to untangle the decades of customized processes established in support of VistA, which inevitably involves challenges.”
NSW Health’s goal is to build a single repository of health information—including lab test results from multiple clinical laboratory sites. When finished NSW Health expects that sharing patient data will contribute to producing better healthcare outcomes.
However, the VA’s experience—and several other similar attempts at large-scale electronic patient record installations—suggest the work ahead will not be easy. But for NSW Health, it may be worth the effort.
But insurers are complying under the Transparency in Coverage regulations and that is where discrepancies in the disclosure of prices to the public have been found
Despite federal regulations requiring hospitals to publicly post their prices in advance of patient services, some large health systems still do not follow the law. That’s according to a new Transparency in Coverage Report from PatientRightsAdvocate.org (PRA), which found that some hospitals are “flouting” the federal Hospital Price Transparency Rule.
By cross-referencing price disclosures by hospitals and insurance companies, which are required to publish the amounts they pay for hospital services under federal Transparency in Coverage regulations, PRA, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, discovered the healthcare providers’ noncompliance with federal transparency regulation.
“Prices revealed in newly released health insurance company data files show some major American hospitals are omitting prices from their required price disclosures in violation of the federal hospital price transparency rule,” according to the PRA report.
Hospitals conceal their prices because they don’t want people to know how much rates for the same procedure vary,” Sally C. Pipes (above), President and CEO of Pacific Research Institute, wrote in the Washington Examiner. “A lack of price transparency benefits hospitals but not patients or payers. The federal government should not let providers get away with flouting the law,” she added. Clinical laboratories are also required under federal law to publish their prices. (Photo copyright: The Heartland Institute.)
“PatientRightsAdvocate.org discovered several instances in which prices were omitted from the hospital files but appeared in the insurance company files,” noted the PRA report. “These discrepancies indicate that some large hospitals are not posting their complete price lists as required by the hospital price transparency rule.”
The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) says hospitals must post standard charges in a single machine-readable digital file, and display in a consumer-friendly way, “300 shoppable services with discounted cash prices, payer-specific negotiated charges, and de-identified minimum and maximum negotiated charges.”
But according to the PRA report and news release, the study team discovered that this was not always the case. Below are examples from the report of some of the discrepancies between prices on a hospital’s website and what payers’ websites showed as prices involving those same hospitals:
PRA’s report casts light on inconsistencies between what insurers and providers share with the public on prices.
“Today’s report confirms that hospitals are hiding prices from patients and [this] calls into question their public assertions that individual prices don’t exist for many of the services they provide,” said PRA Founder and Chairman Cynthia Fisher in the news release.
“The data made possible by the [federal] Transparency in Coverage (TiC) rule reveals prices negotiated with insurers that hospitals did not disclose in the machine-readable files required by law. Our report is just the tip of the iceberg of what the staggering amount of data in TiC disclosures will reveal,” she added.
Ascension, HCA Note Compliance with CMS Rule
For its part, Ascension, in a statement to Healthcare Dive, confirmed it is complying with the CMS rule and offers consumers tools to estimate costs.
“We’re proud to be a leader in price transparency,” Ascension said.
HCA told Healthcare Dive it has “implemented federal transparency requirements in January 2021 and provides a patient payment estimator in addition to posting third-party contracted rates.”
Advice for Clinical Laboratories Sharing Test Prices
Hospitals flouting the federal transparency rule is not new. Dark Daily has covered other similar incidences.
Clinical laboratory leaders who oversee multiple labs in healthcare systems may benefit from advice about CMS rule compliance shared in HealthLeaders.
Post a separate file for each provider.
Be “cognizant” of different sets of standard charges for multiple hospitals under one license.
“Today’s healthcare consumer wants to know prices in advance of service. That’s because many have high deductible health insurance plans of, say, $5,000 for an individual or $10,000 for a family as the annual deductible,” said Robert Michel, Editor-in-Chief of Dark Daily and its sister publication The Dark Report.
Clinical laboratory tests may not be the most expensive healthcare service. But they are critical for high-quality hospital care and outcomes. Increasingly, patients want to know in advance how much they will cost. This is true of patients of all generations, from Baby Boomers to Generations X, Y, and Z.
Though burnout due to COVID-19 pandemic plays a role, the future is bright for pathology assistants
Anatomic pathology laboratories are expanding the role of Pathologist Assistants (PathAs) beyond the traditional duties. What does that mean for the future of this critical position? In an article she penned for the College of American Pathologists (CAP), certified pathologists’ assistant Heather Gaburo, MHS, PA(ASCP)cm, explains how PathA responsibilities are evolving to meet the needs of today’s surgical pathology suite and anatomic pathology service.
The PNPL in Woodbridge, Connecticut, funded the study and worked with various pathology laboratories to gather the information presented.
In her paper published in the Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, certified pathologists’ assistant Heather Gaburo (above), wrote “PathAs can fill a wide variety of nontraditional roles in hospital-based and private practice laboratory settings. In the current state of pathology, PathAs are underused in these roles.” (Photo copyright: American Association of Pathologists’ Assistants.)
Traditional Duties of PathAs
The job of the PathA was developed in the 1970s to fill a gap in the pathology workforce. Traditional duties for PathAs include, but are not limited to, tasks such as:
Macroscopic examination (grossing process) and dissection of surgical specimens,
Assisting with intraoperative frozen sections and autopsies.
However, this role is expanding. According Gaburo, the 2021 AAPA membership survey showed that PathAs duties have grown to include tasks such as:
Why have the duties of PathAs broadened so much? According to Gaburo, the COVID-19 pandemic had much to do with it.
COVID-19 Pandemic Leads to New Duties/Burnout for PathAs
“The pandemic increased public awareness of the clinical laboratory by highlighting essential clinical workers with frequent spotlights on COVID-19 testing and staffing shortages, as well as understaffing in the anatomic space,” Gaburo said in an exclusive interview with Dark Daily.
“COVID-19 caused delays in cancer screening and non-emergency surgery, which led to a backlog of cases and delayed cancer presentations. Some studies have shown an increase in late-stage cancer presentations, which can be more time-consuming to diagnose in pathology. Both factors are contributing to higher traditional workloads for PathAs,” she added.
The pandemic, according to Gaburo, also led to increased duties for PathAs. “The pandemic also provided PathAs with opportunities to assist in developing new protocols such as: handling surgical specimens from COVID-19 patients, enhanced safety procedures in the laboratory, and autopsies on SARS-CoV-2 patients.”
But, with this expansion of duties also comes with the threat of burnout. “I believe the pandemic contributed to the burnout of PathAs in several ways. Many labs faced staffing challenges as employees contracted COVID-19, straining the existing workforce,” she noted.
“Some personnel struggled to balance their jobs as essential workers with providing virtual schooling for their children. Workloads increased when surgical cases resumed to catch up with the patient backlog. The incoming specimens were more complex due to delays in screening and advanced disease at presentation,” Gaburo added.
Job retention is an issue also explored by Gaburo in her Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine paper. “Almost half of the laboratory professionals (including PathAs) surveyed by the ASCP addressed being underappreciated, especially compared with nursing and other allied health professionals.” She goes on to cite the risks of worker burnout, including adverse errors that could lead to liability of healthcare organizations.
Gaburo notes that burnout was an issue for PathAs before the COVID-19 pandemic “possibly due to a lack of job diversity and opportunities for growth,” she said. But the COVID-19 pandemic provided a unique opportunity for many PathAs, as well.
“The pandemic, while it brought challenges, also provided opportunities for PathAs to step into new, temporary roles early on when surgeries were limited, and clinics were closed. This job diversification may have helped develop resiliency and decrease burnout.”
PathA Shortage and Educational Opportunities
The COVID-19 pandemic required the entire healthcare industry to be flexible and expand in a short time. This, according to Gaburo, contributed to the growth of PathAs’ duties and could have helped with job retention as well.
When asked whether there was a shortage of PathAs in clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups, Gaburo said, “Though there are many open jobs for PathAs, our profession is fortunate in that we are not experiencing the same type of shortage as other laboratory professions. Instead of struggling to fill vacant positions, it seems many of the PathA openings are newly created positions. In fact, the new graduate employment rate of most, if not all, PathA programs is 100%.”
However, pandemic-related stresses and burnout have led to a shortage of anatomic pathologists, Gaburo notes. But in this she also sees new opportunities for PathAs.
“This is an area where the utilization of pathologists’ assistants has value for pathologists. PathAs, with support and mentorship, can provide assistance in many areas at a lower cost than pathologists, freeing up the pathologists to devote more time to patient care activities.”
As Gaburo concludes in her paper, “PathAs are qualified allied health professionals capable of handling a wide range of nontraditional roles in the pathology laboratory.” She goes on to note how practices can choose to mentor and support their PathAs by offering them mentorship and diverse educational opportunities.
“Over the last 15 years, the number of training programs for PathAs has more than doubled, from seven to 15. Class sizes have also increased to meet the growing demand for admission, which has become more and more competitive.
“The curricula include basic laboratory management classes, and some programs are considering incorporating ‘Business of Pathology’ courses as well. Many programs have expanded their clinical rotation sites, leading to opportunities for experienced PathAs to move into nontraditional teaching roles by becoming preceptors. However, there is still a need for more high-level administrative training opportunities,” Gaburo wrote.
Job satisfaction and retention increases quality for everyone involved. As clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups continue to support COVID-19 testing on top of traditional laboratory requirements, pathologist assistants have proven—and will continue to prove—what a valuable asset they are to clinical pathology practices.
Clinical laboratories continue to test sample delivery by drone as a viable alternative to ground transport
In Switzerland, another clinical laboratory drone delivery service recently launched and it has several unique capabilities. This new pilot project to test the delivery of medical laboratory samples by UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle, aka drone) is being conducted by the Dr. Risch laboratory group and start-up drone company Jedsy.
What makes the Risch/Jedsy drone delivery service unique when compared to other drone delivery services is their drone’s capability to deliver directly to windows, regardless of where that window is. This, according to a Jedsy news release, “makes the transport of samples faster and more environmentally friendly.”
Dr. Risch group has 14 clinical laboratories and eight sample collection locations throughout Switzerland. The Swiss Federal Office of Civil Aviation (FOCA) approved Dr. Risch’s first flight between its lab in Vaduz, the capital of Liechtenstein, to its lab in Buchs St. Gallen, sUAS News reported. Risch began transporting lab samples between those locations on an experimental basis in December of 2022.
The Jedsy glider, as the drone is called, has a distinctive vertical takeoff, hover, and landing capability. Once it achieves a safe altitude, it transitions to forward flight and can travel at speeds up to 150 kilometers per hour or about 93 miles per hour.
All systems on the Jedsy drone are redundant and developed to be fail-safe. A human drone operator follows the flight visually via a livestream connection. Once the drone approaches a building for landing, with the exception of the docking station the entire surrounding area is blurred to ensure the privacy of nearby individuals.
The Jedsy Glider (above) is quieter than other multicopters, according to Jedsy, and is able to dock outside a window or balcony. This enables the convenient loading and unloading of clinical laboratory specimens in any type of weather. The docking station also serves as a charger for the drone’s battery to ensure the craft is available for use at any time. Similar medical laboratory sample drone delivery services have been tested in Switzerland but none with Dr. Risch Labs’ unique window delivery option. (Photo copyright: Jedsy.)
Why Transport Clinical Laboratory Samples by Drone?
“The last two years during the COVID-19 pandemic have shown convincingly how important this service is for the healthcare sector,” explained the medical laboratory group’s founder and CEO, Martin Risch, MD, in the Jedsy press release.
Risch envisions a need for drones in certain medical situations. Dr. Risch currently employs about 50 courier drivers who transport by ground medical samples to regional medical laboratories throughout Switzerland every day.
“If, however, the courier vehicles are stuck in traffic or if they are driving during rush hour, the planned daily routine regarding the analysis and the medical diagnosis is delayed. We hope that this will allow us to offer an even better service, which will ultimately benefit the patients,” Risch stated.
Jedsy has already utilized its glider drone successfully in Africa to deliver laboratory specimens and medicines to remote locations and looks forward to its continued benefits.
“With the new drone, we have already gained important flying experience in Malawi, where over 5,000 flights have been performed as part of the UNICEF drone corridor,” said aerospace engineer Herbert Weirather, founder and CEO of Jedsy, in the press release. “Health centers have already been supplied with critical medicines by Jedsy and the service is being expanded continuously,” he added.
Use of Drones to Deliver Clinical Laboratory Samples Growing Worldwide
Utilizing drones to deliver medical supplies and laboratory specimens is not a new concept and has been tested several times in the past. Dark Daily has previously reported on some of the projects that have been attempted.
The use of drones to deliver clinical laboratory specimens is a rising trend that could be extremely beneficial for healthcare systems, medical professionals, and patients. A number of clinical laboratories in the US and around the world have initiated drone pilot programs, however, there has been little follow-up press coverage about either the success of these efforts or whether they continue to operate.
Nevertheless, faster delivery of laboratory specimens can lead to more timely diagnoses which can potentially lead to better patient outcomes. In the future, it’s likely more clinical laboratories will receive specimens via drones.
Two former FDA commissioners who support changing oversight of laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) say FDA’s regulatory playbook is ‘outdated’
Congress’ attempts to avoid a government shutdown due to a lack of funding presents a final chance this year for two different clinical laboratory bills to be pushed through.
As Dark Daily’s sister publication The Dark Report, noted in “VALID and SALSA Acts Still Pending in Congress,” a standalone vote on either bill is unlikely this year. Instead, they would need to be attached to the larger spending bill. (If you’re not a subscriber to The Dark Report, check out our free trial.)
In an article for STAT, former FDA Commissioners Scott Gottlieb, MD (left), and Mark McClellan, MD, PhD (right), wrote, “The FDA is currently working from an outdated regulatory playbook that has left gaps in its oversight of safety and effectiveness and makes it more difficult to introduce new innovations. The [VALID Act] would strengthen protections for consumers and patients for both diagnostic tests and cosmetics and make it easier for manufacturers to introduce better products.” (Photo copyrights: FDA/American Well.)
Political Parties Negotiating
At press time, a draft spending bill had not yet been introduced to Congress as lawmakers from both political parties negotiate funding levels.
A source told The Dark Report that until legislators hammer out those details, add-ons such as the VALID Act or SALSA are stalled. There is no guarantee either lab measure will be added to the spending bill.
“We don’t have agreements to do virtually anything,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) to reporters on Dec. 6, according to Reuters. “We don’t even have an overall agreement on how much we want to spend,” he added. Reuters reported that Democrats and Republicans in the Senate were $25 billion apart in their proposals.
Congress could also pass a continuing resolution to keep the government open for a short time, which would allow lawmakers more opportunity to negotiate.
Former FDA Chiefs Weigh In
Meanwhile, proponents of the VALID Act have publicly turned the heat up for the bill. For example, STAT recently ran two commentaries—including a joint piece from a pair of former FDA commissioners—in support of the VALID Act.
Currently, LDTs are regulated through the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA). However, supporters of the VALID Act argue that the complexity of modern LDTs deserves more scrutiny.
“The VALID Act would create a consistent standard for all tests, regardless of the kind of facility they were developed in or made in, as well as a modern regulatory framework that’s uniquely designed for the recent and emerging technologies being used to develop tests,” wrote Scott Gottlieb, MD, and Mark McClellan, MD, PhD, in STAT on Dec. 5.
Gottlieb and McClellan served as FDA commissioners from 2017-2019 and 2002-2004 respectively. They both currently serve on various boards for biotech and healthcare companies.
Pathologists, Clinical Lab Directors Express Concerns about VALID Act
Opponents of the VALID Act contend that LDT innovation will be stifled if clinical laboratories, particularly those at academic medical centers, need to spend the time and money to go through formal FDA approval. There is evidence that working pathologists in academic settings have legitimate concerns about the negative consequences that might result if the VALID Act was passed as currently written.
In “Might Valid Act Support Be Waning in Congress?” The Dark Report covered how on June 1 more than 290 pathologists and clinical laboratory directors sent a grassroots letter to a Senate committee asking for a series of concessions to be made for academic medical center labs under the VALID Act.
It is reasonable to assert that the majority of clinical laboratory professionals and pathologists are supportive of the SALSA bill, which would stop the next round of scheduled price cuts—as much as a 15% price reduction to many tests—to the Medicare Part B Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule (CLFS). That is not true of support for the VALID Act, as currently written. Sizeable segments of the diagnostics industry have taken opposing positions regarding passage of that legislation.
For these reasons, both bills will be closely watched in coming weeks as Congress works to fund the federal government while, at the same time, incorporating a variety of other bills under the omnibus bill, which is a considered a “must pass” by many senators and representatives.
Negative margins, a shift to nontraditional care sites, and an increasingly complex logistics environment should prompt clinical labs and anatomic pathology groups to quickly evaluate shipping costs and data analysis
In September, American Hospital Association (AHA) leaders and Kaufman Hall healthcare analysts posted a particularly dismal status update for US hospitals, saying more than half are projected to operate in negative margins for the rest of the year.
As a result, hospital and healthcare leaders are likely facing difficult decisions around traditional operations while actively seeking new partnerships to increase reach and impact of their hospital services, including clinical lab and pathology testing.
Market pressures and revenue opportunities, including nontraditional clinical trial designs, hospital-at-home programs, and innovative care management for patient cohorts, are reshaping healthcare around the US. These and other ensuing shifts will add complexity on top of already burgeoning costs to the physical logistics of clinical laboratory testing and pathology services.
Traditional and Nontraditional: Conduct Assessments of Lab Shipping Costs and Logistics Management
Analyzing data of dynamic logistical inputs will support informed service line decision-making and can ultimately lead to cost savings for clinical labs and health systems, according to Jeff Ledbetter, regional consultant for Cardinal Health OptiFreight Logistics. Ledbetter monitors cost-per-shipment models and trends in service modes for a variety of healthcare providers, networks, and reference laboratories.
“What I’ve seen in the marketplace is that labs have historically built a reliance on physician offices across the country,” Ledbetter explained in an interview with Dark Daily. “What is changing is that labs have diversified their client base and who they now consider customers.” Some of the new inputs include individual consumers, corporations, and schools, in addition to integrated delivery networks (IDNs) and IDN-like entities.
For Dark Daily, regional consultant for Cardinal Health Jeff Ledbetter explained three data trends guiding cost-saving clinical laboratory logistics strategies and benchmarking. These will be important as labs diversify their client base and who they now consider customers. (Photo copyright: Jeff Ledbetter.)
The problem, Ledbetter said, is that lab executives are not able to see the profitability of their customer types and cannot achieve operational efficiencies because of the more complex and dynamic inbound and outbound shipment flow.
Ledbetter describes three ways to analyze lab costs:
1. Cost-per-pack benchmarking,
2. Ratio of test kit outflow to inflow, and
3. Visibility to shipments for workflow management and staffing availability.
With multiple transportation components for each test performed, “a hidden cost element is wasted test kits,” Ledbetter said. “We look at the ratio of specimens sent out but not returned to the lab. Each lab kit passes through multiple modes of transportation. Kits that are deployed but not returned to the lab become waste, resulting in sunken cost. When I talk to reference lab leaders, they understand this is an issue, but they don’t know how to manage it.” Ledbetter points to OptiFreight Logistics’ robust analytics as a critical element to help manage the waste. To increase profitability, the lab can adjust to whom and how it deploys kits to optimize the number of kits with specimens that return to the lab for testing.
A related issue is understanding the ratio of outflow to inflow for identifying profitability of customers. “Managing customers is now shaped by data points such as productive and profitable pickups,” Ledbetter said. For example, a returned shipment with five specimens is more profitable than a shipment with only one specimen.
“We also look at efficiencies that consider the number of lab employees needed to accession specimens, and how delivery timing can maximize efficiency of the testing operation,” Ledbetter said. “This is based on the mode of service and available delivery time.”
The starting point, Ledbetter said, is to gain continuous data-driven insights into the best possible service modes and specimen pack timing that will improve the lab’s operational efficiency, ease staffing constraints, and correlate with business-critical key performance indicators. Amid an ongoing shift to nontraditional care sites, this level of visibility is critical, he added.
Aggressive Adoption of Decentralized Clinical Trial Services Expected
Following a Clinical Operations Roundtable, global management consulting firm McKinsey and Company explored the acceleration of decentralized clinical trials post-pandemic. Experts there define that model as a clinical trial centered around patient needs that improves the patient experience. By design, decentralized clinical trials will use one or more “decentralization elements” based on suitability for their end points, patient populations, and treatments.
“Clinical-trial sponsors creating hybrid protocols are drawing from the menu of decentralization services and technology interventions, such as remote monitoring of vitals, mobile clinics, and home visits,” wrote Life Sciences Practice leader Gaurav Agrawal and others for the McKinsey and Company report, “No Place Like Home? Stepping Up the Decentralization of Clinical Trials.”
“Traditional site visits will still be needed for complex procedures and specialized assessments, such as screenings and magnetic resonance imaging. So smart, hybrid trial designs will make other touchpoints virtual or closer to the patients—for instance, through mobile clinics and primary-care physicians—whenever possible,” states the McKinsey report. The graphic below shows potential trends that will be of interest to hospital and IDN executives, clinical laboratory leaders, and anatomic pathology group administrators.
According to McKinsey and Company research, clinical trial investigators anticipate a threefold increase in remote patient interactions compared to before the pandemic, although that comfort level is lower than during the peak of the pandemic. (Source: McKinsey and Company and Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.)
Since specific laboratory tests mark key points within the care continuum, decentralization creates a more dynamic environment for specimen logistics, making visibility, data analytics, and predictive technology around lab deliveries essential for maximum profitability.
Hospital at Home and Moving Lab to Home
As the healthcare industry shifts to the home as a site of care, legacy patient-provider relationships and business will face disruption, executives at The Chartis Group wrote in a blog post published in September.
“Health systems would do well to consider how they are positioned to deliver care at home as an integrated part of their care models,” Chartis wrote in its blog. “This may include evaluating legacy home health assets and programs, while also rapidly evaluating the business case for launching a hospital-at-home program as part of their broader strategic and operational plans.”
Although outpatient services have taken to the flavor of innovation, hospital-at-home models may not be easy. “Simply extending the reach of hospitals into patients’ homes is unlikely to allow the promising scale or cost savings stakeholders hope for from home hospitalization programs,” according to a recent Health Affairs piece that simplifies many of the issues, such as top-down and bottom-up payment approaches and transformation challenges of which include diagnostics, monitoring, pharmaceuticals, and nursing services among many.
Regardless, changes to hospital operations in the coming year may be inevitable as a result of cost and payer pressures. In the meantime, patient cohorts appear to be a starting point for moving lab to home and potentially stopping the bleeding.
In Arizona, Sonora Quest Laboratories announced an “exclusive service” that is targeted to those living with chronic conditions and cognitive decline. Collaborating with remote healthcare service provider Getlabs in Los Angeles (for blood sample collection services) and Raleigh, NC-based uMETHOD (a precision medicine care plan provider), the service provides on-demand home lab collection, diagnostics, and individualized assessments to help slow early-stage progression of cognitive decline.
The Sonora Quest-Getlabs-uMethod triad is just one example of mobile and remote clinical laboratory services at work in various parts of the country, as The Dark Report recently explained. In a pilot trial of at-home phlebotomy services, laboratory order completion rates for patients jumped up 22.5%—this is significant because many factors can lead patients to discontinue lab orders, such a driving distances, time wasted sitting in a lab’s waiting room, or the inability to travel.
All of these moves describe strategic actions healthcare providers are taking to make existing and new services more accessible and possibly more efficient. Demand for shifting from traditional to nontraditional sites for care will continue to confront clinical labs and anatomic pathology groups with both opportunities and dilemmas. Forward-looking hospital, health system, and reference lab leaders will leverage logistics technologies.
