A new future for healthcare in Huntingdon

How J.C Blair is addressing the national challenges on rural health facilities

By EMMA HANNAN

A familiar situation

In a Huntingdon Chamber of Commerce event the morning of June 6, 2018, J.C Blair Hospital CEO Adam Dimm repeatedly assured the Huntingdon community that, come what may, the Hospital and Huntingdon were in “good hands”.

J.C Blair Hospital, the only hospital in the immediate service area, faces acquisition before the end of the month, and the situation is reminiscent of one a few years ago to many Huntingdon residents. “No one was willing to risk losing money in 2012 and 2013,” Dimm reminds the audience in his Wednesday morning presentation, referring to the closure J.C Blair would have faced had Pinnacle Health not taken an “enormous risk” on the hospital. In 2018, however, the impending acquisition gives J.C Blair more control than in the last acquisition.  

The plan, according to Dimm, was always for a Pinnacle Health affiliation to be an intermediate step to another larger acquisition. Although the details of the ultimate partnership have changed since the initial contract, next steps for J.C Blair are still going according to the original plan. No partner will be named until July 1, 2018.

A national challenge

Regardless of the eventual partner, which will officially merge with J.C Blair in October 2018, J.C Blair administration has a comprehensive plan to improve value to both individual patients and the whole community. CEO Dimm explained that the issues J.C Blair is facing are not unique to the Hospital or even to Huntingdon County, and the need for a merger is not a result of this particular hospital. Rural healthcare in any state is facing financial pressure, and J.C Blair is committing to shaping the nationwide future of rural healthcare through a series of key innovations.

Of the 46 rural healthcare providers in Pennsylvania, half are operating with negative margins, meaning that they do not earn a profit. Dimm attributes this characteristic in part to the fee-for-service model, which incentivizes hospitals to have as many patients being treated inside the hospital as possible. Financially, this model is not beneficial to the patient nor the provider in rural settings with low volumes of patients.

“When you don’t have volume in a rural community, you don’t have revenue to cover your costs,” Dimm explains. Any hospital has a certain amount of fixed expenses to make services available to patients, but when there are not enough patients to cover those expenses, profit margins suffer.

Despite these setbacks, J.C Blair has been able to accomplish a lot since the initial Pinnacle acquisition years ago. Since 2016, for example, the number of walk-in visits at the J.C Blair Convenient Care Center has far surpassed the amount of Emergency Room visits, meaning that the Hospital has been able to address the health needs of community members in way that is more affordable to them at the Convenient Care Center. The J.C Blair Cath Lab has also been a phenomenal source of success for the health system, serving over 610 patients since May 31, 2017. The theme of higher value in patient services will continue as J.C Blair prepares to merge with a larger partner.

What will healthcare in Huntingdon look like after the merger?

J.C Blair is among the first rural hospitals in the nation to implement a value-focused model instead of a volume-focused model to care for patients. Dimm emphasized the importance of understanding the socioeconomic factors that determine a patient’s or community’s health–including education, employment, income, family and social support, and safety–and then implementing systems that will help address barriers that Huntingdon residents face in these areas.

The Hospital’s Transformation Vision includes steps that J.C Blair will take to better meet the needs of Huntingdon residents. Community Health Workers will overcome some barriers to healthcare access that patients currently face, and will broaden the population that healthcare professionals will be able to serve. Dimm also plans to utilize the County’s paramedical professionals to fill some roles previously filled by home-visiting registered nurses.

Technology plays a large role in the Transformation Vision. J.C Blair hopes to expand telehealth programs to bridge the gap between healthcare professionals and patients, as well as to provide on-line educational opportunities to well patients. Technology will serve as one of many “touchpoints” the Hospital hopes to establish throughout the community to give more options for people to be proactive about their health.

Dimm repeatedly assures us that the community can be very confident about the changes ahead. The new model will not only benefit J.C Blair and its new partner affiliate as a business, but will drastically improve outcomes for each patient and the community at large. The Hospital hopes to eventually make health services so accessible in Huntingdon that people will have no choice but to go to those services as soon as it occurs to them to do so. With new innovations that are already underway, such as the Population Health Leadership Team, the Integrated Care Management Team, advocacy for high-speed broadband, collaboration with Juniata College students and an online health portal (launching August 2018), we can see the commitment that the Hospital is making to the residents of Huntingdon County.

Recommend0 recommendationsPublished in Local health news

Related Articles

How We Transformed Public Health Data for COVID-19 and the Futur

Data is the lifeblood of good public policy, of successful public health efforts, and of any effective emergency response. Especially during an unprecedented emergency like COVID-19, tackling the public health challenges we confront at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) requires accurate data, in as close to real time as possible. Over the past year, HHS has completely transformed how it collects, aggregates, and analyzes data for a challenge like COVID-19. These efforts will have a lasting effect on how our country deals with public health data, leaving us better prepared for future outbreaks and other health challenges.
One of the key elements of a response to a health emergency like a pandemic is knowing the burden on healthcare systems—especially the capacity hospitals have for treating patients. But, before the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government simply did not have a way to know how many patients with a given virus are in hospitals across America.
Moreover, there were many other data points that decision-makers, responders, and analysts across the federal government and state governments would benefit from having access to: levels of crucial supplies, case counts, death rates, demographic information about patients, health expenditure data, and more. These data come from many different sources: federal agencies, state governments, hospitals, other health providers, laboratories, and more. Different federal agencies collect data in different ways, sometimes from sources that conflict.
So, at the end of March, the White House Task Force and leaders at HHS realized that we needed a single data hub: a place where all this data could be securely gathered and accessed by those who needed it. That was the genesis of HHS Protect, an unprecedented system and set of capabilities, powered by various private sector technologies, for sharing, parsing, housing, and accessing COVID-19 data. It was constructed in less than 10 days by dedicated public servants  in the HHS Office of the Chief Information Officer and an integrated, cross-agency COVID-19 federal response team, with partners across the federal government.
Putting all this data in one place was an incredible achievement. But just as important was ensuring we had the data we needed feeding into HHS Protect—like hospital capacity data.
The federal government previously did have some ways to track what’s going on in hospitals. From 2006 to 2016, HHS’s Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) ran a program called HAvBED. HAvBED requested hospitals that were members of ASPR’s Hospital Preparedness Program to provide their bed capacity on an annual basis and, upon ASPR’s request, to provide an update on how many beds were empty and available in the event of a disaster. This was a limited capability, however, only suitable for certain short-term emergencies. ASPR discontinued the program in 2016 because it imposed a burden on top of capacity metrics hospitals were tracking without providing much value to the federal government. In 2019, ASPR put out a standing opportunity for companies to propose new technologies and products that could help with these data challenges. 
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has a program called the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN), through which hospitals report data on healthcare-associated infections, as part of our work to understand and combat antimicrobial resistance. Hospitals are required to report infection data under Medicare regulations, but before the pandemic, NHSN did not capture data on capacity, occupancy, supplies, staffing, or other patient-specific measures.
As COVID-19 spread in the United States in March, it became clear that there was a real risk that hospitals in certain areas could become overwhelmed. We needed data about where COVID-19 patients were filling hospitals in order to understand how to allocate resources like PPE and federal healthcare personnel and to understand the spread of the virus by geography and patient age.
Multiple options were created to start capturing information from hospitals. CDC added the ability for hospitals to report into NHSN how many COVID-19 patients they had. Over the next few months, approximately 3,000 hospitals were eventually reporting this information into NHSN. Second, through the ASPR funding opportunity, we granted a contract to a company called Teletracking, which many hospitals use to report data to states and for other needs, so hospitals could begin reporting their number of COVID-19 patients that way. Hospitals were also using this system to report COVID-19 patient burden in order to demonstrate eligibility for HHS’s $175 billion provider relief fund. Because many states were requiring hospitals to report the same information being requested by the federal response, we also created a third option, to allow states to report on behalf of their hospitals.
Regardless of which of the three methods a hospital used, all of the data was consolidated into a unified hospital data set in HHS Protect. These data streams provided valuable visibility into needs across the country, and the data from them was widely available to federal responders and state decision-makers because of HHS Protect.
But, while many hospitals reported some data, the reporting was inconsistent and incomplete. We also needed data to be reported every day in order to have an actionable picture of stresses on hospitals across the country. When FEMA and HHS were working to efficiently route personal protective equipment to the places it was most needed, we needed granular data. This was a new need: For well-known diseases that have a long history, and especially before technology made near real-time reporting a realistic possibility, it was typical to rely on estimated data. But for a novel pandemic like COVID-19, where we are constantly monitoring new trends, we needed consistent reporting of actual data, not estimates, and the technology to do that existed.
Then, in the summer, another need arose: We had been shipping supplies of the one FDA-authorized treatment for COVID-19, remdesivir, through state health departments to hospitals, based on the data we had on hospital burden, because remdesivir is only for hospitalized patients. But when the science became clear that remdesivir was most effective early on in a hospital admission, we needed more granular data, and we needed to understand the inventory of remdesivir that hospitals had on hand.
Adding that kind of specific data field to CDC’s NHSN was going to take several weeks. Through Teletracking, it could be added in less than three days. Therefore, to get the data we needed most rapidly, CDC recommended that we shift all hospital reporting into Teletracking.
At the time we made that change, on July 15, about two-thirds of hospitals were reporting through Teletracking each week (some directly to us, and some routing the data through their state health departments). Over the course of this year, we’ve worked with hospitals and states and added new incentives to raise that number significantly. By the end of April, 65 percent of hospitals were reporting at least some data, with about 20 percent of hospitals reporting all of the requested fields every day of the week. By the beginning of 2021, 99 percent of hospitals are reporting not only weekly, but seven days a week, and 97 percent are reporting every required field, seven days a week. Having near-real-time updates about the number of COVID-19 patients in every hospital in the country is an incredible result—leaps and bounds beyond where we were at the beginning of the pandemic.
The system we’ve created also offers an even more efficient pathway forward. While the primary goal of Teletracking and HHS Protect has been to increase reporting rates, there are also technology options to reduce the burden of hospitals having to manually report data each day. Around 70 percent of hospitals now have the ability to have patient data electronically submitted directly from their electronic health records or other information systems, and we now have pilot projects to automate the reporting of data on supplies like PPE as well.
All this data can inform not just decisions about allocating key therapeutics, but plenty of other decisions by the federal government and state and local governments. In addition to the hospital data, HHS Protect offers access to more than 200 other data sets, from private-sector sources, federal agencies like the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, CDC, and the Health Resources and Services Administration, and from state partners.
HHS Protect is a solution to a problem that has stymied HHS and government agencies for a long time: how to bring together the huge amounts of data we already have in usable ways to generate useful and actionable insights. To some extent, this was made possible by the emergency we faced. One common barrier to aggregating data from different sources is that agencies can sometimes be protective of their own data and reluctant to go through the work of signing complex data use agreements. The pandemic broke down these barriers and reminded us that we’re all better off when we collaborate and make use, safely and securely, of all the data we have.
Protect makes these diverse data sources available not just across the federal government—to thousands of authorized and vetted users at HHS agencies alone—but for state, territorial, and tribal governments too, including state public health officials and COVID-19 support staff for governors.
Significant amounts of data from Protect is also now available to the public. If you’ve perused, for instance, Covidtracking.com or the New York Times tool for learning how full hospitals are in your area, you’re drawing on HHS Protect-aggregated data.
Executing on this mission required a dedicated data team. HHS and other federal partners created a new, unique interagency team—the Data Strategy and Execution Workgroup—to create and manage the common data and analysis for the federal COVID-19 response, with experts from 13 agencies and components across the federal government. The team has a unified quality assurance process to review and correct errors in data, and it created governance processes to ensure all stakeholders have the data they need. This kind of unified data strategy has been essential to our success and will be a best practice in responses going forward.
Having all this data in one place has boosted our response efforts in diverse ways. Through Teletracking and HHS Protect, hospitals now report regularly on their stocks of PPE. Some hospitals themselves didn’t even keep track of this kind of data before the pandemic, and having it easily at hand for multiple stakeholders can inform decisions to ship PPE by the federal government and the states. Through an effort called Project Greenlight, we specifically monitor PPE data for trouble spots. If, for instance, it looks like a hospital has just a day’s worth of PPE left or has a severe staffing shortage, we can get in touch with the state or the facility to understand whether that’s a data error or a real emergency shortage.
PPE and staffing data are just two elements of a tool created by ASPR, the Healthcare Resiliency Control Tower, which provides states with the data needed to understand the status of their healthcare systems all in one place. Drawing on data that’s been available in HHS Protect for some time, the dashboard offers a full range of data points about how hospitals and long-term-care facilities may be under stress: bed capacity, ICU capacity, drug availability, staffing levels, positive tests, and PPE stocks.
In the event there is a serious shortage of, say, PPE, we are then in a position to work with states and hospitals to ensure they can get what they need from commercial distributors—whose supply chains we also have visibility into through systems built for the next-generation Strategic National Stockpile—or, if necessary, from the revamped and refilled Strategic National Stockpile itself.
HHS Protect isn’t just about hospitals—far from it. For instance, the testing task force working under Admiral Giroir uses it to access all of the data relevant to testing all in one place: daily test results and all of the related information from every state, how many swabs and reagents states have, where private-sector testing supplies are headed, and more. States like Missouri are using HHS Protect as their state data dashboard, and teams working on the placement of Operation Warp Speed’s vaccine clinical trials used HHS Protect Data as well.
Together, all of these data efforts represent what ought to be the future of federal public health data work: where the federal government is not directly collecting data itself, but working as an aggregator of the oceans of data already being generated.
The days of building customized programs and modules to monitor discrete public health threats is coming to an end. In a world where healthcare providers are generating so much data on their own, we need to be streamlining and automating reporting. In a world where Big Data informs so much of what the private sector does, the public sector has to be making maximum use of the incredible data resources at our disposal and working with private-sector technologies to make the data more useful and available. That is exactly what HHS Protect does.
Running such a system requires financial commitments, leadership buy-in, and the dedication of many talented public servants, but it is an incredibly valuable investment. The better data capabilities we’ve developed over this past year have not just enhanced the efficiency of our response but actually saved lives. That is the goal of all public health efforts, and the future of data in supporting that work is now brighter than ever.

Posted in: Emergency Preparedness and Response, Health Data
Tagged:

Strategy for Equitable Change: Intergroup Contact Theory

This is part of the Salud America! Achieving a Cohesive Culture for Health Equity in Latino and All Communities: A Research Review» Intergroup Contact Theory At the individual level, the contact hypothesis of social psychology, also called the intergroup contact theory, proposes that members of one group, having incomplete or inaccurate ideas about members of …
The post Strategy for Equitable Change: Intergroup Contact Theory appeared first on Salud America.

4 Reasons to Think Structuralist, Instead of Individualistic, to Improve Health Equity

Every person is a unique individual. But if you look closely, you’ll see each person lives, learns, works, and plays within social and environmental conditions that influence their individual health and wealth. Some people face health barriers because of structural and systemic policies that curb their access to quality housing, transportation, medical care, food, jobs, …
The post 4 Reasons to Think Structuralist, Instead of Individualistic, to Improve Health Equity appeared first on Salud America.

Mechanism of Discrimination: The Problem of System Justification

This is part of the Salud America! Achieving a Cohesive Culture for Health Equity in Latino and All Communities: A Research Review» System Justification Is a Key Mechanism People Use to Excuse Discrimination among People of Color, Those in Poverty System justification is the label for a social psychology theory asserting that people will rationalize …
The post Mechanism of Discrimination: The Problem of System Justification appeared first on Salud America.

How a Smoke-Free Policy Protects Apartment Tenants from Secondhand Smoke, COVID-19

Does someone smoke in your apartment complex? You might be inhaling your neighbor’s secondhand smoke. Inside multifamily dwellings, secondhand smoke can travel through doorways, halls, windows, ventilation systems, electrical outlets, and gaps around fixtures and pipes. Secondhand smoke, already a cancer-causing killer of millions, also might contribute to the spread of coronavirus. While there is …
The post How a Smoke-Free Policy Protects Apartment Tenants from Secondhand Smoke, COVID-19 appeared first on Salud America.

Responses