Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Pediatric Emergency Department Quality of Care: A Focus on Pharmacists and Drug Therapy

Listening to National Public Radio (NPR) on the way to work recently, I heard a very interesting report about Children’s Medical Center in Dallas incorporating full-time emergency department (ED) pharmacists to ensure appropriate and optimal drug therapy is provided to their patients in the ED setting. As a pediatric-trained pharmacist, anytime I hear about organizations embracing the pharmacists’ role in doing even more to support safe and effective drug therapy in this patient population, it’s particularly exciting. And this information was timely, as my colleague Tina Moen, Chief Clinical Officer for Truven Health, just shared her thoughts about the expanding role of the pharmacist in a recent blog post. While pharmacists have known for some time that we have a great deal to contribute to improving patient safety, it’s wonderful to know that others are taking notice now more than ever.

Important, key organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and Emergency Medical Services for Children (EMSC) are focusing much time and effort on improving pediatric services in U.S. emergency departments. This isn’t just for pediatric-specific emergency departments, but for any ED that will see neonatal and/or pediatric patients, whether frequently or infrequently. It’s estimated that up to 25 percent of all ED visits in the U.S. are pediatric patients, and approximately 90 percent of children’s visits to the ED are in non-pediatric hospitals.

EMSC – an organization that works to promote emergency medical services (EMS) and trauma system development at the local, state, regional, and national levels to adequately prepare for care of children – has developed 60 ED pediatric performance measures that comprehensively cover a broad range of assessable activities related to pediatric emergency care. I recommend visiting www.emscnrc.org to learn more about this resource.

As you would expect, some of the 60 EMSC performance measures and their potential outcomes are associated with drug therapy. For example, “timely treatment with anti-epileptic drugs for patients in status epilepticus” is one of the performance measures. The numerator for this performance measure is the number of patients who received an anti-epileptic drug within 10 minutes of arrival, and the required data elements include medication name, patient arrival time, and medication receipt time. As a pharmacist, however, there are many additional steps in this arena to further care and improve outcomes, simply by applying a medication-focused lens. For instance, while the patient may receive an anti-epileptic medication within 10 minutes of arrival, to assess the efficacy of the therapy, we need to know additional information and should do further assessment, including asking:
  • Did the medication provided actually resolve the seizure?
  • Was the right drug administered for this patient?
  • Was the correct dose prescribed?
  • What resource was used to determine the dose? How was it calculated?
  • Was it administered correctly?
Without this further evaluation of medication practice, it’s difficult to affect outcomes and quality.

Other EMSC performance measures address pain management and sedation (e.g., the effective pediatric procedural sedation, treating and reassessing pain). While there are criteria for assessing adequate sedation or adequate pain relief, again, as a pharmacist, it’s clear that more information would lead to marked advancement in patient care. For example, if there were additional documentation required regarding the drug(s) used, the dose(s) used, the route of administration, etc., this would help to assess outcomes. As such, the additional detail can assist in developing protocols to assure adequate sedation or pain control in the majority of situations – a problem patients across the country routine indicate is an area of patient dissatisfaction in HCAHPS results each year. And this additional detail could identify inconsistencies or inadequate drug therapy, including drug dosing that leads to inadequate/ineffective sedation or pain control.

As the NPR story pointed out, not all hospitals will have the resources to hire a full-time, or even a part-time, ED pharmacist to manage pediatric drug therapy in the ED setting. However, a pharmacist’s focus and input have the potential to contribute greatly to improved pediatric emergency care. What has your ED done to be better prepared to treat children? How are pharmacists contributing to better emergency care? Let us know what first steps you have taken, or would like to take, to help your organization and others meet the mark for pediatric and neonatal care in the ED.

Contact me on LinkedIn.

Linda Elbers, Pharm.D.
Clinical Solution Advisor Neonatal/Pediatric Evidence-Based Practice

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Using Big Data to Improve Quality and Reduce Costs

A new report on potential uses of big data for controlling cost in the hospital setting has just been published. The report, from Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, appeared in the July 2014 edition of Health Affairs. Six areas of potential benefit were discussed:




  • High-cost patients
  • Preventable readmissions
  • Triage upon hospital admission
  • Decompensation of clinical condition while in the hospital
  • Adverse events, particularly renal failure, infections, and adverse drug reactions
  • Treatment optimization for those with chronic disease involving multiple organs
As the authors point out, these are six key areas for intervention to lower healthcare costs in the hospital setting, and using more diverse data sources to analyze these opportunities will be useful.

As I reflect on this report, it strikes me that this type of report would have probably not been published several years ago. Healthcare reform, particularly changes in the payment methodology, is driving this type of research. I understand the need to minimize the healthcare spend and agree these are six key areas for research. But, in my opinion, the more important clinical issue is the improvement in the quality of care and probable saving of lives from better care. This is the real issue and opportunity.

All six of these areas are a result of missed opportunities to improve care. These areas are inter-related: high-cost patients are often a result of those who are readmitted multiple times for the same condition, suffer complications, are inappropriately triaged, and have missed diagnoses or have adverse events. Some of these problems can be prevented medically, but some of these issues have broader root causes. Take readmissions – many cases are due to socioeconomic factors such as inability to pay for medications, poor access to outpatient healthcare, or inability to pay for home care. Doctors and hospitals have historically not been paid to consider and manage these non-medical factors that lead to increased medical cost. While no physician wants complications to develop in their patients, hospitals and physicians have never before been penalized if this happened, so there has not been a focus on preventing these complications. New payment incentives are driving these changes and new approaches to care are developing. The promise of higher pay for better value in healthcare of populations, not for providing more services to individuals, is leading to new solutions in these six areas. “Big data,” meaning information about socioeconomic factors, living situations and other new data sources, and then using these data in predictive algorithms, will improve our ability to care for populations, not just treat individuals. 

At Truven Health Analytics, we use data to understand high-cost medical care. As we work with the payers of healthcare, especially large employers, part of our study is high-cost patients. I consistently find these cases to be complex, often involving advanced cancer cases or complicated heart failure cases. Closer oversight of these patients, team-based care, and better methods to predict and manage complications is warranted in many of these cases. Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), with a patient-centered focus and a population health strategy, are promising new approached to improving care. The tragedy of many of these cases however, is the missed opportunity to prevent these cases from ever occurring. If screening guidelines were followed more universally, advanced colon cancer would almost never happen. Heart failure is usually due to multiple heart attacks that could be prevented by paying closer attention to decreasing risk factors. Not all high-cost cases can be prevented, but many could be avoided.

Why, as a nation, are we not doing a better job in managing the health of our population? The most obvious answer is because we aren’t focusing on and prioritizing disease prevention among our population. Up to 70% of healthcare costs are due to preventable disease, but our healthcare system hasn’t been paid to focus on this issue. But change is apparent. The healthcare industry is undergoing more rapid change at this time than I’ve ever seen in my 30+ years of being a doctor. The new clear message is this: the way to manage costs is to improve the quality of care for entire populations, including new ways to prevent disease. Technology in the form of implementing integrated electronic health records, using more diverse data streams, re-designing healthcare delivery, and better predictive analytics are all tools to improve the quality of healthcare in the U.S. This is the right path to reduce costs.

Michael L. Taylor, MD, FACP
Chief Medical Officer

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Smart Use of Urgent Care Helps Consumers, Providers, and Payers Win

Consumers – people like us, our parents, and our children – wait an average of 19 days for an appointment with a family practice doctor, making healthcare difficult to obtain. When you can take three vacations in the time that you’ll wait to see a doctor, something is really wrong. The magic of the Internet – online Skype appointments and iPhone diagnostics – lacks assurance that something dire hasn’t been missed. This is why doctors train, get credentialed, and ‘practice.’

Providers with smart, extended footprints are doing more. Our data shows that over the next five years, demand for after-hours care in some markets can grow 35%, versus a 22% demand growth for overall Emergency Department (ED) care. The newly insured’s younger enrollees – those under 35 – will use the ED twice as often as when they were uninsured. Nationally, 62% of ED visits are urgent, suggesting that at least one in three can be seen elsewhere.  

Payers are concerned that 70% of ED visits are avoidable, and they can save the $1100/visit by redirecting ED patients to lower-cost sites, such as urgent care centers. Urgent care is right for patient demand, good for the provider access, and effective for payers seeking to contain costs.

Winning the race to profit from the demand for urgent care and improve patient experience calls for delivering the right service, in the right market, with the right access.

Linda MacCracken
VP, Advisory Services

Monday, July 14, 2014

Medicaid Program Integrity: Fighting Fraud in a Managed Care Environment

A recently published study by the Government Accounting Office identified a need for states to ramp up their efforts to assure Medicaid program integrity under managed care. Although a majority of Medicaid beneficiaries are now enrolled with managed care organizations (MCOs), and payments for those plans are growing at a faster rate than fee-for-service (FFS) expenditures, some states are just now beginning to shift their program integrity focus from FFS to managed care. 

Traditionally, Medicaid has fought FFS fraud, waste, abuse, and overpayment by applying edits and algorithms to claims in prepayment, and using data mining, investigation, and recovery modeling and analytics in post payment. More recently, Medicaid has stepped up fraud-prevention efforts by expanding the use of prepay predictive analytics and implementing provider credentialing and stringent ongoing provider surveillance, as required under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). 

Best-practice Medicaid agencies have increased their managed care program integrity efforts through more comprehensive oversight of their contracted MCOs. They are collecting and validating encounter data, which allows them to perform advanced analytics to find fraud, waste, and abuse, and they are performing checks to ensure proper Medicaid administration. These agencies examine the full continuum of managed care fraud and abuse vulnerabilities:
  • Traditional FFS issues, such as over-utilization and billing for unnecessary or unused services
  • FFS/Managed Care crossover issues, including double billing and payment for ineligible recipients, such as prisoners and those with certain medical conditions or who are enrolled in certain waiver programs
  • Managed care operational issues, such as inaccurate encounter claims, under-utilization, and cherry-picking patients
  • Managed care financial auditing to ensure that MCOs accurately account for and categorize costs incurred and capitation rates are premised upon correct information
Medicaid agencies need to be diligent stewards of their managed care contracts. While managed care adds new complexities and challenges for monitoring program integrity, the rapid growth in managed care enrollment adds to the urgency of putting in place effective oversight mechanisms. 

Critical Success Factors
As we look across best-practice Medicaid agencies, several critical success factors have been shown to produce significant results for the integrity of the program under managed care. Some of these critical success factors are:
  • Encounter data accuracy and completeness
  • Contract provisions and rules to support managed care payment integrity
  • Capitation payment review
  • Data analytics examining MCO services and comparing MCO utilization to FFS
  • Inter-MCO comparisons and analytics
  • Managed care organization auditing (both financial and operational)
By incorporating such success factors, Medicaid agencies can avoid common fraud, waste, and abuse pitfalls under managed care and improve the integrity of the program.

Truven Health Analytics™ has been helping managed care organizations in all of these dimensions for several years. Our experts have advised 20 states over the past 15 years about managed care encounter data strategy, and our program integrity experts have been delivering recoveries to Medicaid agencies for three decades. In fact, IDC MarketScape recently named us an industry leader in fraud, waste, and abuse solutions.*

For more information, please contact me at david.nelson@truvenhealth.com.

David Nelson
Vice President, Market Planning & Strategy


*IDC MarketScape: U.S. Healthcare Payer Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Solutions 2014 Vendor Analysis

Thursday, July 10, 2014

Doctors and Data: Working Toward the Triple Aim

Change is rapidly occurring in most aspects of the delivery of healthcare in this country. One of the most promising developments is the understanding that healthcare should strive to achieve the “Triple Aim” – better care for individuals, improved overall health of our communities, and lowered costs. The Triple Aim goals are about delivering better value in healthcare, not just delivering more care. The implications for our healthcare providers are enormous and may represent a fundamental change in the way care is delivered and paid. And the data needs are far greater than before – this represents a major challenge.

Many experts are advocating for new data steams to help find people at risk for diseases, even using non-traditional types of data, such as credit card purchases or use of social media, to define risk levels. Privacy advocates are adamantly opposed, and these debates will continue. Many employers have used medical claims data to understand population risk, but even using these data is worrisome to privacy advocates. Recent federal government revelations about NSA data probes into personal lives have generated much criticism, and I think the outcome will be more controls over the use of data. I think the “new data streams” will be narrowly defined. But the good news is new healthcare delivery models are finding ways to effectively use data to improve patient care.

In the new models of delivery, as seen in the patient centered medical home concept (PCMH), a healthcare team, captained by the physician, now has the responsibility to care for a defined population, not just the patients who show up for an appointment. Physicians are financially incented to provide better care. This drives the need for data, and health records need to find “gaps in care,” such as overdue cancer screening exams and missing lab tests. A PCMH team member is empowered to reach out to patients to help them get the care that is needed. The team is responsible for (and incented to provide) the healthcare needed in all phases of a person’s life. This requires integrated data from all settings – all outpatient encounters, hospital data, and follow-up care, including rehabilitation and nursing home and hospice care. Integrating all these data together will have tremendous potential to improve care. As an HIE contractor, we have constructed platforms that are delivering this kind of integrated data, so we know it’s possible today, and we’re working with hospitals toward the same end. Data integration will be necessary in order to understand when high value care is being delivered by hospitals, physicians, and all healthcare providers.

But more than finding gaps in care; the new model incents better care. Take a simple example of diabetes: the medical evidence shows lower mortality and morbidity in those who achieve blood pressure, lipid, and glucose control compared to those who are not well-controlled. New payment methods will pay physicians at a higher rate when their patients achieve better control of their diabetes. In this scenario, payment is more complicated, and now lab data must be analyzed to determine payment.

Paying more for better value has promise, but also many challenges. Defining better care for diabetes can be done, but what metrics should be used in other conditions?  Physicians see literally hundreds of different conditions in the course of their work with patients; how should higher value be defined in other medical and surgical conditions? Is there value is ordering appropriate radiology exams and forgoing inappropriate tests? How can that be measured and compensated?

Medicare policy is driving much of the change in payment mechanisms, but large employers are also asking about value. Employers are tired of paying for medical treatments that don’t work or are unnecessary, and are looking for cooperative relationships with providers to incent better care. Hospitals are adjusting to focusing on providing better care, not more care. The transition is turbulent, but the result has the potential of achieving the Triple Aim. We will not achieve these results in a fee-for-service system. The changes we’ve seen in healthcare over the last decade are the start of real reform that is badly needed, and we need to continue driving change toward a higher value system. Innovative use of new data streams is vital to this effort.

Michael L. Taylor, MD, FACP
Chief Medical Officer

Physicians Receptive to Using Data to Drive Value-Based Care

It’s not na├»ve to posit that physicians genuinely want the best for their patients. Historically, this was validated by reputation within the community, peer referral patterns, and personal achievement standards. The advent of technology and commensurate analytics enabled the collection of both process and outcome metrics. With the transition from volume- to value-based reimbursement physicians are in a unique position to define the metrics used to characterize high-value best practice.

It has been suggested that few physicians are actively participating in value-based reimbursement. Yet, the very high adherence to inpatient medical and surgical core measure sets illustrates the effective collaboration between hospital staff and physician community. It also highlights the adage “we manage what we measure.” When physicians understood the importance and visibility tied to core measures, they readily engaged in work flow solutions likely to benefit their patients.

Physicians know better than most what defines meaningful care for their patients. Today, especially in the outpatient arena, value is typically determined by adherence to preventive care guidelines. With the tsunami of process and outcome metrics likely to be available in the coming years, physician insight and perspective will be critical in both selecting relevant outcome measures and establishing bold but realistic benchmarks. In the meantime, thoughtful collaboration with CIOs, CMIOs, and CMOs in the successful development, implementation and use of clinical pathways across the continuum can ensure best practice and set the standard for true value-based care.

Michael R. Udwin, MD, FACOG
National Medical Director

Thursday, July 3, 2014

Using Data to Improve Healthcare

As other have pointed out repeatedly, our healthcare system is badly broken. In fact, we don’t have a healthcare system in this country – it’s a series of independent businesses, often competing with each other in the goal of making more profit. The three constituencies in the healthcare business are the customers (patients), the providers (doctors and hospitals), and the payers (health plans, employers and the government). These three groups all have perfectly misaligned incentives. Patients want care at minimal cost, providers make more money by providing more care (whether it is needed or not), and payers want to minimize payments. The payment mechanism drives more care at higher cost, and the result is the U.S. pays 18% of its GDP for healthcare – more than twice as much as any other country on the planet.

How does smarter use of data help this picture? In my opinion, more intelligent use of data is an important part of the answer. Data is a powerful tool to help physicians make better decisions. In the hospital setting, physicians should have access to ALL of a patient’s medical record, not just information gathered during a single hospital stay. In most Emergency Departments, doctors often don’t have unfettered access to outpatient medical records that may provide important clues to making correct diagnoses. Tests are needlessly repeated, incorrect medications are given and diagnostic errors are made all too often.  Electronic medical records (EMRs) should be helping this problem, but unfortunately most EMRs are simply digitized versions of the old paper record. We need EMRs to be longitudinal electronic health records, aggregating all of a person’s health information into a single record to be used by all providers of care. A unified health record then needs analytic tools to be able to use the comprehensive record to improve care, provide guidelines for evidence-based medical care, prevent incorrect medication use, stop dosing errors, and have prompts in the analytic tool to stop repeat tests and x-rays- in sum, improve the care.

A unified, single, health record for a patient would be a great tool to help improve care, but in the U.S., we have more fundamental problems than a lack of accessible data. In today’s residency training programs, physicians should be taught how to use the data and EMRs to make better decisions. An evaluation of a patient should always start with the physician sitting with the patient, taking a probing history by knowing what questions to ask, and how to elicit symptoms. This information is supplemented by knowing how to properly examine a patient and understand how to put all the information together to formulate a diagnosis. We cannot rely on an EMR or CT scans to do this job – it must start with a thorough history and a proper physical. One of the most impactful lessons I was taught in residency was that if I finished taking a patient’s medical history and yet still didn’t have a series of probable diagnoses to consider, I needed to take more history. Unfortunately, in today’s hospitals, finding a diagnosis is all too often done by ordering more testing, and in a fee-for-service payment environment, more testing means more revenue. More procedures mean more revenue. Hospitals and physicians should be paid for providing a higher level of quality, not by volume. 

I am a strong advocate of using medical data and providing better analytic tools to help physicians and patients, but tools are just tools. Physicians and other caregivers need these tools to improve care, but providers of care also need to listen to patients, think critically in making diagnostic assessments, care passionately about improving care, and use sound judgment at all times. They cannot be effective in a fee-for-service world. Providers do need to improve the care they provide, but the U.S. needs a sound healthcare strategy to solve our issues. Technology is part of that solution.

Michael L. Taylor, MD, FACP
Chief Medical Officer

Monday, June 30, 2014

Getting to Enterprise Analytics in the Government Healthcare Sector Begins With a Modern, Connected Data Warehouse

Enterprise analytics is a hot buzz phrase these days. What used to be an analyst-only topic has moved to the executive level. And it’s no secret that the idea of analyzing disparate data from across an organization is becoming increasingly important in all of healthcare today – perhaps even more so in the government sector.

Policymakers are talking about it, elected officials want it, and taxpayers expect that it’s already happening.

Meanwhile, state agencies, such as Medicaid and Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), are facing an urgent need to curtail rising costs, boost efficiencies, report accurate information, and improve quality of care.

To achieve that, they need to see not only the big-picture of program data, but also to understand the intricacies of population health and even coordinate patient-level care across agencies. And thanks to Affordable Care Act-driven concepts, like ACOs and risk-based contracts, it’s all at a tipping point.

The key lies in an interoperable data hub – a modern, connected warehouse that  facilitates the flow of data and reporting, automates workflows, and helps staff be more efficient while providing the right decision-making knowledge to the right stakeholders. 

Of course, as this type of warehouse is developed, particular attention must be paid to data integrity – because without that, enterprise analytics are meaningless.

The development should be guided by an iron-clad master data management process, ensuring that all data values being collected and connected speak the same language. This results in a data warehouse that truly becomes a single source of truth across departments and agencies.

At Truven Health, we see the warehouse development process unfolding with these steps:
  • Identify stakeholders and “champions”
  • Assemble strong executive leadership
  • Create a shared vision of the modern data warehouse
  • Formalize the governance structure
  • Establish a clear decision-making process
  • Evaluate the governance system and adapt as necessary
  • Maintain transparent communications throughout development
  • Identify an enterprise reference model as part of the information architecture
After the enterprise warehouse is developed, we can then apply the all-important, advanced metrics and modeling. Just a few of the typical analytics and applications we recommend include:
  • Calculations for episode grouping
  • Hierarchical Condition Categories (HCC) score calculations
  • Risk stratifications
  • A measures engine
  • Practice-to-cohort comparisons
  • Disease registries
Ultimately, the end result will be an ultra-connected depth and breadth of useful data that can be streamlined and analyzed at all levels, from a policy analyst to a caseworker on the front lines.

Rick Williams
VP Data Warehouse

Friday, June 27, 2014

PULSE Healthcare Survey Captures Opinions Despite Communication Preferences

The perceived risk of taking painkillers is an issue for people of all ages and communication preferences. Our polling shows that one in three adults only have a cell phone instead of both a cell phone and a land line. This is especially important as we collect opinions from the more mobile Millennials and Generation Xers, as well as the more traditional Baby Boomers and Seniors, who often have cell phones in addition to land lines.
 
Every other month, the Truven Health Analytics™-NPR Health Poll surveys approximately 3,000 Americans to gauge attitudes and opinions on a wide range of healthcare issues. Poll results are reported by NPR on the health blog Shots and on air. Complete survey results are also posted. NPR’s reports on the findings are archived.

The Truven Health Analytics-NPR Health Poll is powered by the Truven Health Analytics PULSE® Healthcare Survey, an independently funded multi-modal (land line, cell phone, and internet) survey that collects information from more than 82,000 U.S. households annually. 3,010 survey participants were interviewed from May 1–15, 2014, and the article, Americans Weigh Addiction Risk When Taking Painkillers, reflects their responses. The margin of error is +/- 1.8 percent.

The biggest advantage of using multi-modal survey over strictly land-line telephone surveys is that fewer and fewer people are using land-line telephones. By employing a multi-mode approach to the PULSE Healthcare Survey that includes land-line phone, cell phone, and internet, Truven Health is ensuring that all segments of the population are included in the sample.

By 2010, 21% of the adult population used cell phones exclusively. By 2012, this number increased to 30% and has continued to increase. Additional research suggests that the 18-35 year old population is the largest group of cell phone “only” or cell phone “mostly” users. The 18-35 age group is becoming more difficult to reach and other methods must be used besides land-line telephones.

People have expanded their means of communication, and our work  reflects consumer preference in our polling  sampling methodology. As people leverage technology  to communicate in many different ways, it‘s important that surveys develop sampling methodologies that are broadly inclusive. The PULSE Healthcare Survey is doing just that.

George Popa
Research Scientist, PULSE Healthcare Survey

Thursday, June 19, 2014

Five Things Employers Want from Health Plan Reporting


These days, health plans are under pressure to deliver more comprehensive and reliable information to their employer clients.

After all, population health is on everyone’s radar, and employers are trying to keep a tight rein on rising costs. Plus, with all the talk of healthcare Big Data, employers have higher expectations of the kinds of information health plans can provide. Information transparency and combining financial and clinical data from multiple sources are becoming critical.

In other words, traditional reporting isn’t going to cut it anymore.

But what, specifically, do employers want from health plan reports?

Based on our partnerships with over 150 of the nation’s largest employers — including 25 percent of Fortune 500® companies — Truven Health experts have compiled the following list of the five most important things employers want when it comes to the health plan reporting.
  1. Acknowledge their different needs. Step away from one-size-fits-all reporting. Each employer client will want to see different slices of data and varying levels of analysis to fit their specific business questions. Reports need to be flexible enough to meet those diverse requests and stakeholders.
  2. Help them educate and inform their senior management team. Benefits managers need to be able to prove to the Powers That Be that the company’s investments in employee health are worth it, and health plan reporting is an important part of that.
  3. Provide consistent, accurate, and timely reporting. Employers want data that they can trust, and they want it quickly.
  4. Show them how to compare themselves to the outside world. Reporting solutions should allow employer clients to compare costs and other points of interest to national and regional benchmarks, so they can identify areas for improvement and recognize successes.
  5. Be consultative and creative. This is perhaps the most notable change in what employers need today versus what they needed in the past. Today, it’s not just about the numbers on a spreadsheet. Employers need those numbers to be meaningful and useful as they try to solve new challenges. And it’s now the health plan’s job to offer guidance along with the numbers.
In short, plans that can provide data and analytics that are flexible and trustworthy, and that answer the “So what?” and the “Now what?” will be the best-positioned to become problem-solving partners that employers can’t live without.

For more details about these five employer reporting needs, download our latest insights brief.

Jennifer Huyck
Vice President, Analytics and Consulting