Health is meant to be a proaction

The other day I tweeted healthcare is a reaction; my intended connotation was that this is bad. But I’ve been thinking.

Of course it is a reaction. We want it to be so. We need it to be so. Have a health problem? Get it cared for. 

The fact that healthcare is a reaction is not the problem. The problem, truly, is that health is a reaction. A subtle, but important, difference.

Health is a reaction.

This is the fundamental issue facing healthcare delivery (especially as we enter the era of accountable care). How do provider organizations transition from healthcare to health?

Good question.

It is obligatory to note the environmental factors stacked against this thought: reimbursement models, years of medical practice, disinterested public, billions of infrastructure dollars, and as always (especially in healthcare) the status quo, among others.

The transition is possible. While some of these decisions are being made because “it’s the right thing to do,” widespread transition will not occur without proper economic incentives. Healthcare will always be necessary–probably in ways consistent with its existence today.

But health is meant to be a proaction. There is a burgeoning market for health creation assistance. What can be good for patients can be good for organizations, too.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s