IOM calls for education innovation fund
Its report asks Congress to use existing funds to reward
new approaches to care, but some say diverting money could hurt
institutions.
By
Myrle Croasdale, AMNews staff.
Aug. 4, 2003.
Congress should take a portion of the Medicare indirect
medical education payments it makes to academic medical centers and create
a fund that only finances innovative education, according to a new report
from the Institute of Medicine.
But, the idea is meeting some resistance among medical educators.
Jordan Cohen, MD, president of the Assn. of American Medical Colleges,
greeted the report with caution.
"The development of an 'education innovation fund' is an admirable
concept and one the AAMC supports. However, we strongly disagree with the
method the IOM proposes to create this fund," Dr. Cohen said in a prepared
statement.
IOM committee members said they intensely debated the funding
recommendation, which was one of a raft of proposals aimed at modernizing
academic medical centers and improving patient care, knowing it would be
controversial.
|
Payments for indirect medical education are
estimated at $2.6 billion for 2003.
|
"The section on financing is the most unusual, most provocative part of
the report," said IOM task force member Nancy-Ann DeParle, a senior
adviser for JP Morgan Partners and a former HCFA administrator. "Most
reports talk of the struggles of academic health centers and the need for
more funding. We say redirect the money we have."
The report, "Academic Health Centers: Leading Change in the 21st
Century," proposes that Congress create a competitive grant fund using a
portion of the indirect medical education payments it doles out each year.
In 2003 those payments were estimated at $2.6 billion. This ongoing fund
would support such educational innovations as the use of clinical
information systems and testing of new educational approaches in hospital
and nonhospital settings.
Dr. Cohen said teaching institutions already have IME funds budgeted
for existing educational needs. Segregating a portion for developing new
training modes would be crippling for the centers.
"Academic health centers struggle every day to survive in an
environment of diminishing resources," he said. "IME payments are already
down 30% over the past five years; payments by Medicaid and private
insurers have been constrained; and funding for Title VII health
professions programs may be cut by 93%. If IME payments are slashed
further, the very infrastructure upon which our nation's health care
system rests may well begin to falter. For this reason, we hope the IOM
will come forward with a more realistic funding alternative."
A sense of urgency
DeParle said it was urgent that academic health centers begin working
toward the report's goals and not wait for new funds.
"Academic health centers aren't moving quickly enough, and the country
has a strong interest in seeing this happen," she said.
She said financial incentives were needed if the slow response to a
1999 IOM report on medical errors was any indication of hospitals' ability
to change.
The report recommended medical centers adopt computerized physician
order entry systems. Since the report was released, DeParle said only 2%
to 5% of hospitals have made such a change.
Some academic medical centers have taken steps toward the
interdisciplinary, team-based patient care the report seeks to support,
but this is not widespread.
"We heard anecdotes during this process from doctors who said they'd go
on rounds as a resident and have no idea what the nurses knew or didn't
know and that they didn't have any real understanding of a team-based
process of care," DeParle said.
If the IOM report's recommendations were in place, doctors would start
residencies working side by side with nurses, pharmacists and other health
care professionals, she said, and have an understanding of the differences
in their knowledge bases and expertise.