Skip to main content

"76 Percent Of Consumers Grade Health Care As 'C' Or Below"

A few days ago we learned that, as a group, hospital employees are pretty unhappy. Well, their customers are no happier.

Key Findings from Deloitte LLP's 2010 U.S. Survey of Health Care Consumers:
  • 76 percent of consumers grade the system as “C” or below.
  •  48 percent believe that more than half of health care money is wasted.
  •  Less than a quarter (23 percent) of consumers believes they understand how the health care system works.
  •  42 percent of consumers surveyed support government-required health insurance compared with 38 percent who say they are against it.
  •  However, 42 percent say they would choose an employer-sponsored plan over the government’s (25 percent), all other factors being equal. Among the uninsured, a government-sponsored plan is favored (38 percent vs. 28 percent).
  •  One in three consumers believes that the market needs 10 or more insurance companies competing to ensure consumer choice.
  •  7 out of 8 consumers believe themselves to be in "excellent," "very good" or "good" health yet, more than half (54 percent) have been diagnosed with one or more chronic conditions.
  •  Only one in five (22 percent) participates in a wellness program.
  •  A quarter (24 percent) of consumers remain confident about managing future health care costs, but of the people who skipped care when sick or injured, 4 out of 10 did so due to cost.
  •  More consumers are seeking alternative or natural remedies before seeing a physician (17 percent in 2010 compared with 12 percent in 2009) and more consumers are supplementing their current regimes with alternative remedies (20 percent in 2010 vs. 16 percent in 2009).
  •  One in five consumers rates their interest in accessing their health records by a secure Internet connection as high, would switch physicians to obtain access and would be very likely to use a mobile communication device to maintain them. However, only 10 percent report having a computerized personal health record (PHR).
  •  15 percent of all consumers say they used a retail clinic in the past 12 months.
How can any industry remain optimistic about its future when two-thirds of respondents give it a grade of 'C' or worse?  When three-quarters profess no understanding about the industry's workings and only one-quarter are confident about managing their health care costs?  These are staggeringly bad numbers.

Undoubtedly some in health care will attribute these results to flawed communication.  They may be right, in part.  More likely though, the communicators are doing their best to explain the inexplicable, to simplify the needlessly complicated.  Too bad the odds are stacked against them.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Michael Porter On Health Care Reform

Michael Porter, writing in the New England Journal of Medicine, proposes "A Strategy For Health Care Reform - Toward A Value-Based System." His proposals are fundamental, lucid and right-on, meaning they're sure to be opposed by some parties to the debate, the so-called "Yes, but..." crowd. Most important, in my opinion, is this: "... electronic medical records will enable value improvement, but only if they support integrated care and outcome measurement. Simply automating current delivery practices will be a hugely expensive exercise in futility. Among our highest near-term priorities is to finalize and then continuously update health information technology (HIT) standards that include precise data definitions (for diagnoses and treatments, for example), an architecture for aggregating data for each patient over time and across providers, and protocols for seamless communication among systems. "Finally, consumers must become much mor

Being Disrupted Ain't Fun. Deal With It.

Articles about disrupting healthcare, particularly those analogizing, say, Tesla's example with healthcare's current state, are frequently met with a chorus of (paraphrasing here) "Irrelevant! Cars are easy, healthcare is hard." You know, patients and doctors as examples of "information asymmetry" and all that. Well, let me ask you this: assuming you drive a car with a traditional internal combustion engine, how much do you know about the metallurgy in your car's engine block? I'll bet the answer is: virtually nothing. In fact it's probably less than you know about your own body's GI tract. Yet somehow, every day, us (allegedly) ignorant people buy and drive cars without help from a cadre of experts. Most of us do so and live happily ever after (at least until the warranty expires. Warranties...another thing healthcare could learn from Tesla.) Now, us free range dummies - impatient with information asymmetry - are storming healthcare

My Take On Anthem-Cigna, Big Dumb Companies and the Executives Who Run Them

After last Friday's Appeals Court decision, Anthem's hostile takeover of, er, merger with Cigna has but a faint pulse. Good. Unplug the respirator. Cigna's figured it out but Anthem is like that late-late horror show where the corpse refuses to die. Meanwhile, 150 McKinsey consultants are on standby for post-merger "integration" support. I guess "no deal, no paycheck..." is powerfully motivating to keep the patient alive a while longer. In court, Anthem argued that assembling a $54 billion behemoth is a necessary precondition to sparking all manner of wondrous innovations and delivering $2.4 billion in efficiencies. The basic argument appears to be "We need to double in size to grow a brain. And just imagine all those savings translating directly into lower premiums for employers and consumers."  Stop. Read that paragraph again. Ignore the dubious "lower premiums" argument and focus on the deal's savings. $2.4 billion saved