Feeding the Beast

The value proposition for geriatrics

In response to some of the challenges that have been articlulated about the future of Geriatrics, we describe a more positive view and value proposition for the field. Health professionals with specific training in Geriatrics are a natural fit for a variety of roles in value-based care (VBC) programs and health systems. These roles include serving as educators for primary care health professionals and specialists in person-centered care of older adults, serving as consultants on geriatric conditions and syndromes in a co-management model of care, becoming effective leaders in VBC programs and health systems, and conducting quality improvement initiatives to build on the evidence-base for the management of common conditions in the older population. We further recommend that VBC programs and systems support Centers of Excellence or Institutes to implement these strategies within and Age-Friendly, learning system approach.

Gluing Together a Fragmented Healthcare System for Geriatrics Will Be Hard. It's Time for United Action

"Gluing" together integrated Geriatric Clinical Service lines (GCSL) within the US healthcare system is a significant challenge. Reasons encompass health professional workforce shortages, inconsistent requirements for geriatric educational competencies among the health professional disciplines, preconceived ageist attitudes about older adults with complex illnesses, and a US healthcare system infrastructure that is not aligned with longitudinal and interdisciplinary care needs for older adults. This review focuses on three major characteristics of the US healthcare system that have impeded widespread dissemination of GCSLs: 1) the US's historical fee for service (FFS) reimbursement system; 2) increasing reliance upon disease specific specialty care services for older patients that have resulted from advances in medicine; and 3) rising consolidation of US healthcare systems over the last 30 years. Three specific options are also provided that might help change the current and future trajectories of GCSLs: 1) local political advocacy to implement health policy legislation; 2) expand geriatric physician and health professional workforce by nontraditional means; and 3) reprioritize expansionist healthcare systems corporate behavior. Each of these interventions will be hard to achieve, but it is time to unite if GCSLs are to thrive as pathways to improve care outcomes for older adults with complex medical, cognitive and neuropsychiatric disorders.

Gluing together a fragmented healthcare system for geriatrics will be hard. It's time for united action

"Gluing" together integrated Geriatric Clinical Service lines (GCSL) within the US healthcare system is a significant challenge. Reasons encompass health professional workforce shortages, inconsistent requirements for geriatric educational competencies among the health professional disciplines, preconceived ageist attitudes about older adults with complex illnesses, and a US healthcare system infrastructure that is not aligned with longitudinal and interdisciplinary care needs for older adults. This review focuses on three major characteristics of the US healthcare system that have impeded widespread dissemination of GCSLs: (1) the US's historical fee for service (FFS) reimbursement system; (2) increasing reliance upon disease specific specialty care services for older patients that have resulted from advances in medicine; and (3) rising consolidation of US healthcare systems over the last 30 years. Three specific options are also provided that might help change the current and future trajectories of GCSLs: (1) local political advocacy to implement health policy legislation; (2) expand geriatric physician and health professional workforce by nontraditional means; and (3) reprioritize expansionist healthcare systems corporate behavior. Each of these interventions will be hard to achieve, but it is time to unite if GCSLs are to thrive as pathways to improve care outcomes for older adults with complex medical, cognitive and neuropsychiatric disorders.

The Great Health Paradox: A Call for Increasing Investment in Public Health

The great health paradox is that the least expensive and most effective public health measures available for addressing the COVID-19 pandemic-and other society-wide health challenges-have long been ignored and rejected in the United States in favor of more expensive and personalized care. The U.S. medical system is being overwhelmed in part because of this paradox. The authors argue that the country has invested excessively in acute care medical technology while investing insufficiently in its public health infrastructure. In this Invited Commentary, the authors recommend 5 steps that academic medicine should take to increase emphasis on and understanding of public health interventions to address society's health problems: (1) incorporate problem-based learning experiences in the medical school curriculum and community-based clinical rotations in public health departments, (2) better integrate schools of public health and schools of medicine, (3) encourage physicians to pursue public health careers, (4) educate the public about strategies for decreasing chronic illnesses, and (5) increase collaboration with colleagues around the world to identify and track outbreaks.