The obligation is not the Answer
Originally published by Illumination Curated on Medium
The option is one of the most, if not the utmost, intuitive of all prerogatives in every human’s life. There are, indeed, many essential principles that can ensure more outstanding quality patient care. However, physicians and healthcare professionals alike who are most available, polite, friendly, and helpful undoubtedly do much better than those who fall short of providing the same services. Subtle psychological determinants play a role in ultimate patient satisfaction in every experience. With the ongoing inclination towards a merit-based patient reimbursement system, how physicians incorporate end factors into their practice could help them earn higher customer satisfaction, loyalty, and overall compensation.
Despite the numerous concessions on the necessity of patient and physician options, we are still far from clenching on reality. Patients are facing more and more limited opportunities concerning their medical care. On the other hand, physicians are facing an increasing burden of mandates only to keep up with the mountain of administrative works.
Even though healthcare leaders are constantly conversing on personalizing patient care and engaging everyone in their proactive overhaul, the outcome is utter to the contrary.
Personalized Care and Medicine are the Fundamental virtue in the Healthcare of the Public.
Population-based Healthcare merely focuses on the health status of the whole community or a given population and refutes the individuality of patient care.
Ultimate sustainability of Healthcare is the state desired in every aspect of human lives. Still, however, given the circumstances that accompany every synopsis at a given point of time and place downplays the role of the population health approach. The abundance of conditions pertains to the rattling path towards a sustainable state of harmony. One factor that necessitates particular thought, yet too often overlooked, is the notion of bracing self, individual autonomy, thus option. But in general, those collectivists who despise individuality also provide fewer options.
The “option” is a Pre-Requisite for Personalized Medicine
One unique aspect of patient psychology is the availability and variety of alternatives they receive. Still, it’s more intricate than what most prevailing health leaders envision, particularly with regards to quality-based patient care.
Having more options eventually makes patients and physicians happier. In many ways having the power of selection in a healthcare environment, for example, makes patients and physicians feel more in charge. Today’s patients live in a world where the popular option is the standard. And in general, patients expect a multitude of choices available to them.
However, having more choices doesn’t at all times deem reputable. It is a common notion; patrons may be overwhelmed by having too many opportunities. But in disagreement, I must say, that is when the physician’s role becomes even more vital. Options utilizing educated selection power yield the best outcome.
Applying Choices to Patient Care
The basic concept of having more options is that patients and physicians alike want them. They don’t necessarily want many options to choose from, but then again, We can describe their unconscious desire in several ways.
Patients and physicians, independently, need to be offered or offer extra straightforward, easier-to-understand service or product options with the most negligible side effects and complications. Every patient, in particular, needs more transparent, more basic service plan offerings.
Submission of targeted solutions is always the preferred choice for many individuals. So, Why use a fishing net when one can utilize a fishing pole to catch the right size fish?!
Physicians and healthcare systems must be able to offer patients clear choices on how to contact them. Besides, patients and physicians need at least two to three options to solve a predicament.
If a patient or client has a problem with a product or care, the person offering the service must have enough possibilities for resolution as transparent and contracted as possible. Sometimes patients need default solutions and options who are unable to make choices. Finally, everyone needs to be also prepared for wishy-washy individuals.
Having default options as a backup that kicks into effect if the customer doesn’t want to choose can be invaluable. According to a few scholars, It appears that patients and physicians would be happier with fewer opportunities, as empirical indication has exhibits that this is the case. But then again, the reason behind offering a multitude of options is merely about letting every patient, and medical professional feel empowered simply by giving them choices, of course, without necessarily overwhelming them. It is that simple, yet hardly done right, unless we implement a correct healthcare personalization.
More Regulation and bureaucracy Breeds Mandates, thus Counterproductivity.
Once again, it comes back to Healthcare Administration and Bureaucracy.
For over two centuries, Healthcare and public health, in particular, have been the governments' core responsibility. Such a trend has worked well throughout the first portion of the later period. However, with a progressive increase in public expectation, augmented availability of valuable information, so have legislative burdens. As the anticipated response to the increasing mandate, intentional or not, bureaucratic shortcuts have been skyrocketing, thus undermining the availability of options, individual reign, and personalized medicine.
Leonard Read, the organizer of the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), said once-
“Government is said to be a necessary evil. The saying appears to be without merit. For can anything be at once necessary and evil? True, all governments have had a history of evil-doing, more or less. However, it does not follow from this experience that their good is indistinguishable from their evil. Governments — assuming a proper limitation of their activities — are necessary and not evil. Their evil begins when they step out of bounds.”
Of course, the government has done positive deeds in human life, too, as human beings typically fall short of broad self-governance. Almost every sane individual would indicate that they have not invariably upheld the rights of fellow citizens. Therefore, in general, humanity always requires some form of external moderation and authority.
From a different angle, a family is the basic foundation of a society, just like the government is to people on a larger scale. That is the reason for inherent human want for the religious faith or standard way of life and that parents bear the responsibility of training their children.
Despite all the essence of establishing a government, yet there will never be an utterly perfect government since all people fall short of perfection, and governments are merely chosen by people, if democratically elected, of course. Then comes the hideous injustices of government authority; when disturbed and corrupt, people attain political instruments and employ government potential to promote their self-centered intentions.
Imagining the actions of an authority who is motivated wholly by selfishness, any greedy individual who holds sufficient opportunity to luxuriate will do accordingly by stealing property from others. All said and done with, corruption turns into particularly problematic when that personality is a government administrator.
Modern Healthcare is Utilitarian
Imagine modern Healthcare run by way of government administration, where bureaucracy prevails. Under bureaucratic running, rigid guidelines stay costumery, Standard Operating procedures (SOP), and pure outcome-based solutions become the rules while overseers stay not corruption proof.
The modern medical care system of the modern days is becoming ever more utilitarian. Over the years, the trend has been observed from deontological practice to utilitarian schemes, giving rise to frustration and discontent among patients and physicians. But it is solely expected of the Healthcare system and physicians to balance the two ethical issues to bring unity in medical practice without providing options and reducing strict obligations.
The health delivery system of the 21st-century is still the Population health model even though everyone at the top of all leaderships is enchanting personalized Healthcare. One-size-fits-all pure guideline-based healthcare delivery is flawed, particularly for reducing mandates, increasing patient engagement, and, most of all, alleviating Physician Burnout.
Contemporary Healthcare System carries too many Mandates.
Excessive mandates must be avoided at all costs, as mandates necessitate obligation, and obligation is the enemy of option. An obligated person must follow a required course of action at times, legal or moral. The carry, as mentioned above, constraints, as it limits option.
Those under the burden of obligation may choose to act under obligations freely, but they are often legally bound if their government is the one instituting that provision.
The obligation also endures when there is a choice to do what is morally good and morally unacceptable. There are likewise obligations in other moral circumstances, such as obligations of decorum, social obligations, religious and possibly in names of diplomacies, where duties are conditions that must be fulfilled. These are generally legal obligations, which can incur a penalty for non-fulfillment. However, certain people must carry out specific actions for other reasons, whether as a tradition or for social reasons. Hence, the obligation is not always the right thing.
Population Health promotes Obligation
Given that population health is an approach on the way to maximize the health effects of a group of individuals, together with the dispersal of health and medical services outcomes within the group, it is, therefore, inclined to overlook individual factors. For instance, options provided by the population health scheme may be in line with the expectation of the majority of people in the population but utterly unacceptable to the rest.
Population health primarily entails a scientific, preventive, therapeutic, and diagnostic approach that applies to the most common health problems of the mainstream of people. It is rapt toward the overall health achievement of people through health satisfaction within the assumed geographical region. Thus as a process, it involves the effective and efficient running of a collective population health scheme to cater to the health needs of the people. All in all, the population health outcome is destined to increase obligation and limit options.
The Option is for the Liberty of Personalized Medicine
Even if excessive options may seem to overwhelm patients and physicians alike, however, no one in the right mind would trade-off the option to obligation. Coupled with the prospect, every physician or patient must agree to take personal responsibility.
Today, we can observe a significant discrepancy in what personalized Healthcare means to many people. Some people think of it as Genomics, yet others see personalization of medical care as restricted to engaging patients in their care. But the space of personalized Healthcare is ample and broad, as it covers a wide spectrum of circumstances and determinants. For instance, any technology or medical equipment that enables the customization of treatment options to suit the personal prospects of the patient correspondingly fall underneath personalized medicine.
Any individual therapy or intervention that maximizes the treatment option by 100% is a perfect reflection of personalized medicine. In light of the Population-Based Model, Patient-Centered Healthcare is too deceitfully placed in the customized medicine category.
Defining Personalization in Healthcare Sphere
In reality, personalized Healthcare is a wide-ranging term that denotes the conveyance of medical service. The conclusion goes beyond healing or maintaining health, rendered between a patient and a doctor or healer. The concept of personalized Healthcare covers the entire societal, economic and individual faith. Without exception, coming under its framework Personalized Healthcare involves reimbursements, doctor-patient interaction (virtual or physical), socioeconomic factors, clinical encounters, and many more.
Personalized medicine is a subsidiary of personalized Healthcare. It principally pertains to any form of doctor-patient interaction in the clinical setting, from screening the patient, talking, examination, evaluation, and rendition of clinical judgment. It is the phenomenon describing one physician providing medical service to a patient at a particular place and time. Personalized patient encounter or visit, yet again, is built on socioeconomic, psychological, physiological, genetic, environmental, and familial factors.
Precision medicine epitomizes any paraphernalia, strategy, and science utilized to enhance the quality and value of patient care. It is the direct subcategory of personalized medicine. Whether individually or in collaboration, precision medicine works towards personalized medicine and Healthcare.
Genomics and other technologies can be classified under precision medicine. Some other examples of tools used or potential application in precision medicine include machine learning / artificial intelligence, the blockchain, big data, mixed reality, Software-as-a-service (SaaS), wearable technologies, immunotherapy, robotics, etc.
As the take-home note, the option is the catalytic agent towards instituting a simple, personalized Healthcare system. It helps process patients’ autonomy over their own lives, increases their capacity to act on issues seemingly relevant to them.
Option promotes a kind of milieu where patients find themselves having a critical role. Furthermore, aspects of patient empowerment include health options, literacy, shared decision-making, and self-management.
Concomitant to patient empowerment, an Independent Physician is needed to support the empowered patients. Meanwhile, individual physicians must also maintain an abundance of options as physicians, own a majority of their practice, and hold fundamental decision-making rights for their practice. They must make a clinical judgment and run a practice, all on their rapports.
Having complete control over the administration and fiscal health of the duties, besides cultivating and competing in the local market, are essential components of running an independent medical practice. Everyone in the healthcare community must be able to make informed, strategic decisions, thrive through industry changes, collaborate while connected with hospitals, most of all, still staying autonomous.