The healthcare system might stand to undergo a few adjustments before we turn things over to the machines.
There’s a moment early in the 1993 blockbuster film Jurassic Park when the movie’s designated skeptic, Dr. Ian Malcolm (brilliantly portrayed by a seemingly heavily caffeinated Jeff Goldblum), engaged in a spirited debate with the titular theme park’s creator over the ethical considerations of resurrecting dinosaurs for profit, makes something of a profound point regarding the motivation behind the endeavor.
“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could,” Malcolm says, “they didn’t stop to think if they should.”
The scene came to mind when digesting a recent RACmonitor article, “AI in Healthcare is a Looming Inevitability.”
“Artificial Intelligence (AI) promises to greatly reduce the cost of healthcare,” the article begins, before delving into the all-too-real-sounding scenario in which AI gradually (and then rapidly) replaces many (if not all) of the 950,000 patient care physicians in the U.S. – a notion seemingly championed not as dystopian or terrifying, but merely fiscally responsible.
“AI has won chess and Go tournaments, and now can pass an MBA exam. It can make complicated decisions. It recently created a complete Al Joe Rogan show, including the voice, indistinguishable from the real personality’s voice. It is better at summarizing information than humans. It writes and responds better than 99.9 percent of humans. In the workforce, AI is replacing humans at a relentless rate,” the article reads. “AI is not unionized; it does not sleep; it works 24 hours per day; it has a capacity to process millions of operations per second. A single giant data center could service the entire United States, and more.”
Well, at least they won’t unionize, right? (But wait – do we even know that for sure?)
Before diving headlong into this, let’s first take a step back and a deep breath and a 30,000-foot view. That could involve a quick glance at where we are, not where we’re going. And where we are is, well, ugly.
To call the American healthcare system’s performance abysmal would even be an understatement. Per federal statistics, we doled out a staggering $4.3 trillion on healthcare in 2021, or nearly $13,000 per person.
What did all that dough get us? Well, The Commonwealth Fund took a look at 11 otherwise comparable nations a couple of years ago. We ranked dead last (by considerable margins) in four out of five key healthcare metrics: access to care, administrative efficiency, equity, and outcomes. In terms of healthcare spending as a percentage of GDP, the 10 other countries studied all clocked in at or below 10 percent. We’re pushing 20 percent (and it was less than 5 percent in 1960).
I’m sure it’s merely coincidental that we’re also the only high-income nation on earth that doesn’t universally guarantee health coverage. Otherwise known as the reason that two-thirds of all personal bankruptcies in the U.S. result from medical bills.
But wait just a second! Isn’t all this an argument in FAVOR of AI, not against it? Is our healthcare system so fatally flawed that burning it all down and starting from scratch could be a viable solution?
You’d think so, right? But no. Doctor salaries add up to about 8 percent of U.S. healthcare costs (not 80, 8). The Kaiser Family Foundation estimated that even a drastic 40-percent cut in such salaries would reduce overall healthcare spending by about 3 percent.
Making up a far bigger piece of the pie is administrative spending, accounting for somewhere between 15 to 25 percent. And “at least half” of such spending “does not contribute to health outcomes in any discernable way,” according to a Health Affairs research brief.
Yes, pointing out the problems is far easier than identifying the solutions, and I’d be the first to admit that there is a long, winding road ahead toward improvement. But I’d humbly suggest that we just need to see some of that improvement before even dreaming of talking about AI doctors becoming the norm. By no means am I against AI as a concept, but artificial intelligence will only be as effective as the human intelligence applying it. And human intelligence got us in the mess we’re in now.
Plus, an AMA survey done last year found a record high of 63 percent of physician respondents reporting symptoms of burnout. Could we cut them some slack before we start suggesting they get the ax? I’m sure if you asked them, they’d say that burnout is preferable to unemployment.
In the meantime, maybe we keep the words of Dr. Malcolm in mind. If I recall correctly, the rest of the movie didn’t do very much to prove him wrong.
And let’s all perhaps be a little more skeptical of anything described as a panacea. Too often such promises turn out to be more of a Pandora’s box.
EDITOR’S NOTE: RACmonitor Publisher and Monitor Mondays program host Chuck Buck recently asked longtime national RACmonitor correspondent Mark Spivey to produce a feature article on the
As part of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency, or PHE, which officially ended earlier this month, the federal government gave healthcare providers considerable flexibility to
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Dr. Ronald Hirsch provides tried-and-true strategies and insight into outpatient in hospital bed stays including determining the applicable definition, who uses it, and when and how to bill for this circumstance, solidified with concrete case examples and expert insight.
Practical solutions for CDM departments to protect your hospital’s revenue.
This webcast teaches hospitals how to comply with CMS price transparency rules and compare their rates with peer hospitals. It covers creating a compliant machine-readable file, comparing negotiated rates, and improving pricing decisions.
The No Surprises Act (NSA) presents a challenge for hospitals and providers who must provide Good Faith Estimates (GFEs) for all schedulable services for self-pay and uninsured patients. Compliance is necessary, but few hospitals have been able to fully comply with the requirements despite being a year into the NSA. This webcast provides an overview of the NSA/GFE policy, its impact, and a step-by-step process to adhere to the requirements and avoid non-compliance penalties.
This expert-guided webcast will showcase tips for providers to ensure appropriate capture of the work performed for a visit. Comprehensive examples will be given that demonstrate documentation gaps and how to educate providers on the documentation necessary to appropriately assign a level of service. You will gain clarification on answers regarding emergency department and urgent care coding circumstances as well as a review of how/when it is appropriate to code for E&M in radiology and more.
Set yourself up for financial and compliance success with expert guidance that breaks down the impactful changes including MS-DRG methodology, surgical hierarchy updates, and many new technology add-on payments (NTAPs). Identify areas of potential challenge ahead of time and master solutions for all 2024 Proposed IPPS changes.
Do you struggle with selecting and appending the correct modifier for your medical claims? Join our must-attend webinar, “Mastering Modifier Usage: Preventing Denials and Ensuring Compliance” to reduce claim denials and improve your reimbursement rates.
Kay Piper reviews the guidance and updates coders and CDISs on important information in the AHA’s fourth quarter 2023 ICD-10-CM/PCS Quarterly Coding Clinic in an easy to access on-demand webcast.
Copyright © 2022 RACmonitor. Powered by MedLearn Media.
