[{"innerBlocks":[],"name":"core\/freeform","postId":125994,"blockType":{"name":"core\/freeform","keywords":[],"attributes":{"content":{"type":"string","source":"raw"},"lock":{"type":"object"}},"providesContext":[],"usesContext":[],"selectors":[],"supports":{"className":false,"customClassName":false,"reusable":false},"styles":[],"variations":[],"apiVersion":3,"title":"Classic","description":"Use the classic WordPress editor.","category":"text"},"originalContent":"A creatively illustrative scene from the 2008 film The Hurt Locker follows the primary character, William James, on a trip to a local grocery store.

James is an ordnance disposal technician home from the war in Iraq whose wife asked him to pick up a few things from the store, including cold cereal. As James stands dazed and overwhelmed before the wall of cereal options, the camera pans back to reveal an entire aisle wall\u2014floor to ceiling, end to end\u2014 of cereal boxes from which to choose. James is smaller in the frame, looking less and less up to the task before finally grabbing a box and throwing it in the cart with obvious frustration. He\u2019s decided because he must, but the decision comes with scant confidence or satisfaction because there is little in the way of a \u2018best\u2019 decision, a greater purpose.

Would that such consternating decisions were limited to cereal.

As data demonstrates, putting healthcare consumers in similar situations\u2014asking them to opt in, to make active choices about their health and healthcare\u2014yields similar results: Choices poorly made about which most will be unhappy.

The problem is particularly acute for those who need the most help\u2014those at the tail end of the economic spectrum with few resources, little time and not much information. In the language of behavioral economics, these people live in an environment of scarcity, especially with regard to time and mental resources.

\u201cThat\u2019s why active policies haven\u2019t proved very helpful for the 40 million U.S. citizens who live in poverty,\u201d write Austin Frakt and Gilbert Benavidez in The Upshot blog on NYTimes.com. \u201cWork by the University of Southern California economics professor Leandro Carvalho and colleagues showed that low-income people were more \u2018present-biased\u2019 after payday, worrying about the immediate more than the long-term effects of their decisions.\u201d

Returning to the Best Picture Oscar winner from 2008, cereal is an \u201cactive\u201d choice James must make, an opt-in he has to choose. Anxiety over whether he picked the right cereal may impact how he makes subsequent choices. Contrast that with the implied \u201cpassive\u201d choices he had every day in the military. Every morning in the mess, he got an anxiety-free breakfast, whatever was served, unless he opted out.

Now apply scarcity and active decision-making to understanding why workplace wellness programs don\u2019t really work. Having a gym membership your company provides is one thing; actually going to the gym regularly is another.

\u201cThe challenge is that a lot of these programs are designed with the idea that we\u2019re perfectly rational people,\u201d says David Asch of the Wharton School. \u201cThat a little bit of feedback \u2026 is naturally going to fall upon a rational human being who\u2019s going to say, \u2018You know, you\u2019re right.\u2019 The trouble is, I don\u2019t necessarily want to get on the scale in the morning and get that feedback. Sometimes that feedback isn\u2019t so helpful. Sometimes it\u2019s a little aversive.\u201d

So, what\u2019s an overwhelmed, irrational homo sapiens with too little time, information and money to do?

Ideally, engage in more passive decision-making, even if that sounds contradictory.

\u201cThese are programs that don\u2019t require individual action; you\u2019re not expected to add another task to the to-do list,\u201d say Frakt and Benavidez. \u201cExamples include default enrollment in a 401(k); in the health realm, they are public health efforts like water fluoridation and air quality improvement.\u201d

Unfortunately, it is rather difficult for people to set up passive scenarios all by themselves. It\u2019s hard and probably unsafe to fluoridate your own water. We can\u2019t improve air quality by ourselves where we live.

But specific industries, like healthcare, for example, can create scenarios where passive decision-making is more common. Healthcare IT is essential in that goal.

Take EHRs and patient portals, for example. Practices and hospitals that register patients in the system can then send regular updates to personal email accounts. After an initial active choice to register, patients need do little more than open their email\u2014a fairly passive decision in today\u2019s world\u2014to receive messages about appointments, medications, diet and so on.

Will an email improve health? No more so than an unused gym membership. But passive communication qualifies as a nudge, which in behavioral economics, is what increases the likelihood that a person makes a particular choice that favors a desired outcome.

Patient portals and passive communication also enable providers to develop personalized incentive plans that meet the needs of individual patients.

\u201cDoes depression, for example, predispose you to becoming avoidant and not wanting to step on a scale when you know that you\u2019re going to see a number that you don\u2019t like?\u201d says the University of Pennsylvania\u2019s Shreya Kangovi. \u201cAre there other factors involved? We need to figure out who benefits from feedback so that we can start to tailor these programs for the individuals who are most likely to benefit.\u201d

And we need to tailor the programs in such a way that some patients have fewer, not more, choices. There will always be the highly motivated, proactive patient who makes sound financial and health decisions and who needs few, if any, nudges. As with wellness programs, we\u2019re providing incentives for these people to do what they\u2019d most likely do anyway. The irony is that those who need the most help are often those most avoidant.

Is the juxtaposition of cereal selection and bomb disposal relevant for a conversation about making good health choices? As it relates to urgency and purpose, yes. But while the urgency of an unexploded bomb is self-evident, the importance of positive health choices is often shrouded in personal denial. Yet the currency of both transactions is human life.

In the age of digital healthcare and industry transformation, one task of healthcare and healthcare IT is to help patients make positive choices about urgent concerns, even when they may not know they\u2019re choosing.","saveContent":"A creatively illustrative scene from the 2008 film The Hurt Locker follows the primary character, William James, on a trip to a local grocery store.

James is an ordnance disposal technician home from the war in Iraq whose wife asked him to pick up a few things from the store, including cold cereal. As James stands dazed and overwhelmed before the wall of cereal options, the camera pans back to reveal an entire aisle wall\u2014floor to ceiling, end to end\u2014 of cereal boxes from which to choose. James is smaller in the frame, looking less and less up to the task before finally grabbing a box and throwing it in the cart with obvious frustration. He\u2019s decided because he must, but the decision comes with scant confidence or satisfaction because there is little in the way of a \u2018best\u2019 decision, a greater purpose.

Would that such consternating decisions were limited to cereal.

As data demonstrates, putting healthcare consumers in similar situations\u2014asking them to opt in, to make active choices about their health and healthcare\u2014yields similar results: Choices poorly made about which most will be unhappy.

The problem is particularly acute for those who need the most help\u2014those at the tail end of the economic spectrum with few resources, little time and not much information. In the language of behavioral economics, these people live in an environment of scarcity, especially with regard to time and mental resources.

\u201cThat\u2019s why active policies haven\u2019t proved very helpful for the 40 million U.S. citizens who live in poverty,\u201d write Austin Frakt and Gilbert Benavidez in The Upshot blog on NYTimes.com. \u201cWork by the University of Southern California economics professor Leandro Carvalho and colleagues showed that low-income people were more \u2018present-biased\u2019 after payday, worrying about the immediate more than the long-term effects of their decisions.\u201d

Returning to the Best Picture Oscar winner from 2008, cereal is an \u201cactive\u201d choice James must make, an opt-in he has to choose. Anxiety over whether he picked the right cereal may impact how he makes subsequent choices. Contrast that with the implied \u201cpassive\u201d choices he had every day in the military. Every morning in the mess, he got an anxiety-free breakfast, whatever was served, unless he opted out.

Now apply scarcity and active decision-making to understanding why workplace wellness programs don\u2019t really work. Having a gym membership your company provides is one thing; actually going to the gym regularly is another.

\u201cThe challenge is that a lot of these programs are designed with the idea that we\u2019re perfectly rational people,\u201d says David Asch of the Wharton School. \u201cThat a little bit of feedback \u2026 is naturally going to fall upon a rational human being who\u2019s going to say, \u2018You know, you\u2019re right.\u2019 The trouble is, I don\u2019t necessarily want to get on the scale in the morning and get that feedback. Sometimes that feedback isn\u2019t so helpful. Sometimes it\u2019s a little aversive.\u201d

So, what\u2019s an overwhelmed, irrational homo sapiens with too little time, information and money to do?

Ideally, engage in more passive decision-making, even if that sounds contradictory.

\u201cThese are programs that don\u2019t require individual action; you\u2019re not expected to add another task to the to-do list,\u201d say Frakt and Benavidez. \u201cExamples include default enrollment in a 401(k); in the health realm, they are public health efforts like water fluoridation and air quality improvement.\u201d

Unfortunately, it is rather difficult for people to set up passive scenarios all by themselves. It\u2019s hard and probably unsafe to fluoridate your own water. We can\u2019t improve air quality by ourselves where we live.

But specific industries, like healthcare, for example, can create scenarios where passive decision-making is more common. Healthcare IT is essential in that goal.

Take EHRs and patient portals, for example. Practices and hospitals that register patients in the system can then send regular updates to personal email accounts. After an initial active choice to register, patients need do little more than open their email\u2014a fairly passive decision in today\u2019s world\u2014to receive messages about appointments, medications, diet and so on.

Will an email improve health? No more so than an unused gym membership. But passive communication qualifies as a nudge, which in behavioral economics, is what increases the likelihood that a person makes a particular choice that favors a desired outcome.

Patient portals and passive communication also enable providers to develop personalized incentive plans that meet the needs of individual patients.

\u201cDoes depression, for example, predispose you to becoming avoidant and not wanting to step on a scale when you know that you\u2019re going to see a number that you don\u2019t like?\u201d says the University of Pennsylvania\u2019s Shreya Kangovi. \u201cAre there other factors involved? We need to figure out who benefits from feedback so that we can start to tailor these programs for the individuals who are most likely to benefit.\u201d

And we need to tailor the programs in such a way that some patients have fewer, not more, choices. There will always be the highly motivated, proactive patient who makes sound financial and health decisions and who needs few, if any, nudges. As with wellness programs, we\u2019re providing incentives for these people to do what they\u2019d most likely do anyway. The irony is that those who need the most help are often those most avoidant.

Is the juxtaposition of cereal selection and bomb disposal relevant for a conversation about making good health choices? As it relates to urgency and purpose, yes. But while the urgency of an unexploded bomb is self-evident, the importance of positive health choices is often shrouded in personal denial. Yet the currency of both transactions is human life.

In the age of digital healthcare and industry transformation, one task of healthcare and healthcare IT is to help patients make positive choices about urgent concerns, even when they may not know they\u2019re choosing.","order":0,"get_parent":{},"attributes":[],"attributesType":{"content":{"type":"string","source":"raw"},"lock":{"type":"object"}},"dynamicContent":""}]

How healthcare IT can help consumers with health choices

More for you