You’ve heard the Chief xxx Officer saying, I don’t need to listen to patient experts, we’re all patients. Gee, what do you say to this inexperience? You’ve also heard the empathy and born-again drive of the Chief xxx Officer who has a chronic illness, was recently hospitalized, or is the caregiver of a family member with chronic illness. Nothing can replace the experience of spending a day in a hospital bed or navigating your neighborhood for a day in a wheelchair.
I attended the Society of Participatory Medicine’s first conference a couple of months ago. Some businesses making big money from patient data describing their volunteer patient advisory panels or providing gift cards to their patient experts. We’d like to pay more, but it’s what we can afford.
I’ve been a reviewer of funding requests since 2013 for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). PCORI pays all stakeholder reviewers (patients, clinicians, scientists, administrators) the same stipend-a reasonable amount.
In 2013 and 2014 funding applications I reviewed listed either no payment or $50 gift cards for patient stakeholders on their Research Advisory Boards. By 2016 many funding applications listed $500-$1000 stipends. In 2017 I saw an application that budgeted for the payment of respite care for caregiver experts’ carees. We’ve come a long way.
The US has a love-hate relationship with paying for value. It’s like the Golden Rule: easy to say, tough to do. Just look at the Trump-Ryan-McConnell tax bill. I digress… The healthcare industry values credentials as a proxy for knowledge- whether or not they know what the acronyms mean. Acronyms = expertise. Credentials usual mean deep expertise in a narrow subject. We willingly pay for deep and narrow with credentials. Patients can have deeper knowledge about a narrower subject than those credentialed. We don’t have a means to calculate that value nor a willingness to pay for it. Read More