« New Year’s Resolutions and Population Health Improvement: Anything in Common? | Main | Unpacking the Triple Aim Model »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Here's one: How in your view does population health tie in with the other two elements (quality of care, cost-effectiveness) of Berwick's Triple Aim?

The Wisconsin state and local government system to deliver public health services has been essentially the same structure for the past 100 years or so. Is this the best model we have or are there improvements that should be made to improve the liklihood of achieving the Healthist Wisconsin 2020 plan? With the change in administration and legislatures now might be a rethink the current governmental system structure.

Good topics all - but can't but wonder given the past 22 years whether any policy topic can rise beyond bipartisan politics and the national economics of the haves keeping theirs at the expense of the have-nots. However on a happier note I am in accord with Jay’s comment that continued focus on quality & cost, which is of course the 'value’ question, is likely the only viable way forward. Whether any government body can address value in a evidence-based meaningful way remains the question.

What are the pros and cons of Accountable Care Organizations and Medical homes relative to population health?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Recent Posts