Highest and Best Use - An Imperative Concept in Healthcare Valuation
A thorough understanding of financial valuation concepts is a requisite foundation for a well-reasoned and defensible valuation analysis. At the outset of each valuation engagement, it is critical to appropriately define the standard of value and premise of value to be employed in developing the valuation opinion. The standard of value defines the type of value to be determined and answers the question, "value to whom?" The premise of value defines the hypothetical terms of the sale, i.e., "...the most likely set of transactional circumstances that may be applicable to the subject valuation; e.g., going concern, liquidation," and answers the question of "value under what further defining circumstances?" The selection of the premise of value can have a significant effect on its application in the valuation process. Two general concepts relate to the consideration and selection of the premise of value: (1) value in use; and, (2) value in exchange. An important concept that impacts the selection of the appropriate premise of value is that of highest and best use. (Read more...) (Read more...)

Outlook Increasing For Future of Telemedicine
Examples of the impact of telemedicine occurred with increasing frequency across the U.S. in 2014, and investors are starting to take notice. After years of slow growth, 2014 levels of telemedicine funding increased by 315% from 2013 to "nearly $300 million in aggregate funding." Growing investment in telehealth companies and the development of new telemedicine technologies may signify the start of the potentially revolutionary shift in healthcare delivery toward an increasing reliance on telemedicine. This Health Capital Topics article will discuss both the investment trend in telemedicine technologies, and the removal of traditional barriers to telemedicine, which are creating favorable prospects for continued telemedicine expansion. (Read more...)

Transition Timeline Set for Medicare Reimbursement Payments
On January 26, 2015, HHS announced an initiative to transfer a large share of Medicare payments from the current fee-for-service model, paying for value rather than volume by incentivizing better outcomes and lower costs by rewarding quality and efficient care. This monumental announcement was the first time HHS set specific goals for alternative payment models and value based models in the 50 year history of the Medicare program. HHS plans to use internal metrics to track the progress of these goals and utilize population health statistics, currently measured and reported through Healthy People 2020, to track quality of care improvements in the U.S. HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell stated that, even with all of the improvements made so far, that many people today are still not receiving quality care, as evidenced by one out of every ten hospitalized patients experiencing an adverse event during their episode of care. HHS envisions that by releasing these goals and using payment incentives to foster quality care, it will be able to accelerate the pace of improvements and advance change in a sustainable and permanent manner. (Read more...)

Barriers to Medical Innovation
In the first installment of this two-part Health Capital Topics series on medical innovations, the top innovations for 2015 that were profiled at the Cleveland Clinic and TedMed Conferences were discussed. Although unique and influential technologies similar to the ones exhibited at these conferences are showcased every year, these potential innovations often succumb to insurmountable barriers before going to market, which barriers are a daunting challenge for innovators seeking to develop and implement new healthcare inventions. This article will explore the challenges and barriers to innovation in the healthcare sector, and discuss the probability of a less cumbersome and more effective process going forward. Myriad barriers to healthcare innovation exist, including: (1) strict, overlapping healthcare laws and regulations; (2) disconnects between innovators and providers; and, (3) unfavorable reimbursement models. (Read more...)