Cerner’s New CEO Led Google Health; Johnson & Johnson’s CEO To Leave
Health tech firm Cerner's new CEO will be former Google Health lead Dr. David Feinberg. Separately, Johnson & Johnson CEO Alex Gorsky will step down in January to become executive chairman. Surprise-billing bans, kidney care, "Gun Court," and medical journal editorials are also in the news.
The Wall Street Journal:
Google Health Boss Leaves To Take Over Cerner
David Feinberg, who led Google’s ambitious and sometimes controversial push into healthcare, is leaving the search giant to become Cerner Corp.’s
chief executive officer. Dr. Feinberg joined Alphabet Inc.’s Google two years ago in a newly created role as vice president for health. He helped strike partnerships with some of the country’s largest hospital systems to collect and analyze their data. He has also led the company’s initiatives around Covid-19. (Mickle and Armental, 8/19)
The Hill:
Johnson & Johnson CEO To Leave Role In January
Johnson & Johnson announced on Thursday that its current CEO Alex Gorsky will step down from his role and Joaquin Duato will take the helm in January. Gorsky will instead serve as the executive chairman for the healthcare company, and the new roles will become effective Jan. 3. Duato, who is currently the vice chairman for J&J’s executive committee, will also be named a member of J&J’s board of directors. (Vakil, 8/19)
In other health care industry news —
Modern Healthcare:
It's Time To Get Ready For The Surprise Billing Ban, Experts Say
It's time for hospitals and health systems to start getting ready for the surprise billing ban that takes effect next year. President Joe Biden's administration published an interim final rule last month that covers the basics, but left out essential details about how the No Surprises Act will work in practice. The regulation bars surprise bills for emergency care, high cost-sharing for out-of-network services, out-of-network charges from ancillary providers such as anesthesiologists or assistant surgeons, and out-of-network charges from providers who don't notify patients they are not in-network. (Brady, 8/19)
Modern Healthcare:
Cigna, Fresenius To Improve Value-Based Kidney Care Program
Cigna and Fresenius Medical Care North America will extend their national partnership through 2023 to improve outcomes and lower costs for patients with end-stage renal disease and kidney failure. The latest agreement, announced on Monday, will allow the companies to continue to work on the value-based kidney care program under Cigna Collaborative Care. The program engages with providers using incentives to help with better outcomes, affordability and patient satisfaction. The partnership began in 2017 and allows Cigna members to access Fresenius' 2,600 dialysis centers and home dialysis options to manage their health. (Devereaux, 8/19)
Crain's Cleveland Business:
MetroHealth To Assist Defendants In 'Gun Court' With Trauma Counseling, Mental Health Support
The Institute for H.O.P.E. Trauma Recovery Center will provide trauma counseling and mental health support for defendants in the Violence Intervention Docket, also known as "Gun Court," through a recently signed contract with the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas. The program aims to target young adults to address their trauma before they are involved in violent crime, Cuyahoga County administrative judge Brendan Sheehan, who oversees the specialized docket, said in a news release. "The progress we can make working together is amazing," Sheehan said in a provided statement. "These efforts will make our community safer and save lives." (8/19)
Stat:
Medical Journal Editorial Writers Have Financial Conflicts Of Interest, Too
In the latest look at conflicts of interest in science, a new analysis found 15% of the authors of editorials accompanying studies in prestigious medical journals about heart drugs and devices had financial ties to the companies that sponsored the clinical trials, but they did not disclose the relationships. Generally, financial ties between study authors and manufacturers have generated considerable interest due to concerns over influencing medical research and practice. But this latest analysis, which was published in JAMA Internal Medicine, extends this unease to editorial writers, who are also in a position to sway thinking about trial results. (Silverman, 8/19)
