September 5th, 2011 by Happy Hospitalist in Health Policy
1 Comment »
One of the worst parts of my job over the years has been to tell patients I was going to bring them into the hospital as an observation status because they did not have any criteria for full inpatient status. There is a huge difference in how CMS pays for hospital care (excluding critical access hospitals) between inpatient versus observation.
Observation is considered outpatient. Medicare will pay for observation hospital services for up to 48 hours to allow physicians a chance to observe the patient and determine if they need to have an inpatient hospital admission. Observation was never intended to be used as a holding pit to help social workers arrange for a nursing home transfer during normal business working hours because it can’t be arranged, on either end, at 10 pm on a Friday night.
What used to be a moral family obligation to care for loved ones too weak to care for themselves has now been relinquished to the role of hospitals and hospitalists. And we all pay for it. Families have abandoned their loved ones for good. It’s really quite sad. Bringing patients into the hospital for the purpose of arranging a nursing home transfer is, in my opinion, a form of Medicare fraud, since these patients have no intention of being fully admitted.
But it’s paid for and will always be paid for, except when Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at The Happy Hospitalist*
August 31st, 2011 by Toni Brayer, M.D. in Uncategorized
No Comments »
I am smacking myself on the forehead and saying, “Why didn’t I think of this?” Dr. Richard Parker, Medical Director at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, has sent out a list to his physician colleagues of 56 common medical tests and procedures. What is revolutionary is that there are prices next to each item. You non-physicians may be surprised to know that we doctors have no idea what the tests or drugs we order actually cost. Unless we get billed as a patient, we are as clueless as you are.
As I wrote before, the ostrich excuse just won’t fly any more. We all need to be aware of the cost of care and have skin in the game. Some will argue that price can’t be the only driver. I’ve heard physicians say you can’t compare one price to another because “quality” costs more. I say prove it. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at EverythingHealth*
August 28th, 2011 by Michael Kirsch, M.D. in Opinion, Research
No Comments »
Medical malpractice reform is in the news again. Of course, for the medical profession, the medical malpractice system is the wound that simply will not heal. For the plaintiffs bar, in contrast, the medical liability system is the gift that keeps on giving. I have argued that the current system fails on four important fronts.
- Efficiency
- Cost
- Fairness
- Quality Improvement
I admit readily that my profession has not been as diligent as it should be in holding ourselves accountable. We have not been forthright in admitting our medical errors, although can you blame us under the current medical liability construct? Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at MD Whistleblower*
August 24th, 2011 by admin in Health Policy, Opinion
1 Comment »
I must confess that I have a weakness for medical tourism. Patients have always been ready to go on a pilgrimage to find the world’s leading expert (we call it ‘key opinon leader’ now) hoping to find a cure. As long as traditional leaders in the field of Medicine have been the Germans, the French and the English -with some occasional Austrian and Spanish name in the mix- traffic of wealthy patients across Europe is nothing new.
Since we entered the antibiotics era, these leaders started to be located mainly in the United States, the cradle of modern, technology-driven Medicine. Thus hi-tech centers got ready to welcome foreign patients, building strong International Customer Support departments. A random example -by no means the only one- would be the Mayo Clinic. On their website you can see that their wealthy patients speak Arabic or come from Latin America. These healthcare services have a long tradition of client-oriented work because they work for private clients that pay for their treatment (sometimes the client is not the patient himself but his family). The important thing was never the price, but the patient. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Diario Medico*
August 10th, 2011 by Michael Kirsch, M.D. in Health Policy, Opinion
2 Comments »
The concept of cost-effectiveness in medicine is elastic. One’s view on this issue depends upon who is paying the cost. Of course, this is true in all spheres of life. When you’re in a fine restaurant, you order differently when the meal will be charged to someone else. Under these circumstances, the foie gras appetizer and the jumbo shrimp cocktail are no longer luxuries, but are considered as essential amino acids that are necessary to maintain life.
In the marketplace, except in the medical universe, goods and services are priced according to what the market will bear. If an item is priced too high, then the seller will have fewer sales and a bloated inventory. Consumers will not pay absurd prices for common items, regardless of supernatural claims of quality.
- Would you pay $100 for an ice cream sundae that boasted it was the best in the world?
- Would you pay $1000 for a tennis racket that promised performance beyond your ability?
- Would you pay $500 for a box of paper clips that never lose their tension? Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at MD Whistleblower*
