5 ms·
Trying hard to spin this as a reasonable effect, when the hospital buys a practice it also enforces all kinds of quality metrics that they need to maintain to g
by conanbatt 8y ago
Trying hard to spin this as a reasonable effect, when the hospital buys a practice it also enforces all kinds of quality metrics that they need to maintain to get their insurance rates. Its true that a practice that changes no procedure will see a strange uptick in revenue, but those that update their practices, in principle, provide better care.
That aside, i believe this happens because it is illegal for a doctor to refern a patient and "Get a kickback". If the hospital really were the best place to perform a procedure, independent doctors have to be split between sending a patient out, which requires effort, staff & liabilities for the hospital to get all the revenue from it. If the doctor could negotiate with hospitals or other cares, they could do the work and get paid.
- atourgates 8y agoThe justifications I've heard have nothing to do with the quality of care, and everything to do with subsidizing the costs hospitals bear for being required to treat uninsured populations who won't pay your bill. E.g., if someone shows up at a private medical office and can't pay their bill, the office has no legal obligation to treat that person. If someone shows up at a hospital emergency room and can't pay their bill, that hospital is required to provide emergency treatment regardless. It seems like a horribly inefficient and inaccurate way to address this issue. I think broadly, the value-based model (where cardiologists are paid to keep their patients from needing expensive surgeries, instead of paid per expensive surgery) is probably the right model for the future of medical care, but I have doubts about how successful its implementation will be.