Chrissy wrote: Markle wrote:I don't know about the number of medications but Hospitals will be awarded "bonus points" for keeping the cost of care for seniors low. This will be in addition to the cuts already in line for Medicare.
In effect, seniors will be seeing what is known as the Liverpool Pathway in use in Great Britain.
That makes me wonder about the question, then if bonus points are going to be handed out. Ive seen hospitals make business plans developed around meeting those goals to get the bonus. So it could be a plan by the hospital itself to try and stay afloat by doing this.
I dont think people realize how much these cuts hurt these hospitals. after operational cost many times if the hospital is doing well only has 2-3% profit margin. This was Baptist profit margin when i worked there. and e knew what the others were too, they look at these things. so maybe some rationing is going to occur if they are encouraged to financially, after all that's why they have the advisory board to make up ideas like this to sway the care given in order to save money. also they are putting a lot of bad science out in the media to trick people ive noticed to.
DE, I work in pathology and run pathology/histology labs. I don't ever deal with medicine, now im sure PB can give her take on it, however my sister in law is a nursing administrator for Shands so I will go on Facebook today and ask her. with that said with what markle put it may be something the hospital has a goal to 'TRY" and do with most patients in order to get that financial incentive from the gov.
Yes, please ask your SIL, Chrissy. All I know is we haven't heard anything of this nature.
I'm wondering if perhaps DE isn't referring to meds used in an in-hospital setting, such as IV antibiotics. Too many times I've seen antibiotics started before the results of a C&S are back - if one was even ordered. You know how essential a C&S is to effective care for an infection.
This would result in more expensive patient care, since patients would be charged for both the ineffective antibiotic as well as later administration of an antibiotic to which the infection is sensitive. When we're talking IV antibiotics, that can become expensive quickly.
I just can't imagine people being limited to just four meds a day, especially the elderly. That makes no sense. In the long run, a limitation of that nature would result in sicker citizens and more costly care.
Take a hypertensive diabetic with high cholesterol, for example. If he is trying to avoid insulin, he may take two different pills daily. Add in some Lisinopril for the BP, and some pravastatin for the cholesterol. That's four. Then let's say this person develops an infection of the foot, for which he needs an antibiotic. And God forbid this same person needs a psychotropic or two and some medication for restless legs. Let's hope he never strains a muscle, either.
It's just plain silly, and that's why I called DE's statement BS. It's not that DE said it, it's that the whole concept is BS, unless it refers to a specific type of medication used in an in-hospital setting.
Knowwhadamean?
EDIT: I've tried to find some info about this online, and I can't. If anyone else can, please lead me to it. Thanks!