Surgery with a 90-day warranty

May 17, 2007

This is what a hospital system in Pennsylvania is trying out:

The group, Geisinger Health System, has overhauled its approach to surgery. And taking a cue from the makers of TVs, washing machines and other products, Geisinger essentially guarantees its workmanship, charging a flat fee that includes 90 days of follow-up treatment.

Even if a patient suffers complications or has to come back to the hospital, Geisinger promises not to send the insurer another bill.

(via White Coat Notes)



Related posts:

  1. Should health care come with a warranty?
  2. Confessions of a phlebotomist
  3. No-fault malpractice
  4. The controversy over organ donations after cardiac death
  5. The profit of cancer treatment
  6. Wrong-site surgery at BIDMC
  7. A jury ignores findings from a pre-litigation screening panel


KevinMD.com on Facebook


  Follow on Twitter   Subscribe



{ 2 comments }

1 Anonymous May 17, 2007 at 8:08 am

90 days of postoperative care is generally included in the global surgical fee for most major procedures, especially under Medicare. They are advertising as a “warranty” what has almost always been required. The only exceptions are unanticipated second procedures and staged operations that must be done within the 90-day global period of the initial operation.

I think this is a silly and pointless gimmick. People don’t choose hospitals based on a 90-day warranty. They choose based on where their doctor happens to work or where their insurance coverage dictates where they must go.

2 Anonymous May 17, 2007 at 9:59 am

What they also don’t tell you is that in substantial number of cases, the insurer is Geisinger itself. In other words, they’ve always eaten the bill on unexpected outcomes,complications, re-do’s etc in a large number of their patients anyway. thier staff doc’s are salaried,so it doesn’t matter (from a monetary prespective)if the patient needs aditional work in the global period. Work is work is work,and it doesn’t affect the doc’s bottom line.

I suspect what they’re really trying to do is set this as a precedent so that the (non-Geisinger staff)doctors who accept their insurance product, and occasionally find themselves having to re-operate on, or re-admit a patient will then have to eat their bills for service.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post: Synthol: "Like implants for the arms"

Next post: NEJM engaging their readers

Site Meter