Sid Schwab on Medicare’s misguided attempts to control medical errors:
As one who’s gone on record as supporting single-payer health care, this is the sort of thing that makes the position a little hard to defend. It’s not that I entirely disagree with the concept. For one thing, I never (nor do most surgeons, far as I know) charged for a re-operation, even if it wasn’t for an obvious error. Plus, I have advocated greater efforts to identify measures that some doctors take to get better outcomes, and to encourage them. So this sort of thing — in theory — is not unwarranted. The devilment is in the details. Some items on the list are inarguable; but not all.
Related posts:
- Medicare ceases to pay for medical errors
- Medicare and single-payer
- Thinking about implementing a single-payer system?
- The intolerance of single payer supporters
- The RUC, medical home and the specter of single-payer
- An on-call committee to disclose medical errors
- Single-payer: Read the fine print
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 4 comments }
Although some benefit will probably come of this new regulation, I am all but certain that some hospitals will be denied payment because CMS will say something was preventable that really wasn’t. In such cases, I wonder if hospitals would be more apt to provide less expensive and maybe not as effective treatment and discharge the patient asap to prevent further costs. Also, as CMS goes, so do private insurers, so I expect they will be jumping on board soon too.
Dominic A. Carone, Ph.D.
Founder and Webmaster of MedFriendly.com and The MedFriendly blog.
No payment if the patient develops a urinary tract infection or pressure wound? The geniuses who came up with these crooked bean-counter criteria must have deep clinical experience and top-drawer training.
This alone should end the option of a single payor system in the United States for anyone even remotely rational or sane.
“For one thing, I never (nor do most surgeons, far as I know) charged for a re-operation, even if it wasn’t for an obvious error.”
I want this guy for my surgeon.
I went through six follow-up surgeries to correct gland duct obstructions that followed one procedure. Was charged for them all. Understood then and now that this was not an unusual complication, but six is still a hell of a lot. Insurance fortunately paid most of it.
I wonder if this will be a nudge to families to move to palliative care instead of pursing more active care for the very old/sick who seem to be complication-magnets.
Several months ago the Washington Post had an article highlighting that some demographic groups almost never pursue hospice care for their very old/sick relatives.
I think it’s not the kind of thing anybody wants to pressure families to do if it’s not their choice. It will be interesting to see how a hospital might handle that situation.
Comments on this entry are closed.