|
E-mail this page to a friend!
Medicare News
Medicares Refusal to Pay Hospitals for Their Own
Mistakes Draws Editorials
When an auto mechanic breaks one part while fixing
another, would you pay for it?
Aug. 24, 2007 - Not only do hospitals use their
financial muscle to get state and federal lawmakers to protect them from
law suits brought by the errors they commit, they also want Medicare and
insurance companies to pay their bills, even if the cost was due to
their mistake. Medicare has said no more and the insurance industry may
do the same. The action drew mostly praise from U.S. newspapers.
Several newspapers published editorials on a new
rule
under which Medicare no longer will reimburse hospitals for the
treatment of certain preventable conditions. Summaries appear below.
●
Akron Beacon
Journal: "It's about time taxpayers stopped footing the
extra bills for errors that are preventable with reasonable precautions
and modifications in care practices," a Beacon Journal editorial states.
In addition to "lost lives and lost productivity, treating the
complications that result from errors is a huge extra expense," and the
"tougher federal stance should serve as a powerful financial incentive"
for hospitals to reduce their "error rates for greater patient safety,"
according to the editorial (Akron Beacon Journal, 8/22).
●
Austin
American-Statesman: The rule will provide hospitals with
a "strong incentive to ensure that doctors and nurses using their
facilities follow proper medical procedure," a practice that should
"reduce the financial cost of treating conditions caused by poor medical
care" and "reduce suffering by patients," according to an
American-Statesman editorial. The editorial concludes, "At a time when
the cost of health care keeps outpacing inflation generally and Medicare
costs $400 billion a year, any measure that can help reduce medical
costs is welcome -- especially when it comes in the form of preventing
needless suffering, as well as avoiding the need for additional
treatment" (Austin American-Statesman, 8/22).
●
Boston Globe:
The rule "puts U.S. hospitals on notice that they have got to work
harder to make sure patients do not suffer needless harm while under
their care" but might "require refinement," such as the addition of a
requirement that hospitals make public their infection and medical error
rates and develop strategies to prevent them in the future, the
editorial states. Hospitals "traditionally have been reluctant" to make
such data public, but the possibility of a "loss of Medicare money
should force them to act," according to the editorial (Boston Globe,
8/22).
● Lucian Leape,
Boston Globe:
The rule directs hospitals to reduce preventable conditions "in a
language they understand: the language of money," Leape, an adjunct
professor of health policy at
Harvard School of
Public Health, writes in a Globe opinion piece. "Hospitals
have had the opportunity for some time to help their patients and save
money by implementing a number of proven safe practices," but "most have
ducked it" because of costs, Leape writes, adding, "The new rules will
provide a strong incentive for development of more cost-effective
methods" (Leape, Boston Globe, 8/23).
●
Chicago Tribune:
"With its enormous clout, Medicare's move is likely to accelerate
efforts already under way by private insurers and major companies to
persuade hospitals to waive charges for certain so-called 'never events'
-- mistakes that should never happen," according to a Tribune editorial.
The editorial states, "That's hugely important" because medical errors,
"preventable and not, add billions to the nation's medical bill -- and
take a horrendous toll in patient suffering and deaths" (Chicago
Tribune, 8/23).
●
Las Vegas Sun:
The rule could "improve the prevention of secondary infections and
injuries among patients" but does not "go far enough in explaining who
will pay" for the treatment of preventable conditions when they occur, a
Sun editorial states. According to the editorial, "It is naοve to think
that hospitals are going to simply absorb the costs of treating these
conditions without finding ways to pass those costs to all health care
consumers" (Las Vegas Sun, 8/22).
●
Miami Herald:
The "common-sense" rule will "get hospitals to do what they already
should be doing: putting the safety of patients first," a Herald
editorial states. Some hospitals have raised concerns about the cost of
the rule, but, when weighed "against the upside potential of the policy
changes, these concerns pale in comparison," according to the editorial
(Miami Herald, 8/23).
●
Pittsburgh
Tribune-Review: The rule "has the earmarks for vastly
improved health care in the United States," a Tribune-Review editorial
states. The rule will provide "a new ethic for hospitals and insurance
providers," the editorial states, adding, "Pay for performance is an
idea as old as the hills. Glad the government is catching up"
(Pittsburgh Tribune-Review 8/22).
●
Winston-Salem
Journal: "This is a winning policy change from all
vantage points," a Journal editorial states. According to the editorial,
when an "auto mechanic breaks one part on a car while fixing another,
his customers expect him to pay for the damage or repair it," and
patients and "taxpayers should expect the same from the medical and
hospital industries" (Winston-Salem Journal, 8/22).
|
Nursing Home Abuse, Medical Malpractice? Contact a lawyer.
click here
|
|
Click to More Senior News on the
Front Page
Copyright: SeniorJournal.com |
