Quality of healthcare discussions

Post your thoughts on the following:

• What are some attempts that have been made to improve the quality of health care?
• Please share your own experiences and thoughts from your readings in this course and in other courses in this program pertaining to efforts made to improve the quality of health care.
• Refer to some of the key initiatives described in your text (i.e., physician report cards).
• Comment on your fellow students' postings.

According to Health Leaders magazine March, 2011 issue volume 14 number 3, "Hospital stays for the diagnosis of septicemia cost a total of $14.6 billion and accounted for 791,000 discharges. The average cost per discharge was $18,400, about twice as much as the average cost for all discharges ($9,100). Fifth on the list, liveborn infant, was just $2,700 per stay, but the large volume of stays, more than 4.2 million, boosted the overall cost to $11.5 billion." Even diagnoses of coronary atherosclerosis, and acute MI overall did not cost as much.

One of the things being done to decrease bloodstream infections is by Medicare and Medicaid requiring those hospitals who accept them to report any central-line associated bloodstream infections to the CDC. Some hospitals are changing the LOS (length of stay). It is thought that those hospitals who cut LOS even by 10% could free up almost 80 beds yearly. This type of change has the potential to increase the hospitals ability to deliver more procedures. (Health Leaders, 2011).

My own experiences, and thoughts regarding improvement of quality: I believe that everyone (medical staff, administration, patients and families) have to work together in order to achieve any sort of quality. This collaborative, and trusting kind of relationship will also, help in reducing medical malpractice claims. If we all work to eliminate claims of malpractice then naturally costs of care will and can decrease. It is frivolous lawsuits that cost everybody. Of course then we have those in the judicial system that also need to buy into this concept.

Patient satisfaction is key in determining how a patient feels not only about their physician, but the facility in which they were cared for. (Sultz & Young, p.105) Without this kind of quality check how would anyone know the areas in which improvement is needed, or what they are doing well.  Of course if patients are happy then they will feel they received great care. If they are not then everyone knows about it. As they should. Everyone has to work together to try making the patients and their family happy. If this was retail or another service type of atmosphere we would think nothing of providing a quality survey, but even those of us in this industry are struck odd by it when a survey is done for our work. But, physicians need to also be subject to quality survey's. They are under the employ of the patient and the patient as the customer is always right. Isn't that the adage?

Cantlupe, J., (2011, Mar.). The Quest For Quality, As healthcare reform sharpens the focus on    quality outcomes, the ability to achieve and demonstrate success becomes increasingly     important, Health Leaders, 14(3), pp. 14-26.

Sultz, H.A. & Young, K.M. (2011). Health Care USA: Understanding Its Organization and Delivery                (7th ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Response to classmates:

I am going to climb into the same boat and agree that the media can manipulate the publics way of thinking. It happens with every election, as well as, many other issues. The media used to ask tough questions of anyone they would interview, now they seem to be more like cheerleaders who are afraid to get messy or go off the beaten path of political correctness. I grew up all over the country and have seen the media bias. What the media wants us to know is not actually the facts, but what they deem to believe are the facts, or their version of the truth. Why is it that celebrities and those from Hollywood seem to grasp more news than actual news? Who really cares what dress so and so wore to her movie premiere? Is it really important? More important than knowing about Iran making nuclear bombs and missiles? Did they all get exhausted and too tired after 9/11/01 to actually report the real issues? But, then we have our nations politicians who refuse to come to work because of the collective bargaining issues, etc. These are elected officials folks, they don't have the right to not show up for work unless we the people say it is ok! If one of us refused to come into work because we couldn't take 'the heat', what do you think would happen? No more job!

Discussion 2:

Visit the Center for Responsive Politics at OpenSecrets.org. This organization tracks and analyzes campaign contributions to national Republican or Democratic candidates, and the contributions' sources. Then:

• Get familiar with the site by trying some of the many links available. Then look at areas such as, "Top overall donors," "Top PACs," "Top industries," "Most partisan industries," and "Totals by sector."
• Do some searches on the Health Sector, entering the names of various donors, such as "pharmaceuticals," "health professionals," "physicians," and "nurses."
• Consider party affiliations, including recipients according to party.
• Discuss what you find on the discussion page below, and identify what your findings may suggest in terms of money buying political influence.

$1,039,895 came from AstraZeneca PLC, and this was not even the largest contribution by a pharmaceutical company. I was well aware that large contributions came from pharmaceutical companies, however I think I was most astounded by the largest amounts coming from American Hospital Assn, and American Dental Assn. Granted some of these contributors tried to split their funds down the middle or as close to for equal contribution, however when you are giving this kind of money a 1-2% difference is huge! In 2010 cycle:

         Total             Democrats   Republicans   % to Dems% to Repubs   Individuals   PACs

        $1,674,734   $890,545     $765,689         53%                      46%       $228,120      $1,446,614

was contributed by Pfizer. Granted they contributed to both political parties, but they contributed 7% more to the democratic party. It seems that large associations, or companies seem to contribute more one way or another. There is no true bi-partisan on anyone's part. One would think that most of these large corporations and associations would want to contribute more to the republican party considering the history is they are for less regulations. It appears to me that these contributors are actually in favor of regulation just in the way and amounts of their contribution .