Tuesday, September 08, 2015
Small May Be Efficient As Well As Beautiful
By completing a $30 million construction project, Fremont
Health Medical Center in Fremont, Nebraska “intends to upgrade its quality and
image by down-sizing its number of patient beds.” The down-sizing is from 90 to 61 beds, not
including 20 mental health beds being added.
Another $10 million is being spent to upgrade Dunklau Gardens, an
attached nursing home.
That was the lead-in to a front page story in the September
5 issue of the Omaha World Herald.
Fremont is a town of about 25,000 people located on the
Platte River, some 35 miles northwest of Omaha.
According to the article, Fremont Health operates about a
dozen clinics throughout its service area.
It employs 30 physicians and has relationships with a hundred more – a
number of which presumably are specialists who travel out periodically from
Omaha. Services include cancer care,
labor and delivery, orthopedic surgery, cardiac catheterization, and
psychiatry.
The article related the case of 87-year-old Loran Pfeiffer
who recently had surgery in Fremont Health for a broken hip. His daughter Peggy, a nurse practicing in a
different hospital, was quoted as saying she was pleased with the care given to
her father.
The story is indicative of what is happening in small
hospitals all across the country. While
medical glamour has been associated with large teaching hospitals, these
smaller institutions are showing that they can provide quality care in pleasant
ways and at lower cost for a large portion of the patient population.
It causes one to wonder about the future of the large,
prestigious institutions, particularly those located in relatively small
communities like the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, the University of
Michigan in Ann Arbor and the University of Iowa in Iowa City.
Sunday, September 06, 2015
The Silent Evolution
Rich Umbdenstock having retired, the American Hospital
Association has a new CEO, Rick Pollack.
The August issue of H&HN, the Associations journal, included an
interview with him in which he summarized his plans, the issues facing hospitals,
and so on.
The issues and strategies covered by Mr. Pollack were as
might be expected. I looked in vain,
however, for mention of what seems to me to be a momentous development – the
transfer of primacy in the delivery of health care from the medical profession
to hospitals.
For all of history up until recently, medical doctors
occupied the central role in the provision of health care services. When my career in hospital administration
began in the 1950’s, hospital medical staffs were “self-governing.” County health departments were the creatures
of county medical societies and state health departments and medical licensing
boards were controlled by state medical associations. The AMA accredited medical schools. No legislature could adopt a law on a health
care matter that was opposed by organized medicine.
The gradual change that has been going on in that for some
time has been accelerated in recent years by a number of factors. Except for a few large group practices like
Mayo and Cleveland Clinic, the medical profession has not been organized in a
way that would allow it to deal effectively with the emerging issues of cost
and quality. The complexity of the
payment system has grown beyond the ability of individual practitioners or
small groups to cope with it. Doctors
have become more interested in the quality of their lives and are avoiding the
stresses and demands of individual and small group practices.
A result of all this is that the mantle of leadership in the
provision of health care services has fallen on hospitals – the only entity
with the culture, experience, resources, and organizational infrastructure to
take it on. Hospitals have not sought
out that role but it has devolved upon them.
The culture of health care has conferred great respect –
even adulation – on the medical profession and there is great reluctance even
to talk about the demise of its primacy.
It is a silent evolution.
