Discover the best ways to public safety


The Sickly State of Public Hospitals

There are many types of hospitals but thefinance hyper-sophisticated marketing. Public
most well known are the Public Hospitals.policy must be written to support "safety
What sets them apart is that they providenet" institutions. They must be allowed to
services to the indigent (people withoutorganize their own MCOs (Managed Care
means) and to minorities.Historically, publicOrganizations of patients), to insure
hospitals started as correction and welfarepatients and to market their services
centres. They were poorhouses run by thedirectly to groups of potential consumers.
church and attached to medical schools. AThis way they will save the 20% commission
full cycle ensued: communities establishedthat they are paying HMOs currently. If they
their own hospitals which were later takenbecome more efficient and reduce utilization,
over by regional authorities and governmentsthey will absorb the full benefits, instead
- only to be returned to the management ofof ceding them to contracting groups of
communities nowadays. Between 1978 and 1995 apatients and insurance companies or even to
25% decline ensued in the number of publicthe government's medical insurance plans. The
hospitals and those remaining werehospitals will thus be able to construct
transformed to small, rural facilities.In thetheir own networks of suppliers and share
USA, less than one third of the hospitals aretheir risks with their physicians or with the
in cities and only 15% had more than 200insurance companies as best suits their
beds. The 100 largest hospitals averaged 581objectives.An example: a Public Hospital with
beds.A debate rages in the West: shouldits own healthcare plan is likely to make use
healthcare be completely privatized - orof all its specialists and facilities,
should a segment of it be left in publicincrease capacity utilization and profits -
hands?Public hospitals are in dire financialwhereas today only its primary care, less
straits. 65% of the patients do not pay forlucrative, services are used by independent
medical services received by them. The publicHMOs.The government can limit the total
hospitals have a legal obligation to treatnumber of healthcare plans available, so that
all. Some patients are insured by nationalthe one propagated by the public hospital
medical insurance plans (such as Medicarewill stand out and not be swamped by hundreds
Medicaid in the USA, NHS in Britain). Othersof other plans. Such a public hospital plan
are insured by community plans.The othercould also be declared the "healthcare plan
problem is that this kind of patientsof default" - anyone who has not selected a
consumes less or non profitable services. Theplan will be automatically referred to and
service mix is flawed: trauma care, drugs,included in the public hospital plan.Not
HIV and obstetrics treatments are prevalent -every hospital can start an HMO plan. Only
long, patently loss making services.The morethe big ones can support the necessary
lucrative ones are tackled by privateinsurance payments, the reserve requirements
healthcare providers: hi tech and specializedand the marketing and administrative costs.
services (cardiac surgery, diagnosticThe paradox is that big public hospitals are
imagery).Public hospitals are forced toalready committed to HMOs, insurers, other
provide "culturally competent care": socialpatient groups, or government-sponsored MCOs.
services, child welfare. These are moneyThese resist the inclusion of hospitals which
losing operations from which privateown competing healthcare plans - in their
facilities can abstain. Based on research, wenetworks. This is natural: a hospital with a
can safely say that private, for profitplan - is a direct competitor of a private
hospitals, discriminate against publiclyprovider of healthcare management and
insured patients. They prefer young, growing,insurance. Another obstacle is that
families and healthier patients. The lattergovernments are very reluctant to encourage
gravitate out of the public system, leavingthe public sector on account of the private
it to become an enclave of poor, chronicallyone. This is definitely out of fashion
sick patients.This, in turn, makes itnowadays.So, an alternative strategy looks
difficult for the public system to attractmore viable:Public hospitals can act as
human and financial resources. It is becomingdirect contracting networks. They can team
more and more destitute.Poor people are poorup, pool their resources, exercise political
voters and they make for very littlelobbying, relegate administrative and audit
political power.Public hospitals operate infunctions (data processing, claim processing,
an hostile environment: budget reductions,payment system, accounting, legal services)
the rapid proliferation of competingto a common centre. This will eliminate the
healthcare alternatives with a much betterneed for middlemen like the HMOs. These joint
image and the fashion of privatization (evennetworks will be able to negotiate contracts
of safety net institutions).Public hospitalswith other contractors: physicians,
are heavily dependent on state funding.pharmacies, specialized laboratories and so
Governments foot the bulk of the healthcareon. This will assist the public hospitals to
bill. Public and private healthcare providerspreserve a loyal and stable (low churning)
pursue this money. In the USA, potentialpatient base.Finally, public hospitals are
consumers organized themselves in Healthcarelarge employers with political muscle. All
Maintenance Organizations (HMOs). The HMOthey lack is the will to exercise it. They
negotiates with providers (=hospitals,should do it to force governments to adopt
clinics, pharmacies) to obtain volumesome unpopular decisions: offer incentives to
discounts and the best rates throughHMOs which will refer patients to public
negotiations. Public hospitals - underfundedhospitals, require HMOs to use all the range
as they are - are not in the position toof services (both primary and speciality),
offer them what they want. So, they losecompensate public hospitals directly for
patients to private hospitals.But publicnonpaying patients.But the public hospitals
hospitals are also to blame for theirmust begin to behave as public entities: they
situation.They have not implemented standardsmust open their decision making processes and
of accountability. They make no routinemake them community-oriented. They must shift
statistical measurements of theirfrom relying on contractual language to
effectiveness and productivity: wait times,relying on administrative law (regulations) -
financial reporting and the extent of networkexcept when it comes to employment. In a
development. As even governments arenutshell: they should be business oriented,
transformed from "dumb providers" to "smarton the one hand - and publicly accountable on
purchasers", public hospitals mustthe other.There is the little matter of
reconfigure, change ownership (privatize,Public Relations and advocacy. Public
lease their facilities long term), or perish.Hospitals have a terrible image and they are
Currently, these institutions are (oftendoing very little to change it. They do not
unjustly) charged with faulty financialeven collaborate with researchers trying to
management (the fees charged for theirestablish a factual fundament concerning
services are unrealistically low),"safety net medical and social care". In a
substandard, inefficient care, heavy labourworld where images count more than realities
unionization, bloated bureaucracy and nothis may well be the public hospitals biggest
incentives to improve performance andmistake.Eight Ways to Improve the Operation
productivity. No wonder there is talk aboutof Public HospitalsA public hospital can
abolishing the "brick and mortar"lease physical space or temporal slots, or
infrastructure (=closing the publiccomputer equipment or any other equipment
hospitals) and replacing it with a virtualwhich suffers capacity underutilisation - to
one (=geographically portable medicaltheir physicians for private practice.The
insurance).To be sure, there arelessee physicians will undertake to pay the
counterarguments:The private sector ishospital - either in the form of fixed fees
unwilling and unable to absorb the load ofor in the form of participation in the income
patients of the public sector. It is not(franchise arrangements).They will also
legally obligated to do so and the marketingcommit themselves to provide
arms of the various HMOs are interestedcommunity-oriented, non profit services in
mainly in the healthiest patients.Thesereturn for the right to use what is,
discriminatory practices wreaked havoc andessentially, community property.Another
chaos (not to mention corruption andmethod of using the excess capacity is to
irregularities) on the communities thatsell it, rent it, or lease it to
phased out the public hospitals - and phasedentrepreneurs who are not members of the
in the private ones.True enough, governmentshospital staff. There are many such
perform poorly as cost conscious purchaserspossibilities: small laboratories, speciality
of medical services. It is also true thatmedical services, primary care and specialist
they lack the resources to reach apractitioners. All these would love to use
substantial segment of the uninsured (throughthe superior infrastructure of the hospital.
subsidized expansions of insuranceThe right to use this infrastructure can be
plans).40,000,000 people in the USA have nogiven in the form of a concession, a
medical insurance - and a million more arefranchise, a rental arrangement, or any other
added annually. But, there is no data toarm's length mode of collaboration.
support the contention that public hospitalsProfessionals are likely to jump on the
provide inferior care at a higher cost - and,bandwagon when they realize that the hospital
indisputably, they possess unique experienceprovides them with a "captive market" of
in caring for low income populations (bothpatient. This is very much like the
medically and socially).So, in the absence ofrelationship between an "anchor" in a
facts, the arguments really boil down toshopping mall and the small retail shops
philosophy. Is healthcare a fundamental humansurrounding it. The small shops benefit from
right - or is it a commodity to be subjectedthe business diverted in their direction from
to the invisible hand of the marketplace?the big "anchor" outlets.The next logical
Should prices serve as the mechanism ofstep would be to sell products and services
optimal allocation of healthcare resources -to the community on a commercial, competitive
or are there other, less quantifiable,basis. The hospital does not have to limit
parameters to consider?Whatever theitself to the sale of medical goods and
philosophical predilection, a reform is aservices. It can also sell medical legal
must. It should include the followingservices, use its print shop to offer print
elements:Public hospitals should be governedjobs, organize its social services as a
by healthcare management experts who willprofit centre and sell them to the community
emphasize clinical and fiscal considerationsor to individuals, offer medical consultancy
over political ones. This should be coupledon a fee per service basis, even sell food
with the vesting of authority with hospitals,from the hospital kitchen through a catering
taking it back from local government.service or data to researchers from its
Hospitals could be organized as (publicarchives. A natural extension of this
benefit) corporations with enhanced autonomyapproach would be "internal privatization".A
to avoid today's debilitating dual effects:hospital is a collection of small (to medium)
politics and bureaucracy. They could organizesize businesses operating under one
themselves as Not for Profit Organizationsorganizational roof. Laundry, cleaning,
with independent, self perpetuating boards ofkitchen, the provision of television sets and
directors.But all this can come about onlytelephones to patients, a business centre for
with increased public accountability and withthe hospitalized businessmen - these are all
clear measuring, using clear quantitativeprofit or loss generating centres.Internal
criteria, of the use of funds dedicated toprivatization entails the transformation of
the public missions of public hospitals.the hospital into a holding company. This
Hospitals could start by revamping theirholding company will own and operate a host
compensation structures to increase both payof corporations. Each corporation will
and financial incentives to the staff.Currentconstitute a separate contractor which will
one-fits-all compensation systems deterprovide the hospital with a service or a
talented people. Pay must be linked toproduct. Thus, all laundry will be done by a
objectively measured criteria. The Hospital'scorporation which will charge the hospital
top management should receive a bonus whenfor its services. The same will go for the
the hospital is accredited by the state, whenkitchen, the printshop, the legal services
wait times are improved, when disrollmentand so on. These corporations will employ the
rates go down and when more services areformer staff of the hospital. This way, the
provided.To implement this (mainly mental)knowledge and experience accumulated within
revolution, the management of publicthe hospital will not be lost. The
hospitals should be trained to use rigorouscorporations owned by the former employees
financial controls, to improve customerwill have a "right of first refusal" in the
service, to re-engineer processes and tofirst five years following the
negotiate agreements and commercialtransformation. The employee-owned
transactions.The staff must be employedcorporations will be allowed to match the
through written employment contracts withbest offers in yearly tenders that the
clear severance provisions that will allowhospital will conduct for the services that
the management to take commercial risks.Clearthey are offering.These corporations will
goals must be defined and met. Publicalso be allowed to offer their services to
hospitals must improve continuity of care,other clients. Thus, they will reduce their
expand primary care capacity, reduce lengthsdependence on one employer, the hospital.
of stay (=increase turnaround) and meetThey will become truly entrepreneurial
budgetary constraints imposed both by theentities, competing for profits in a market
state and by patient groups or theirenvironment.A part of the re-engineering
insurance companies.All this cannot beprocess is to determine which of the
achieved without the full collaboration offunctions that the hospital fulfils are "core
the physicians employed by the hospitals.functions", indispensable functions without
Hospitals in the USA form business jointwhich the hospital will cease to exist or
ventures with their own physicians (PHO -will change its identity to such an extent
Physicians Hospital Organizations). Theythat it will no longer will be recognizable
benefit together from the implementation ofas a hospital. All other, "noncore",
reforms and by the increase of productivity.functions should be tendered out (a concept
It is estimated that productivity today iscalled "outsourcing"). They should be awarded
40% less in the public sector than in thein a tender to the most competitive bidders,
private one. This is a dubious estimate: theregardless of their identity and previous
patient populations are different (sickerallegiance. The hospital is likely to benefit
people in the public sector). But even if thefrom the transfer of functions, in which it
figure is incorrect - the essence is: publichas no relative competitive advantage, to
hospitals are less efficient.They are lessoutsiders whose expertise these functions
efficient because of archaic scheduling ofare. This is somewhat akin to international
patient-doctor appointments, laboratory tests(free) trade, where each nation optimizes its
and surgeries, because of obsolete orresources and passes the (beneficial) results
non-existent information systems, because ofof this optimization process to its trading
long turnaround times and because ofpartners.To control this kind of
redundant lab tests and medical procedures.transformation, medical information
The support - which exists in privatemanagement systems need to be introduced.
hospitals - from other (clinical andMany are available and they improve both the
nonclinical) personnel is absent because ofquality and the quantity of data available to
impossibly complex labour rules and jobthe management of the hospital and, as a
descriptions imposed by the unions. Most ofresult, the decision making process. This
the doctors have split loyalties between thewill make it easier for the management to
medical schools in which they teach and thepinpoint which areas require doing what. For
various hospital affiliates. They would tendinstance: the management of the hospital will
to neglect the voluntary affiliates andbe able to determine what kind of incentives
contribute more to the prestigious ones.should be provided to which members of the
Public hospitals would, therefore, be wellstaff, where could costs be cut and where and
advised to hire new staff, not from medicalhow could productivity be improved.Finally, a
schools, share risks with its physiciansnovel concept is emerging. Universities and
through joint ventures, sign contracts withhospitals are two important repositories of
pay based on productivity and put physicianshuman knowledge and experience. Virtually
in the governing boards. In general, theevery hospital somehow collaborates with an
hospitals must shrink and re-engineer theacademic institution, or with a medical
workforce. About half the budget is normallyschool.There is symbiosis between hospital
spent on labour costs in private hospitals -and medical and social researchers.Hospitals
and more than 70% in public ones. It is noshould actively encourage this. It improves
good to reduce the workforce through naturaltheir image, it contributes to their ability
attrition, mass layoffs, or severanceto provide quality services. But should not
incentives. These are "blind",do it for free. They should be contractual
nondiscriminating measures which affect thepartners to the commercial exploitation of
quality of the care provided by the hospital.the results of research conducted within
When compounded by work rules, senioritytheir premises or with their co-operation.
systems, job title structures and skewedThere is a vast field for pharmaceutical,
grievance procedures - the situation can getmedical, genetic and bioengineering research
completely out of hand.The government must- and a lot of opportunities to make money
contribute its part. Public hospitals cannotfor the benefit of the entire community. By
comply or compete with the demands ofnot getting commercially involved - hospitals
national, publicly traded HMOs with politicalgive up money which really is not theirs to
clout and the capacity to raise capital togive up.



1 A B C D 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 91 92 93 94 95 96 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109