Newspaper corrections
My intentions were to post some interesting medical information over the next few days, but after receiving several phone calls and emails in response to the articles, I thought I would at least comment on this topic for another day.
I appreciate the Courier and the Tribune’s coverage in the past few days. But there are some inaccuracies in the reporting.
[Doctor's blog takes on Indiana medical establishment]
[The News Tribune - Nursing shortage takes toll on patients]
The Tribune stated “Eichenberger said he can’t remember Floyd Memorial being on diversion one time last year.”
This was reported and published in error and should have read that I could not remember Floyd being on diversion because of nursing shortage one time last year. We were on diversion, but always for lack of beds. This was just an unintentional error in reporting.
The Courier’s article also contained some inaccuracies. I never stated as fact that Clark Memorial was in the red for three years in a row, but stated that “from what we were told”. Our board was given this information when we were reviewing our financials and our budget. We were always being compared to Clark and were led to believe that we were in much better shape than Clark County. If this is not correct, our board was being given bad information. That is another issue.
Physicians as well as others who have worked in hospitals managed by Jewish have reported that the “funneling concept” described is a very common perception. Show us the numbers and eliminate this perception.
Lastly, the comments about the primary care group “basically eliminating the need” are accurate. The group is owned by Norton and if Clark Memorial was not in existence, this group would be able to utilize Norton’s. They may choose to use Clark, but if they are like our office, plus have the additional equipment previously mentioned, then they already have nearly everything necessary to provide primary care and practice their specialties. In addition, physicians from the Norton owned primary care groups have told me that they have been encouraged to direct patients in the direction of Norton’s but it is certainly not required. Their representative stated that 70% are sent to Clark. But in our group, more than 95% of our patients go to our local hospital (Floyd). There is a difference.
Not that any of these are huge discrepancies, but it has certainly stimulated more discussion even among Clark County government officials, physicians, staff and the community. Open dialogue is always good even if it is challenging.
I appreciate the Courier and the Tribune’s coverage in the past few days. But there are some inaccuracies in the reporting.
[Doctor's blog takes on Indiana medical establishment]
[The News Tribune - Nursing shortage takes toll on patients]
The Tribune stated “Eichenberger said he can’t remember Floyd Memorial being on diversion one time last year.”
This was reported and published in error and should have read that I could not remember Floyd being on diversion because of nursing shortage one time last year. We were on diversion, but always for lack of beds. This was just an unintentional error in reporting.
The Courier’s article also contained some inaccuracies. I never stated as fact that Clark Memorial was in the red for three years in a row, but stated that “from what we were told”. Our board was given this information when we were reviewing our financials and our budget. We were always being compared to Clark and were led to believe that we were in much better shape than Clark County. If this is not correct, our board was being given bad information. That is another issue.
Physicians as well as others who have worked in hospitals managed by Jewish have reported that the “funneling concept” described is a very common perception. Show us the numbers and eliminate this perception.
Lastly, the comments about the primary care group “basically eliminating the need” are accurate. The group is owned by Norton and if Clark Memorial was not in existence, this group would be able to utilize Norton’s. They may choose to use Clark, but if they are like our office, plus have the additional equipment previously mentioned, then they already have nearly everything necessary to provide primary care and practice their specialties. In addition, physicians from the Norton owned primary care groups have told me that they have been encouraged to direct patients in the direction of Norton’s but it is certainly not required. Their representative stated that 70% are sent to Clark. But in our group, more than 95% of our patients go to our local hospital (Floyd). There is a difference.
Not that any of these are huge discrepancies, but it has certainly stimulated more discussion even among Clark County government officials, physicians, staff and the community. Open dialogue is always good even if it is challenging.
posted by Anonymous at 6:06 PM
5 Comments:
Was any regular reader of this blog surprised to see that Dr. Dan (The Grandstand Man) took no responsibility for his own inaccurate reporting? All errors belonged to someone else.
For the pure fun of observing an unchecked ego, I reviewed all his postings since last September. I couldn't find a single time that he admitted making an error of fact or judgment (including his remarkable discourse on "intelligent design," and his rationalization that writing anonymously in support of his reappointment to the board wasn't dishonest). Self-appointed. Self-important. Self-righteous. He will save us all!
Doc, looks like you've got yourself one of those troll fan clubs.
Anonymous, of course. Anonymity is a disease for which we all should seek a cure.
NAC,
Just as you, I've accepted the responses from critics.
My goals continue to be better accessible healthcare, better patient care with increased staffing levels and to identify problem areas within the current dysfunctional system.
I'll never be able to change attitudes like the anonymous blogger and therefore won't waste a lot of energy trying.
Yesterday I posted, tongue in cheek, about this blog becoming "SOLFC" over the weekend. There is a big difference here.
By far the majority of posts on this blog are well written and have, at the minimum, a modicum of logic behind them.(Mine excluded) To just basically dismiss posts by unknown authors, regardless of content, is shortsighted. Would Robert Frost's poetry be any less enjoyable and enlightening if we did not know who wrote it?
God Bless You ! Errors and all !
More physicians should get involved with educating the public stimulating this type of debate and encouraging discourse. Healthcare is arguably one of the most complex industries and probably the most regulated industry in history.
The finances are very difficult to understand since payments to physicians vary by source, year and geographical area. Entire courses are taught on coding for Medicare alone. Cash flow is ridiculous from most sources. Hospitals are a business - the requirements for most administrators would surprise most people yet entire communities depend on their success.
My advice is simple - follow the money - which entity makes how much for which service - pretty enlightening. Each payer source has a separate money allocation [e.g. CMS has no insurance agents, brokers or wholesale brokers] yet most state Medicaid programs have Pharmacy Benefit Managers and they need to get paid too.
It is a fascinating industry with plenty of lessons to learn.
Bryn J. Henderson, DO,JD,CPE
Post a Comment
<< Home