The New Medicare Regulations: Realistic or The Beginning of a Witch Hunt

Implications: The new Medicare regulations are not based in science as there is no proven clear cut medical way to eliminate the incidence of these "so-called" medical errors. It would be a dream to believe that some intervention today can eliminate the occurrence of infections in hospitals or patient falls.  Just as it would be a dream to hold state toopers responsible for eliminating car accidents.

Analysis: The reduction in medical errors is essential to the practice of medicine.  Hospitals also have committees in place to oversee and help monitor and reduce medical errors.  This occurs for the good of patients and for the good of humanity.

For Medicare or anyone to believe for one minute that hospitals or physicians would ignore patient safety or put patients in harm's way to increase their reimbursement from Medicare when the patient then develops complications or falls is purely ludicrous. 

To suggest that money will drive the system is also ludicrous.  Physicians are paid less now than last year and less now than many years ago.  Physicians are seeing more patients and providing more care without even the typical cost of living or inflation increases in reimbursement that would be fair.  Does this mean that since physicians are paid less today, that their care is substandard and lacking in quality when compared to care many years ago?  I would say this is not correct.  Physicians continue to provide better and better care in spite of pay cuts.

If hospitals are paid less to care for patients who sustain nosocomial infections or sustain falls in the hospital, then hospitals may be forced into taking fewer high risk patients.

Regarding withholding payment if patients sustain falls in the hospital or nosocomial infections, since there is no proven way to eliminate these occurrences, it is not fair to withhold payment for the care of these patients.  If this was the stone ages, and there were no standards for hand-washing between physician and nurse visits with different patients or isolation measures for patients with highly infectious conditions or for those patients particularly susceptible to infection, then it might be reasonable to pursue a policy such as this.  However, in today's world, where measures are in place to prevent infection and to prevent falls, Medicare should instead put emphasis on funding studies to invent new ways to reduce infections and falls in patients, not to penalize hospitals for unfortunate accidents, especially if the hospital has measures in place to minimize these occurrences.