As soon as my facility went from not-for-profit to privately owned they cut our staffing by around 15% and started aggressively increasing intakes.
Shocker, quality of care dropped.
this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2023
172 points (99.4% liked)
Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related
2343 readers
77 users here now
Health: physical and mental, individual and public.
Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.
See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.
Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.
Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.
Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.
Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
We need public hospitals back in the United States. There are some things that only make sense being collectively owned
such as anything that affects the public
First do no harm...
Unless you can get moar profits that way, then do that instead.
- shareholders, not even knowing or caring that the business is a hospital
(I very much wish I could put a /s in this message, but sadly, I cannot, it seems)
Doctors aren't the ones making the decisions about staffing and care anymore when a private equity firm buys out a hospital.
Probably why they attributed their scenario to shareholders and not doctors.
Shareholders wouldn't start with "First do no harm..."
Shareholders also wouldn't say anything else in that statement. It's made up for the internet to make a point.
In other news, water is wet. More at 11.
🫶🏽 you microwave.
Edit: disregard my thoughts on formulary.
This article is about the increase in surgical site and bloodstream infections. Meaning that they cut hours from the antibiotic stewardship teams. I hope this article leads to many changes in privately owned hospitals.
What I always thought was weird was formulary.
It is acceptable to give a patient a different medication than the ones they take at home, if we do not have that medication in the hospital formulary.
Technically this makes 0 difference other than the fact that it’s a different molecule, its purpose has to be the same one.
I wonder if this is one of the reasons that quality of care drops?
Once the hospital privatizes it becomes crucial for management to save money wherever they can, preventing new cutting edge medications from being used and going back to the cheaper, yet tried and true, medication.
It shouldn’t cause any difference. But I wonder.
gee, it turns out when you prioritize profit over _____, the quality of ______ suffers! who could have guessed?