But I do have one question about something that was written: "The proposed rule sustains the requirement that all hospitals maintain an effective internal system for assessing quality, studying adverse events, and improving both the safety and quality of care (quality assessment and performance improvement program)."
Rather than having an "internal" system, which sounds it could vary from hospital to hospital (or system to system), can we have a standardized set of measures instead to impose upon these health care settings desiring to keep getting Medicare/Medicaid money?
Yes, for the most part; some revisions should still be made or clarifications. But I do think that the CMS revision will be more accepted by the public than the one that was done in 1997 as the approach is focused on improving patient centered care, quality, and care coordination. I’m not sure how the proposal is going to be funded but it seems almost too good to be true in some respects.
I do think that if changes were made that it would reduce medical mishaps/medical error with its provision on hand offs and authenticating verbal orders. There is the patient centered approach to permit self-administration of home medications by patients or support persons; will this cause the patient to take the wrong medication or the wrong quantity? I’m not sure how effective this change would be for everyone.
I think it’s great that they are focusing on surveying to assess and monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the new revisions. But this seems like it would be expensive, and even if they can cover the initial cost for the changes, future costs should be taken into consideration.
Ensuring a single governing body would ensure that the entire system is running smoothly, but would this create a monopoly and shift power to the single governing body and be counter-effective in the participatory aspect that this revision is trying to initiate?
Also, cost aside, establishing an electronic system where health care facilities would be able to transfer information easily to each other may be beneficial to achieve the CMS’ goals.
I vote yes...
ReplyDeleteBut I do have one question about something that was written: "The proposed rule sustains the requirement that all hospitals maintain an effective internal system for assessing quality, studying adverse events, and improving both the safety and quality of care (quality assessment and performance improvement program)."
Rather than having an "internal" system, which sounds it could vary from hospital to hospital (or system to system), can we have a standardized set of measures instead to impose upon these health care settings desiring to keep getting Medicare/Medicaid money?
Yes, for the most part; some revisions should still be made or clarifications. But I do think that the CMS revision will be more accepted by the public than the one that was done in 1997 as the approach is focused on improving patient centered care, quality, and care coordination. I’m not sure how the proposal is going to be funded but it seems almost too good to be true in some respects.
ReplyDeleteI do think that if changes were made that it would reduce medical mishaps/medical error with its provision on hand offs and authenticating verbal orders. There is the patient centered approach to permit self-administration of home medications by patients or support persons; will this cause the patient to take the wrong medication or the wrong quantity? I’m not sure how effective this change would be for everyone.
I think it’s great that they are focusing on surveying to assess and monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the new revisions. But this seems like it would be expensive, and even if they can cover the initial cost for the changes, future costs should be taken into consideration.
Ensuring a single governing body would ensure that the entire system is running smoothly, but would this create a monopoly and shift power to the single governing body and be counter-effective in the participatory aspect that this revision is trying to initiate?
Also, cost aside, establishing an electronic system where health care facilities would be able to transfer information easily to each other may be beneficial to achieve the CMS’ goals.