Criteria for Alternatives Quantitatively assessing the costs of alternatives for HAC is difficult, as the cases are often not accurately reported, making it difficult to use the cost-benefits analysis. Online and physical research will provide various measures, ratings, rankings, and report cards for hospitals but these are not consistent scales and will vary in value and validity (Pronovost, 2013). Another difficulty is the accuracy of these figures is rarely reported to the public. Thus, the criteria to evaluate the following alternatives are effectiveness, political feasibility, and the costs involved. These points will assess the management of the “error chain,” care system, and complexity of the model. The term “error chain” refers to
…show more content…
The stakeholders involved in this policy vary from Federal and State agencies, local communities, provider organizations, health care professionals, and other individuals such as patients or payers (Clancy, 2011). The program is designed for flexibility in adapting and evolving with developing methods of measuring and improving healthcare quality. The program’s core can be assess at local, state, and national levels to better improve the quality of health care, improve health through interventions, and reduce the cost (but not the quality) for everyone (Clancy, 2011). The six proposed priorities are: making care safer through reduced harm in delivery of care, ensuring engagement of individuals and family members in their care, promoting effective communication and coordination of care, promoting what has been deemed the most effective practice in prevention and treatment, working with communities to promote wide use of the best practices for healthy living, and making quality care more affordable through development and expansion of new delivery models (Clancy, 2011). What this policy seeks to achieve in reducing HAC cases is a modified system of communication amongst healthcare providers and other officials such as patient advocates in implementing and designing protocols. These regulations would identify potential sources …show more content…
While figures for the estimated cost of implementing this is not provided, the estimated waste of Medicare dollars annually by HAC is $4.4 million and can be used as a reference point of what figure to reduce (Clancy, 2011). This cost, though not including that of Medicaid recipients, can be used as the baseline when determining the costs of HAC cases reported from each hospital following this policy. Any potential models indicative of positive results from this level can then be tested and measured at higher levels, such as regionally, before being proposed as a potential federal regulation. From the political feasibility aspect, representatives may object funding for this measure if it requires raising prices for their constituents. This would be a quick motion to strike down, but if the policy enables lower level implementing as an experiment on several hospitals would allow a compilation of data for representatives to consider as well as public opinion on the efficacy of the
The stakeholders involved in this policy vary from Federal and State agencies, local communities, provider organizations, health care professionals, and other individuals such as patients or payers (Clancy, 2011). The program is designed for flexibility in adapting and evolving with developing methods of measuring and improving healthcare quality. The program’s core can be assess at local, state, and national levels to better improve the quality of health care, improve health through interventions, and reduce the cost (but not the quality) for everyone (Clancy, 2011). The six proposed priorities are: making care safer through reduced harm in delivery of care, ensuring engagement of individuals and family members in their care, promoting effective communication and coordination of care, promoting what has been deemed the most effective practice in prevention and treatment, working with communities to promote wide use of the best practices for healthy living, and making quality care more affordable through development and expansion of new delivery models (Clancy, 2011). What this policy seeks to achieve in reducing HAC cases is a modified system of communication amongst healthcare providers and other officials such as patient advocates in implementing and designing protocols. These regulations would identify potential sources …show more content…
While figures for the estimated cost of implementing this is not provided, the estimated waste of Medicare dollars annually by HAC is $4.4 million and can be used as a reference point of what figure to reduce (Clancy, 2011). This cost, though not including that of Medicaid recipients, can be used as the baseline when determining the costs of HAC cases reported from each hospital following this policy. Any potential models indicative of positive results from this level can then be tested and measured at higher levels, such as regionally, before being proposed as a potential federal regulation. From the political feasibility aspect, representatives may object funding for this measure if it requires raising prices for their constituents. This would be a quick motion to strike down, but if the policy enables lower level implementing as an experiment on several hospitals would allow a compilation of data for representatives to consider as well as public opinion on the efficacy of the