Emergency Physicians' Ethical Issues with Hospital Business Models.

BACKGROUND: The changing hospital business model has raised ethical issues for emergency physicians (EPs) in a healthcare system that often prioritizes profits over patient welfare. For-profit hospitals, driven by profit motives, may prioritize treating patients with lucrative insurance plans and those who can afford expensive treatments. Private equity investors, who now own many for-profit hospitals, focus on short-term financial gains, leading to cost-cutting measures and pressure on EPs to prioritize financial goals over patient welfare. Nonprofit hospitals, mandated to provide charity care to the underserved, may fail to meet their community service obligations, resulting in disparities in healthcare access. OBJECTIVE: This review examines the ethical challenges faced by emergency physicians (EPs) in response to the evolving hospital business model, which increasingly prioritizes profits over patient welfare. DISCUSSION: Emergency physicians face ethical dilemmas in this changing environment, including conflicts between patient care and financial interests. Upholding professional ethics and the principle of beneficence is essential. Another challenge is equitable access to healthcare, with some nonprofit hospitals reducing charity care, thus exacerbating disparities. EPs must uphold the ethical principle of justice, ensuring quality care for all patients, regardless of financial means. Conflicts of interest may arise when EPs work in hospitals owned by private equity firms or with affiliations with pharmaceutical companies or medical device manufacturers, potentially compromising patient care. CONCLUSION: Emergency physicians must navigate these ethical issues while upholding professional ethics and advocating for patients' best interests. Collaboration with hospital administrators, policymakers, and stakeholders is vital to address these concerns and prioritize patient welfare in healthcare delivery.

The cost effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open gastric bypass surgery.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGBP) has been proven to be a safe and well-tolerated approach to the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, despite its increased cost when compared to the open approach (OGBP). This increased expense has led many to question whether LGBP is a cost effective alternative to OGBP. The aim of this study is to determine which approach is most cost effective, considering costs associated with the operation itself, perioperative complications, and income lost during convalescence. METHODS: A PubMed search of the National Library of Medicine online journal database was conducted. Studies that met predetermined criteria for selection were included in the analyses of patient demographics, perioperative complications, length of hospital stay, excess weight loss, and time to recovery. Data on 6,425 OGBP and 5,867 LGBP patients were used to compare the outcomes associated with each approach. RESULTS: Significant differences were found in the perioperative complication profiles, time to recovery, and overall expense of the two approaches. OGBP was associated with an increased incidence of major perioperative complications, especially extraintestinal complications, and greater perioperative mortality. LGBP was associated with shorter hospital stays, increased incidence of intestinal complications, and a 2.25% incidence of conversion to OGBP. Patient demographics and percent excess weight loss (%EWL) at 3 years follow-up were found to be similar with both OGBP and LGBP. CONCLUSION: LGBP is a cost effective alternative to OGBP for surgical weight loss. Despite the increased cost of LGBP, patients suffer fewer expensive and lifethreatening perioperative complications.