When things go wrong: the impact of being a statistical outlier in publicly reported coronary artery bypass graft surgery mortality data.

The public reporting of hospital quality and safety data is a growing phenomenon. Yet there are few reports of the effects of publicly reported data on individual organizations, particularly when the data show worse than expected performance. In this article, our hospital's response to having a mortality rate from coronary artery bypass graft surgery that was significantly higher than other programs in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is reported. The data caused suspension of elective cardiac surgery at the institution, and an independent review of the program was undertaken. The effects of the suspension and publication of mortality data on quality and patient safety, the residency training program in cardiothoracic surgery, and the financial performance of the hospital are described. Several lessons were learned that may be of value to other health care organizations that experience a public crisis in clinical quality.

Higher Priced Older Pharmaceuticals: How Should We Respond?

We and our patients have been aware of the high cost of medications in the United States for decades; however, we are now witnessing a relatively new phenomenon: exponential price increases for some older pharmaceuticals that have been available for years. To assist practitioners in how to respond to the issue of higher priced pharmaceuticals, an interprofessional session was developed and held at CHEST 2016 in Los Angeles. The session proceedings and a few updates are presented here to summarize what pulmonologists; a sarcoidosis expert; a retired executive of a medical society, an executive of a pharmaceutical company and of a pharmacy; and an ethicist advise that we do about the problem. Because the comments presented at the session and in this manuscript represent the opinions of each author, this commentary in essence is a compilation of nine editorials. It does not represent a comprehensive discussion of the field of pricing of drugs. In reflecting upon the answers to the questions posed, and regardless of their sector of health care, all participants stated that they focused on the patient. However, actually providing patient-focused care (ie, the care defined from the patient's perspective) is another matter. To significantly improve patient satisfaction and health-care outcomes, patient-focused care needs to embody the 3 Cs of (1) communication, (2) continuity of care, and (3) concordance of expectations (ie, finding the common ground). Therefore, we discuss how the 3 Cs apply to responses to higher priced pharmaceuticals.

Integration of an academic medical center and a community hospital: the Brigham and Women's/Faulkner hospital experience.

Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH), a major academic tertiary medical center, and Faulkner Hospital (Faulkner), a nearby community teaching hospital, both in the Boston, Massachusetts area, have established a close affiliation relationship under a common corporate parent that achieves a variety of synergistic benefits. Formed under the pressures of limited capacity at BWH and excess capacity at Faulkner, and the need for lower-cost clinical space in an era of provider risk-sharing, BWH and Faulkner entered into a comprehensive affiliation agreement. Over the past seven years, the relationship has enhanced overall volume, broadened training programs, lowered the cost of resources for secondary care, and improved financial performance for both institutions. The lessons of this relationship, both in terms of success factors and ongoing challenges for the hospitals, medical staffs, and a large multispecialty referring physician group, are reviewed. The key factors for success of the relationship have been integration of training programs and some clinical services, provision of complementary clinical capabilities, geographic proximity, clear role definition of each institution, commitment and flexibility of leadership and medical staff, active and responsive communication, and the support of a large referring physician group that embraced the affiliation concept. Principal challenges have been maintaining the community hospital's cost structure, addressing cultural differences, avoiding competition among professional staff, anticipating the pace of patient migration, choosing a name for the new affiliation, and adapting to a changing payer environment.

A cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical records in primary care.

Electronic medical record systems improve the quality of patient care and decrease medical errors, but their financial effects have not been as well documented. The purpose of this study was to estimate the net financial benefit or cost of implementing electronic medical record systems in primary care. We performed a cost-benefit study to analyze the financial effects of electronic medical record systems in ambulatory primary care settings from the perspective of the health care organization. Data were obtained from studies at our institution and from the published literature. The reference strategy for comparisons was the traditional paper-based medical record. The primary outcome measure was the net financial benefit or cost per primary care physician for a 5-year period. The estimated net benefit from using an electronic medical record for a 5-year period was 86,400 US dollars per provider. Benefits accrue primarily from savings in drug expenditures, improved utilization of radiology tests, better capture of charges, and decreased billing errors. In one-way sensitivity analyses, the model was most sensitive to the proportion of patients whose care was capitated; the net benefit varied from a low of 8400 US dollars to a high of 140,100 US dollars . A five-way sensitivity analysis with the most pessimistic and optimistic assumptions showed results ranging from a 2300 US dollars net cost to a 330,900 US dollars net benefit. Implementation of an electronic medical record system in primary care can result in a positive financial return on investment to the health care organization. The magnitude of the return is sensitive to several key factors.