Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 94(1): 123-135, 2019 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31104353

ABSTRACT

This article is intended for any physician, administrator, or cardiovascular catheterization laboratory (CCL) staff member who desires a fundamental understanding of finances and economics of CCLs in the United States. The authors' goal is to illuminate general economic principles of CCL operations and provide details that can be used immediately by CCL leaders. Any article on economics in medicine should start by acknowledging the primacy of the principles of medical ethics. While physicians have been trained to act in the best interests of their patients and avoid actions that would harm patients it is vitally important that all professionals in the CCL focus on patients' needs. Caregivers both at the bedside and in the office must consider how their actions will affect not only the patient they are treating at the time, but others as well. If the best interests of a patient were to conflict with any recommendation in this article, the former should prevail. KEY POINTS: To be successful and financially viable under current payment systems, CCL physicians, and managers must optimize the outcomes and efficiency of care by aligning CCL leadership, strategy, organization, processes, personnel, and culture. Optimizing a CCL's operating margin (profitability) requires maximizing revenues and minimizing expenses. CCL managers often focus on expense reduction; they should also pay attention to revenue generation. Expense reduction depends on efficiency (on-time starts, short turn-over time, smooth day-to-day schedules), identifying cost-effective materials, and negotiating their price downward. Revenue optimization requires accurate documentation and coding of procedures, comorbidities, and complications. In fee-for-service and bundled payment reimbursement systems, higher volumes of procedures yield higher revenues. New procedures that improve patient care but are expensive can usually be justified by negotiating with vendors for lower prices and including the "halo effect" of collateral services that accompany the new procedure. Fiscal considerations should never eclipse quality concerns. High quality CCL care that prevents complications, increases efficiency, reduces waste, and eliminates unnecessary procedures represents a win for patients, physicians, and CCL administrators.


Subject(s)
Cardiac Catheterization/economics , Cardiology/economics , Commerce/economics , Health Care Costs , Practice Management, Medical/economics , Ambulatory Care/economics , Budgets , Cardiac Catheterization/ethics , Cardiac Catheterization/standards , Cardiology/ethics , Cardiology/standards , Commerce/ethics , Commerce/standards , Consensus , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Health Care Costs/ethics , Health Care Costs/standards , Health Care Reform/economics , Humans , Income , Insurance, Health, Reimbursement/economics , Practice Management, Medical/ethics , Practice Management, Medical/standards , United States
3.
Arch Cardiovasc Dis ; 106(4): 228-37, 2013 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23706369

ABSTRACT

The need to inform patients using validated scientific data is acknowledged internationally. The obligation to inform patients is based on a fundamental principle of French law: the principle of the unavailability of the human body. Before engaging in diagnostic or therapeutic strategies such as paediatric cardiac catheterization, the healthcare professional must explain the disease, the advantages and drawbacks of each treatment strategy and their foreseeable benefit/risk ratio in order to help older children and their parents come to a decision. To obtain this required consent and before the care is provided, the infant and their legal representative must have received clear, accurate and understandable information. An information sheet cannot substitute for verbal information. Guidelines for good practices on the delivery of information have been established by the Health Authorities and officially recognized in a decree from the Ministry of Health. These documents allow professionals to draft a written information document for patients and healthcare users. This document must help the patient to take part in decisions that concern them. The law of 4th March 2002 regarding the rights of patients and the quality of the healthcare system states that 'in cases of litigation, it is the responsibility of the professional or the healthcare establishment to provide proof that the information was given to the person concerned in the conditions set out in the present article. This proof can be brought by any means'.


Subject(s)
Cardiac Catheterization , Consumer Health Information , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Heart Defects, Congenital/diagnosis , Heart Defects, Congenital/therapy , Patient Education as Topic , Pediatrics , Cardiac Catheterization/adverse effects , Cardiac Catheterization/ethics , Cardiac Catheterization/standards , Comprehension , Confidentiality , Consent Forms , Consumer Health Information/ethics , Consumer Health Information/legislation & jurisprudence , Consumer Health Information/standards , Emergencies , France , Government Regulation , Health Policy , Humans , Liability, Legal , Parental Consent , Patient Education as Topic/ethics , Patient Education as Topic/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Education as Topic/standards , Pediatrics/ethics , Pediatrics/legislation & jurisprudence , Pediatrics/standards , Personal Autonomy , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors
4.
Can J Cardiol ; 29(6): 718-26, 2013 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23218465

ABSTRACT

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a relatively new technology for the treatment of severe and symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. TAVI offers an alternative therapy for patients unable to be treated surgically because of contraindications or severe comorbidities. It is being rapidly dispersed in Canada, as it is worldwide. The objective of this article is to present our recommendations for the use of TAVI, based on a multidisciplinary evaluation of recently published evidence. We systematically searched and summarized published data (2008-2011) on benefits, risks, and cost-effectiveness of TAVI. We also examined ethical issues and organizational aspects of delivering the intervention. We discussed the soundness and applicability of our recommendations with clinical experts active in the field. The published TAVI results for high-risk and/or inoperable patients are promising in terms of survival, function, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness, although we noted large variability in the survival rates at 1 year and in the frequency of important adverse outcomes such as stroke. Until more data from randomized controlled trials and registries become available, prudence and discernment are necessary in the choice of patients most likely to benefit. Patients need to be well-informed about gaps in the evidence base. Our recommendations support the use of TAVI in the context of strict conditions with respect to patient eligibility, the patient selection process, organizational requirements, and the tracking of patient outcomes with a mandatory registry.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Cardiac Catheterization , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Cardiac Catheterization/economics , Cardiac Catheterization/ethics , Cardiac Catheterization/methods , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/economics , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/ethics , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Humans
7.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 59(24): 2221-305, 2012 Jun 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22575325
12.
Am Heart Hosp J ; 2(1): 52-4, 2004.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15604841

ABSTRACT

As coronary intervention procedures have become more common, their performance at the time of diagnostic coronary arteriography has become more routine. Combined arteriography and coronary intervention may be slightly less costly and, for some patients, more dangerous than staged intervention. Combined intervention is appropriate in selected patients if they are well informed and it can be done safely; however, a combined strategy should not be applied to all patients.


Subject(s)
Cardiac Catheterization/ethics , Cardiology/ethics , Coronary Angiography/ethics , Patient Selection/ethics , Radiography, Interventional/ethics , Cardiac Catheterization/economics , Cardiac Catheterization/standards , Cardiology/economics , Cardiology/standards , Combined Modality Therapy , Coronary Angiography/economics , Coronary Angiography/standards , Cost Savings , Humans , Patient Advocacy/ethics , Physician's Role , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Principle-Based Ethics , Radiography, Interventional/economics , Radiography, Interventional/standards , Safety
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...