Providence has made a number of key innovations that has allowed it to succeed:

1. “Single Stay” Wards. In 2003, they introduced one of the first “single stay” wards in the country. Under this model, the patient stays in one room during their entire stay, but the equipment and personnel move from patient to patient. The average length of stay at the hospital has dropped by a day or more and patient satisfaction has soared.

2. Two Hour Checks. The Hospital implemented a policy that requires nurses to check on patients every two hours. As a result, they have experienced a 25% decrease in falls.

3.  Hospitalists. In 2003, Providence placed almost all of its patients’ care in the hands of hospitalists. Since the shift, the hospital has published data showing decreases in infections, length of stay and surgical complications.

4. Value Analysis Committee. A Value Analysis Committee (“VAC”) of doctors, nurses and administrators evaluates and approves every major equipment purchase. Providence also offers financial training on cost effectiveness and efficiency to its physicians.

You can read the full article here:  http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_03/b4163040943750.htm

Instead of billing for a yearly consultation, the radiation oncologist can now only bill for a new patient visit every three years. This represents a significant reduction for most radiation oncologists.

Class Action Lawsuits Between Nurses & Hospitals:
Practical Guidance to Prevent & Defend Against Suits & Current Summary of Actions

Wednesday, February 17, 2010
12:30 – 1:15 p.m. (ET)

McGuireWoods Speakers
Kimberly Q. Cacheris, Partner
Benjamin R. Holland, Associate

McGuireWoods Moderators
Scott Becker, Partner
Thomas J. Stallings, Partner

Automatic 30-minute deductions for non-exempt employee lunch periods remain the healthcare industry standard. A lack of specific guidance from the Department of Labor recognizing the special demands inherent with patient care facilities has caused class or collective action lawsuits to become more prevalent.

These lawsuits – many times spearheaded by law firms specializing in and advertising the ability to sue hospital systems for overtime issues – are prohibitively expensive and represent the possibility of significant damages or settlements. However, there are steps healthcare systems can take to limit their exposure to such suits, and, in some instances, eliminate exposure altogether.

Please join us as we outline the risks for hospitals, and discuss the corrective actions needed to ensure compliance. We will address specific questions as time permits, so please send questions by Monday, February 15 to anorris@mcguirewoods.com.

Online registration is available. Dial-in information and presentation materials will be sent via e-mail closer to the event. If you have questions or comments, please contact Amy Norris at anorris@mcguirewoods.com or 704.343.2228.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/health/24radiation.html?pagewanted=all

I have not seen a response yet from radiation oncology industry groups or equipment manufacturers yet, but would expect a statement will be forthcoming.

Wednesday, May 12, 2010
7:30 a.m. – 5:30 p.m.
Westin Chicago O’Hare
6100 River Road
Rosemont, Illinois 60018

Online Registration

Save the date for an engaging full-day seminar covering business and legal issues in dialysis and nephrology. Geared toward nephrologists; hospital and dialysis facility CEOs, CFOs and COOs; lawyers; administrators; and consultants, the symposium will cover:

• Effects of healthcare legislation and regulations on dialysis and nephrology
• Year in review and trends in 2010
• Regulatory and reimbursement issues affecting
  the industry
• Structuring and financing dialysis facility transactions
• Organizational issues for nephrology practices
• Structuring relationships between dialysis facilities and nephrologists, including medical director arrangements and other collaborative efforts

If you are interested in exhibiting at this conference or need more information, please contact Amy McGlynn at amcglynn@mcguirewoods.com or 804.775.7892. Exhibition space is limited.

The fee for attending the conference is $300, and $250 for each additional registrant from the same organization.

Conference Co-chairs:

James B. Riley Jr.
Robert J. Pristave
Scott P. Downing
Kimberly J. Kannensohn

http://www.beckersasc.com/news-analysis-asc/business-financial-benchmarking/republican-wins-senate-seat-in-massachusetts-8-quick-thoughts-by-scott-becker.html

I view this as a fair and non-partisan analysis that echoes many of the comments we have been hearing from both sides of the aisle. It is worth a quick read.

The ASC claimed that the Hospital’s agreement with Caterpillar, Inc. (“Caterpillar”), a large corporation headquartered in the area, to provide their employees with inpatient and outpatient surgical services violated certain antitrust and business competition laws.  The Hospital’s agreement with Caterpillar stated that once the Hospital’s surgery center had the capacity to meet all of Caterpillar’s surgical needs that Caterpillar was to no longer use the ASC or other providers for surgical services.  The ASC claims, and the court is willing to consider at trial, that this type of agreement by one of the three largest hospitals in the area is an illegal “tying arrangement” in that the Hospital has the market power to tie the product (surgical services) in a substantial volume.

The key to the court’s analysis, and most important for North Carolina hospitals and surgery centers, is that there must be a “geographic market” that the hospital is controlling.  If a hospital commands a substantial share of a “rough” market then direct evidence of anticompetitive effects is enough to establish the hospital’s market power without showing a precisely defined market.  The ASC must then show anticompetitive effects by demonstrating consumer injury (i.e. higher prices or lower quality of care) or injury to competition.

Many hospitals in the southeastern part of the United States are the primary health care providers in their respective regions. As a result, exclusive contracts could become targets for litigation if there are “anticompetitive effects.”  It will be important for both hospitals and surgery centers to be aware of the type of arrangements which could lead to these types of disputes.  The court’s decision is available here.

The Wall Street Journal Law Blog also has a running list of the various large national law firms that have committed to making donations or matching contributions to relief efforts in Haiti. http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/01/15/biglaw-stepping-up-on-haiti-aid/

• five outpatient imaging centers;
• one vein and vascular center;
• one interventional clinic;
• twelve breast imaging centers;
• two mobile MRIs; and
• one mobile ultrasound.

 Click here to read the press release accompanying the merger.  To obtain further information on Charlotte Radiology, visit www.charlotteradiology.com.  For further information on Cabarrus Radiologists, visit www.cabarrusradiologists.com.