Some have questioned the economic value of hospitalists. That having hospitalists offer no additional advantage to patients or hospitals. Some studies have suggested that hospitalists do not save money. I would suggest those studies have been either
- Performed at places with poor hospitalist programs
- Poor hospitalists
- Poor hospitals.
Let's assume for a moment that hospitalists don't save any money. Don't order fewer tests. Don't order fewer medications. Don't order fewer consultants. Let's assume for a moment that hospitalists don't keep PCP's happier or keep subspecialists happier.Lets assume for a moment that the only benefit of a hospitalist program is decreased length of stay (LOS), which is a clearly defined benefit of most programs.
Let's even assume this decreased LOS is only 0.5 days. Now. Let's run some numbers and assumptions. Last week, Happy's Hospital was full to the brim, overflowing with patients with no place to go. No nurses to care for them. Without nurses you have no bed. You could have 100 open beds, but with no nurses, you have 100 less beds.
What happens when you don't have nurses to care for patients? Emergency rooms go in diversion, sending sick patients to other hospitals. Insurance paying customers vanish. Elective surgeries and procedures get cancelled. Hospitals take big hits when they have to divert patients to their competition. They lose market share which can damage them for years.
All the profit in medical care is derived from volume of scale. How can you squeeze more patients into the same overhead cost structure. It's no different from selling widgets. So let's do a crude economic analysis on the value of hospitalists to a hospital. You will understand why hospitalists are in such demand. If you don't, you're in denial.
Here are the assumptions for a hospital with no hospitalist program
- 300 bed hospital
- Average length of stay: 4 days
- Average (diagnosis related group) DRG collection per patient stay: $5,000 (a likely gross underestimation)
For an always full to the brim hospital, you have 300 beds * 365 days =109,500 bed days/year.
Now, if each length of stay is 4 days: 109,500 bed days per year/4 day LOS= 27,375 different patient DRG's/year.
At $5,000 per DRG, a hospital could collect a maximum of $136,875,000 a year from patient stays in an always full hospital. For an always full hospital, more patients can't be admitted. That means ER's close to ambulances. Surgeries get canceled and patients get diverted to other hospitals for their illness. The ONLY way a hospital get's paid by Medicare is to fill their beds. More patients mean more money.
Now lets look at some assumptions for a hospital with a hospitalist model in place that has no economic value except a decreased length of stay:
- 300 bed hospital
- Average length of stay 3.5 days
- Average DRG per patient of $5,000 ( I suspect a gross underestimation)
In the hospitalist model the 109,500 bed days/year are now divided by a length of stay of 3.5 days instead of 4 days. What does that do for you?
109,500/3.5 = 31,285 different patient DRGs/year in an always full hospital.
At $5,000 a year, this same hospital could generate a maximum revenue of 31,285 * $5000= $156,428,600 from patient stays in an always full hospital.
Now, I'm not mathematics professor, but you don't have to be a professor to understand what the value is in a good hospitalist program in an always full hospital by doing nothing more than decreasing the length of stay by 1/2 a day.
20 million dollars
Now lets think about one other aspect before we assume that hospitalist efficiency benefit is only 20 million dollars. Let's assume that because there are more available patient admissions, more surgical admissions and elective procedures are performed. Let's do a highly conservative 20% increase in average DRG payment and make it $6,000.
So 31,285 DRGs * $6,000 = $187,710,000
That's 50 million dollars more.
Now, let's assume that because hosptalists are much more likely to document what the hospital needs to get paid a higher payment rate based on severity of illness complicating and major complicating conditions. Things like writing the key words "uncontrolled diabetes" or "acute systolic heart failure" or "severe protein malnutrition". Let's assume conservatively that the hospital makes, on average, $200 extra per DRG in good documentation.
31,285 DRGs * $6,200 = $194 million dollars.
That's 57 million dollars more.
You have just witnessed the value of a hospitalist program. Increasing the hospital revenue by $57 million dollars a year by doing nothing more than decreasing length of stay, documenting and increasing the capacity of a hospital to accept more volume in the setting of a fixed labor pool of nurses.
In this example, there are 300 patients a day to round on. Let's assume 85 are discharged and 85 new admissions. That's 385 encounters a day. (that's a LOS of 3.5 days). If each hospitalist has a maximum of 15 encounters a day that's having 25 hospitalist rounding every day. Now. For every hospitalist working, you need to have one not working to get time off. That's the standard way a hospitalist schedule is managed. So lets assume this group of hospitalists have 50 hospitalists total.
At a subsidy of 5 million dollar ($100,000 per doc) the hospital's return on investment in additional DRG collections of 57 million dollars just made their return on investment of greater than 1000%, per year, every year till the end of time.
Now, I ask you again. Do you still think hospitalists are not valued at $100,000 a year in subsidy, when the return is $1 million per doc? This is why happy hospitalists make for happy hospitals and why their salaries continue to rise. Make sure to review my hospitalist resource area for a wealth of information on hospitalist practice management.
|LINK TO HOSPITALIST E&M CODING CARD POST|