I guess I posted my first message in the wrong forum!?!?
Now that California has prohibited the American Kidney Fund from steering dialysis patients into private insurance plans, what is going to happen?
Davita and Fresenius have been closing small dialysis facilities across the country. Why?
It only takes a couple of private insurance patients to make a clinic profitable, as they can charge the insurance companies several times the Medicare rate for every routine ‘chronic’ treatment. ‘Acute’ treatments, done in the hospital or emergency room, are also a source of profit. Dialysis companies contract with local hospitals to provide acute dialysis services when patients are hospitalized.
When a dialysis clinic no longer has private insurance patients, what can/must the for-profit company to stay profitable? If it controls nearby dialysis facilities and the local hospital contract, it can close its unprofitable dialysis centers and force patients to drive long distances to its other clinics. If the patients are unable to arrange transportation, their only choice is to seek emergency acute dialysis treatments at the local hospital. While this is disastrous for the patient's health, it does produce the necessary profit for the company.
Is this what is coming to California? Will non-profit dialysis providers eventually become the dominant providers in California? Is there something I’m missing?
|<a couple of things>|
this is a dangerous precedent California is setting, first off even non profit dialysis centers have to make enough money to keep the lights on and the water flowing. The utilities alone to operate a chronic center are outrageous. Although these clinics are "non profit" does not mean that do not make money it simply means they put their profit back into technologies, equipment etc. for their operation.
the acute programs are also an issue, many of the large providers do not make money on acute programs, they provide the service for their patients and doctors, but also as "feeder" programs that direct patients to their units after they are discharged.
I would guess many facilities are going to close in California but first I would expect a lawsuit from the big two, this is an anti capitalist anti American law. Before those of you start lecturing about greedy healthcare companies look around the world and see where the ground breaking healthcare drugs, therapies, equipment are coming from.
|<Capitalism and dialysis>|
Has capitalism worked for dialysis patient?
The American dialysis industry is notorious for its lack of innovation and randomized controlled trials.
There's also this unfortunate reality:
"As a new study of the dialysis industry asserts, the acquisition of thousands of dialysis centers by major commercial firms resulted in higher hospitalization and mortality rates of patients and less access to kidney transplants."
What these big companies are doing isn't working for patients.
Funny how the editor of this website/ board sneaks his 2 cents in.
I guess your web site should be free to advertise on? Oh no, that wouldn’t be fair right?
At least the providers are providing something....life
They provide life? (sounds like a Davita slogan)
More like minimal, profit-driven care.
Not all providers are Davita
|<Third World Dialysis>|
Thrice a week dialysis is for profit nothing else.Thrice a week 4hours patients rarely reaches URR or KT/V
I run my own practice and twice a week dialysis reduces Urea to 20 or under pre dialysis and post dialysis between 3 and 7.URR is between 75% and 80%.Need I say more
Are you saying you only have patients come in twice a week for dialysis ?
|Powered by Social Strata|