Medical Errors in Private Equity Hospitals

[somarco]

The study, published in JAMA on Tuesday, found that in the three years after a private equity fund bought a hospital, adverse events including surgical infections and bed sores rose by 25% among Medicare patients when compared with similar hospitals that were not bought by such investors. The researchers reported a nearly 38% increase in central line infections, a dangerous kind of infection that medical authorities say should never happen, and a 27% increase in falls by patients while staying in the hospital.

Over the last two decades, private equity firms have become major players in health care, purchasing not just hospitals but also a growing number of nursing homes, physician practices and home health care companies. The firms pool money from institutional investors and individuals to form investment funds, often buying hospitals and other entities through high levels of debt, with an eye to reselling them in a few years. A separate recent study suggested the firms were consolidating physician groups in certain local markets, potentially leading to higher prices.

[EXTERNAL LINK] - Serious Medical Errors Rose After Private Equity Firms Bought Hospitals

 

[ValeRosso]

Of course, because private equity dont care about peoples healthcare, they care about profits only. Disgusting practice honestly and should be barred somehow.

 

[somarco]

Of course, because private equity dont care about peoples healthcare, they care about profits only. Disgusting practice honestly and should be barred somehow.

It's actually a mixed bag . . .

The providers purchased are often in a financial hole . . . especially the hospitals . . . if not purchased they may eventually close.

We had a local hospital in a poor area that actually closed, then reopened a few months later thanks to angel funding. However the funding was not enough to offset patients who STILL did not pay their bills, and the hospital closed again.

Sometimes the takeover works and a newer, leaner operation emerges. However that does not address the healthcare problems caused by errors. It may or may not be the result of not enough funding or some other reason.

Still, at least this issue is being addressed and hopefully will be corrected.

 

[Lee Vena]

Could not access that article but did find another one online at CNN Health. That article did have a retort from the American Investment Council that of course downplayed the study as being slanted. However, it did mention that an earlier study by some of the same authors found private equity investment was associated with slight increases in the quality of care received for some diagnosis, such as heart attacks and pneumonia, compared with hospitals not owned by private equity. Private equity investments not only improve care, but also expands access to it: when comparted to other for-profit counterparts, private equity-backed hospitals are more likely to serve low-income, rural communities, ensuring that rural resident and their families have access to high-quality, life saving care.

Also stated in the article was the fact that the study could not determine the "why" for the outcome. That would be interesting to know.