Revisiting the business case in 'the business case for quality'

The author is writing to comment on a featured article in the October 2009 issue of hfm, "The Business Case for Quality" (Richard Boehier, MD, Daniel Hardesty, MD, Eva Gonzales, and Karen Kasnetz). Two flaws in the business case as presented in the article require attention. The first is t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inHealthcare Financial Management Vol. 64; no. 1; pp. 24 - 25
Main Author Ward, William J., Jr
Format Journal Article Trade Publication Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Westchester Healthcare Financial Management Association 01.01.2010
Subjects
Alliances
Cost control
Costs
Errors
Forecasts and trends
Health care costs
Hospital costs
Hospitals
Initiatives
Market trend/market analysis
Medical care
Medical care quality
Medical care, Cost of
Public health
Quality improvement
Quality management
Quality of care
Services
United States
United States
United States > US
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The author is writing to comment on a featured article in the October 2009 issue of hfm, "The Business Case for Quality" (Richard Boehier, MD, Daniel Hardesty, MD, Eva Gonzales, and Karen Kasnetz). Two flaws in the business case as presented in the article require attention. The first is the assertion that the financial benefit of the quality improvement initiative is based on average cost. The second flaw is that the potential revenue impact was neither considered nor measured as part of the quality improvement initiative. The team should be complimented. This was a great clinical initiative (the team saved 62 lives!). But the team misstated the business case.
ISSN:0735-0732
0735-0732