Hospitals Are Keeping COVID-19 Patients Longer. Why?


by James A. Bacon

In my daily update of COVID-19 statistics reported by the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) and the Virginia Hospital and Healthcare Association (VHHA), I abandoned some time ago the use of “confirmed cases” as a useful indicator of the progress of the epidemic through the general population. I turned instead to hospitalizations, which I figured was a more accurate reflection of that subset of the population displaying severe symptoms. It’s not a perfect number — it misses people who die at home or in long-term care facilities — but it’s more reliable number than confirmed tests.

Now I’m wondering about the hospital data. Either there’s something very wrong with the data, or I’ve stumbled across something very important occurring in how hospitals are responding to the virus.

Here are the salient statistics: Over the past 13 days, the VDH has reported that 1,211 COVID-19 patients were admitted to Virginia hospitals. Over that same period, the VHHA has reported that COVID 1,318 patients were discharged. In other words, 97 more patients were discharged than were admitted. One would expect, then, that the number of patients in hospitals would have diminished by some amount.

But the reverse has happened. The total number of COVID-19 patients currently in hospitals actually increased — by 18% to 232. (See details in the graph above.)

The obvious explanation for why there are more COVID-19 patients in hospitals is that they are staying longer on average. One might conjecture that patients on average are sicker and are taking longer to recover. That would be a perfectly valid reason for an increasing hospital population.

But that hypothesis flies in the face of other evidence. During the same period, according to VHHA data, the number of patients held in ICUs and using ventilators has declined slightly, as seen below.

If COVID-19 patients were sicker, we’d expect to see more of them in ICU beds and, possibly, using more ventilators. (The ventilator stats are tricky. The declining use of ventilators may reflect evolving medical opinions regarding their efficacy. The same cannot be said of ICUs, however.)

Here’s another possibility: Hospitals are are motivated for financial reasons to treat COVID-19 patients for longer periods of time because they are hemorrhaging cash like a pierced femoral artery.

In the early days of the epidemic, Virginia hospitals were concerned that the system would be swamped by a spike in the number of COVID-19 patients. The goal was to free up as much capacity as possible. Thanks to Governor Ralph Northam’s emergency shutdown measures, the patient surge never materialized. But hospitals were left stranded with loads of empty beds.

It has been widely reported that Bon Secours, Ballad Health and Carilion Clinic have instituted widespread furloughs due to declining patient counts attributable to Northam’s decree prohibiting elective surgery. Now we can add the University of Virginia Health System to the list. The hospital system, it was reported this morning, is cutting executive salaries, slashing physician compensation, reducing hours for patient-care staff, and furloughing some non-patient care staff.

Why? Because surgeries are down 70% and clinic visits are down 90%. The same scenario is playing out across much of the state.

If I were a hospital administrator distressed by empty beds, worried about literally running out of cash, and fearful that my hospital enterprise was crashing and burning, what would I do? I would urge docs to keep patients in the hospital as long as legally and ethically possible in order to generate as much revenue as possible. The increasing number of COVID-19 patients in hospitals is consistent with this theory. If I’m right, hospital stays for non-COVID patients could be lengthening as well.

I have not tested this hypothesis by checking with the hospitals themselves. Most refuse to return my phone calls during the epidemic, and those that have responded have given non-responsive, boilerplate responses. I have better things to do with the three to four hours a day I can devote to this blog than solicit no comments. But if readers can provide information that either confirms or contradicts my theory, please let me know. Either leave a comment or email me directly at jabacon@baconsrebellion.com.

(I want to credit Carol Bova for bringing issue of conflicting hospital data to my attention offline. For better or worse, the ensuing analysis is mine.)


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

60 responses to “Hospitals Are Keeping COVID-19 Patients Longer. Why?”

  1. idiocracy Avatar
    idiocracy

    Federal $$$$$ that’s why.

  2. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    I think someone has to be pretty cynical or even conspiratorial to think that virtually all hospitals across the state are purposely keeping COVID19 patients longer so they can make more money.

    Geeze!

    Steve touched on it… the ventilators are a virtual death sentence to a lot of folks and other therapies that involve longer recovery times seem to be what’s going on.

    Bloggers asking hospitals for data that they will then use that data to accuse the hospitals of bad faith in treating COVID19 patients, and the hospitals have no time for it? Who woulda thought?

    1. I stated my conjecture regarding hospital actions as a “possibility” and a “hypothesis.”

      Do you understand what those words mean? Or are you deliberately misrepresenting what I wrote?

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        You’re basically asking if the hospitals are acting in bad faith – not one or two – but most of them across the state.

        Correct? And you want some data to determine if it is true. Correct?

        If I have “misrepresented”, then please show me where and I will apologize.

        This is why bloggers get no respect.

        1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
          TooManyTaxes

          I agree that a statewide effort by hospitals to retain COVID-91 patients is not very likely. Having said that, concluding no one is doing it, maybe just incrementally, is also not very likely. It’s other people’s money.

      2. Larry, READ THE FRIGGIN’ POST!

        I wrote, “I would urge docs to keep patients in the hospital as long as legally and ethically possible.”

        How do you get from that statement to “virtually all hospitals across the state are purposely keeping COVID19 patients longer so they can make more money”?

      3. A strange argument between you two: Jim, you did say, “Here’s another possibility: Hospitals are are motivated for financial reasons to treat COVID-19 patients for longer periods of time because they are hemorrhaging cash like a pierced femoral artery.” Larry’s correct, that’s the theme of the entire post, isn’t it? And Larry, when you say, “I think someone has to be pretty cynical or even conspiratorial to think that virtually all hospitals across the state are purposely keeping COVID19 patients longer so they can make more money” — no, Jim is simply reporting what he sees and what it suggests to him?

        Anyway, there is a middle interpretative path here: hospitals originally got ready for a crush of new patients and braced to push for the fastest possible turnover, but as we have in fact “flattened the curve” it has allowed them to treat these patients with the care they always deserved; moreover we continue to hear that covid infections are now known to cause a lot more complications: strokes, and blood clots in the limbs, and lung and kidney/liver impacts, than were originally envisioned.

        What this all does underscore is the focus of our insurance system, and therefore our hospital charges (as well as private doctor charges), on per-patient, per-episode-of-sickness accounting — NOT on health care focused on KEEPING US HEALTHY. Say what you will against health care systems in other countries, this is a major failing of ours.

        1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
          Reed Fawell 3rd

          Very fine summary. Plus I would emphasize the obvious, hospitals in America often accentuate maximizing profits, thus America has by far the most expensive health care in the world, one that too often over prescribes, over tests, over operates, and over charges, and does so in highly opaque, contrived ways to hide from patient the true costs of their care, that often are far below their bills. And hospitals fight to maintain this system of secrecy that has been built into the system, often with contrivance of government that says it represents the people, not the privileged special interests.

        2. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Yup. Jim says “Hospitals” – not one or two – but he left the impression he was speaking of hospitals – plural and that’s where I got the “cynical” or “conspiratorial” part.

          I do not rule out – out of hand – an industry practice – LIKE cost-shifting but that gets to the realm of investigative journalism which is more than someone essentially saying ” I suspect these folks are doing something” … and .. oh by the way – I want them to give me the data that I need to prove bad faith on their part.

          Investigative journalism is MORE than that and I do not rule it out even for bloggers but I also call out just plain old speculation of bad faith.. which is pretty much a central theme here in BR on a lot of issues involving institutions and government… public schools, you name it.

          If Jim has some hard data – yes… if Jim is showing that SOME hospitals are NOT holding COVID19 as long as most others, then yes…

          So I’ll apologize for riling up Jim…but I’m sticking to that point. Until I see more proof than ” I suspect”… too much of that already.

  3. Nancy_Naive Avatar
    Nancy_Naive

    Woohoo! Gimme my cigars and a scotch on the rocks! Finally, I have a real excuse. Of course, I’ll have to smoke it on the deck outside, but now I won’t have to wait for weddings, babies, and funerals!

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/scientists-perplexed-low-rate-coronavirus-170200046.html

  4. idiocracy Avatar
    idiocracy

    Federal $$$$$ that’s why.

  5. Steve Haner Avatar
    Steve Haner

    They were putting them on ventilators, and they died. For 80%, the ventilator was followed by…..death (for a while it was 88% in NYC?). Now they are using a different approach, probably saving more but perhaps taking longer? I’ve also read that people have left only to return, and perhaps they are now slower to discharge. The question is always, discharge to where? Perhaps remaining in hospital is the best option. Not a nursing home, thank you.

    You expect data, Jim, you expect rational discussion. You expect too much. Somebody knows. I suspect what docs have learned in the past six weeks will prove to be amazing. What info my daughter has shared tells me they are learning plenty and adapting fast.

    1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
      Reed Fawell 3rd

      Steve says:
      “I suspect what docs have learned in the past six weeks will prove to be amazing.”

      Yes, that is one positive result of Coved-19 experience, such as exposing the gross over use of ventilators as standard practice before Coved-19. This includes the fact that for some patients who otherwise would have recovered, ventilators were death sentences. This now seems beyond dispute.

      Another big story now emerging, and this story will surely grow, is that what started off as a severe threat to the lives of vast numbers of people, this pandemic, has now morphed into a severe threat to America’s health care, and those who practice it, including entire systems, as we have known them in the past. In fact, our current misguided government policies now are laying waste to health care, and people who deliver it to us, in America. This includes many of the very best best and most effective health care providers, we have. The whole industry is in a rising crisis. Critical parts will not survive now. This is complex and multifaceted subject that deserves much elaboration. One facet of the problem is dealt with here:

      https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/29/how-coronavirus-shutdowns-are-killing-americas-health-care-system/

  6. Steve Haner Avatar
    Steve Haner

    They were putting them on ventilators, and they died. For 80%, the ventilator was followed by…..death (for a while it was 88% in NYC?). Now they are using a different approach, probably saving more but perhaps taking longer? I’ve also read that people have left only to return, and perhaps they are now slower to discharge. The question is always, discharge to where? Perhaps remaining in hospital is the best option. Not a nursing home, thank you.

    You expect data, Jim, you expect rational discussion. You expect too much. Somebody knows. I suspect what docs have learned in the past six weeks will prove to be amazing. What info my daughter has shared tells me they are learning plenty and adapting fast.

    1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
      Reed Fawell 3rd

      Steve says:
      “I suspect what docs have learned in the past six weeks will prove to be amazing.”

      Yes, that is one positive result of Coved-19 experience, such as exposing the gross over use of ventilators as standard practice before Coved-19. This includes the fact that for some patients who otherwise would have recovered, ventilators were death sentences. This now seems beyond dispute.

      Another big story now emerging, and this story will surely grow, is that what started off as a severe threat to the lives of vast numbers of people, this pandemic, has now morphed into a severe threat to America’s health care, and those who practice it, including entire systems, as we have known them in the past. In fact, our current misguided government policies now are laying waste to health care, and people who deliver it to us, in America. This includes many of the very best best and most effective health care providers, we have. The whole industry is in a rising crisis. Critical parts will not survive now. This is complex and multifaceted subject that deserves much elaboration. One facet of the problem is dealt with here:

      https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/29/how-coronavirus-shutdowns-are-killing-americas-health-care-system/

  7. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    I think someone has to be pretty cynical or even conspiratorial to think that virtually all hospitals across the state are purposely keeping COVID19 patients longer so they can make more money.

    Geeze!

    Steve touched on it… the ventilators are a virtual death sentence to a lot of folks and other therapies that involve longer recovery times seem to be what’s going on.

    Bloggers asking hospitals for data that they will then use that data to accuse the hospitals of bad faith in treating COVID19 patients, and the hospitals have no time for it? Who woulda thought?

    1. I stated my conjecture regarding hospital actions as a “possibility” and a “hypothesis.”

      Do you understand what those words mean? Or are you deliberately misrepresenting what I wrote?

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        You’re basically asking if the hospitals are acting in bad faith – not one or two – but most of them across the state.

        Correct? And you want some data to determine if it is true. Correct?

        If I have “misrepresented”, then please show me where and I will apologize.

        This is why bloggers get no respect.

        1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
          TooManyTaxes

          I agree that a statewide effort by hospitals to retain COVID-91 patients is not very likely. Having said that, concluding no one is doing it, maybe just incrementally, is also not very likely. It’s other people’s money.

      2. Larry, READ THE FRIGGIN’ POST!

        I wrote, “I would urge docs to keep patients in the hospital as long as legally and ethically possible.”

        How do you get from that statement to “virtually all hospitals across the state are purposely keeping COVID19 patients longer so they can make more money”?

      3. A strange argument between you two: Jim, you did say, “Here’s another possibility: Hospitals are are motivated for financial reasons to treat COVID-19 patients for longer periods of time because they are hemorrhaging cash like a pierced femoral artery.” Larry’s correct, that’s the theme of the entire post, isn’t it? And Larry, when you say, “I think someone has to be pretty cynical or even conspiratorial to think that virtually all hospitals across the state are purposely keeping COVID19 patients longer so they can make more money” — no, Jim is simply reporting what he sees and what it suggests to him?

        Anyway, there is a middle interpretative path here: hospitals originally got ready for a crush of new patients and braced to push for the fastest possible turnover, but as we have in fact “flattened the curve” it has allowed them to treat these patients with the care they always deserved; moreover we continue to hear that covid infections are now known to cause a lot more complications: strokes, and blood clots in the limbs, and lung and kidney/liver impacts, than were originally envisioned.

        What this all does underscore is the focus of our insurance system, and therefore our hospital charges (as well as private doctor charges), on per-patient, per-episode-of-sickness accounting — NOT on health care focused on KEEPING US HEALTHY. Say what you will against health care systems in other countries, this is a major failing of ours.

        1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
          Reed Fawell 3rd

          Very fine summary. Plus I would emphasize the obvious, hospitals in America often accentuate maximizing profits, thus America has by far the most expensive health care in the world, one that too often over prescribes, over tests, over operates, and over charges, and does so in highly opaque, contrived ways to hide from patient the true costs of their care, that often are far below their bills. And hospitals fight to maintain this system of secrecy that has been built into the system, often with contrivance of government that says it represents the people, not the privileged special interests.

        2. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Yup. Jim says “Hospitals” – not one or two – but he left the impression he was speaking of hospitals – plural and that’s where I got the “cynical” or “conspiratorial” part.

          I do not rule out – out of hand – an industry practice – LIKE cost-shifting but that gets to the realm of investigative journalism which is more than someone essentially saying ” I suspect these folks are doing something” … and .. oh by the way – I want them to give me the data that I need to prove bad faith on their part.

          Investigative journalism is MORE than that and I do not rule it out even for bloggers but I also call out just plain old speculation of bad faith.. which is pretty much a central theme here in BR on a lot of issues involving institutions and government… public schools, you name it.

          If Jim has some hard data – yes… if Jim is showing that SOME hospitals are NOT holding COVID19 as long as most others, then yes…

          So I’ll apologize for riling up Jim…but I’m sticking to that point. Until I see more proof than ” I suspect”… too much of that already.

  8. Nancy_Naive Avatar
    Nancy_Naive

    Woohoo! Gimme my cigars and a scotch on the rocks! Finally, I have a real excuse. Of course, I’ll have to smoke it on the deck outside, but now I won’t have to wait for weddings, babies, and funerals!

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/scientists-perplexed-low-rate-coronavirus-170200046.html

  9. Yes, as Steve H points out, they are learning lots about this disease. That to me is the best reason to maintain this whole social distancing regime a while longer and to lift it slowly: not that we’ll get a miraculous full pardon by vaccine, but at least a decent reprieve through our hospitals learning much better treatment techniques to save us if we do get it. Unfortunately the more we learn about it the more complications seem traceable to this disease.

    As for the financial turmoil in the hospitals: unquestionable we are fueling the fires of broad health care reform once we do get back to normal.

  10. Yes, as Steve H points out, they are learning lots about this disease. That to me is the best reason to maintain this whole social distancing regime a while longer and to lift it slowly: not that we’ll get a miraculous full pardon by vaccine, but at least a decent reprieve through our hospitals learning much better treatment techniques to save us if we do get it. Unfortunately the more we learn about it the more complications seem traceable to this disease.

    As for the financial turmoil in the hospitals: unquestionable we are fueling the fires of broad health care reform once we do get back to normal.

  11. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    In terms of things we are finding out about our health care system – and how it is “harming” doctors who make profits on elective surgery… isn’t that similar to the COPD argument?

    just asking…….

    I have zero doubts that over time, Doctors have found out how to better montetize their returns with the way that health insurance “works” – including Medicare (which does pay for SOME elective surgeries) , but to cry crocodile tears because the market has been disrupted and then to blame it on our health care system… I’ve got some swampland to sell those who think that.

    If we had universal health care LIKE THEY HAVE in Canada or Europe or Asia – it would be not so easy to make profits on elective surgeries because in those countries they are not treated the same way they are in this country. There are waiting lists in those countries for elective surgeries because they are not a priority to their health care systems.

    Pays your money and makes your choice but the folks who are currently unemployed – never had access to “gold standard” health insurance and elective surgeries to begin with. Those who actually had health insurance lost it and Medicaid don’t pay for elective surgeries like employer-provided does.

    1. That to me is where this discussion needs to go. The incentives under our current system are all wrong. Why wouldn’t we suspect hospitals (very plural intended) of extracting maximum profit from the current system by doing exactly what they are incentivised to do?! Especially when there’s federal money in the works to pay for it? But after covid is said and done, we still have to consider the lessons learned and what to do about health care generally. I see universal health care in some form comin’ like a freight train and so the question is how to design it so it actually delivers without bankrupting us? We’ve got so much inefficiency in the current system that at comparable cost there’s a lot of room for improvement along the way.

      1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
        Reed Fawell 3rd

        I disagree. Government in America is far worse, completely dysfunctional, dishonest, and corrupted. This is the regime Obama built. Now you want AOC, Bernie and Hillary to fix it?

      2. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        I totally agree, that hospitals – as well as most businesses are incentivized to make profits any way they can figure out with the current rules, regs and tax laws. No question, what so ever.

        But that is the way ANY “market”will work. They adapt to current rules and the incentivize. That’s won’t change unless you do away with Govt and go to a truly unfettered free market.

        The best countries to get a handle on profit-seeking entities in health care are the ones that have univeral health care and get critisized for things like wait times especially for elective surgeries.

        The numbers don’t like – every other country on the planet that has universal healthcare – pays LESS than we do AND they live longer AND they have less infant deaths.

        There is no way around that reality.

        The insurance that works best in the US in terms of keeping costs down are the VA, Medicare and Medicaid… because they have
        essentially taken away incentives by limiting how much they will
        pay- just like other developed countries do.

        In terms of the Hospitals getting Federal Money – yep – and why not if we’re going to give money to big corporations and chain restaurant companies? The hospitals, as far as I can tell, have never said once, that they’re going to turn anyone away even if they cannot pay.

        We think the hospitals should eat this cost? come on………

    2. Steve Haner Avatar
      Steve Haner

      There is zero evidence in the data that the “single payer” systems have done better in dealing with this. Just the opposite. Belgium, Italy, France, etc far more deaths per 1 M population. What works is Stalinist/Maoist style control of the population. Uh oh.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        Steve – WHERE do you get your “evidence”? how about a reference?

        here’s one:

        https://assets.americashealthrankings.org/app/uploads/othernations-fig14.png

  12. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    In terms of things we are finding out about our health care system – and how it is “harming” doctors who make profits on elective surgery… isn’t that similar to the COPD argument?

    just asking…….

    I have zero doubts that over time, Doctors have found out how to better montetize their returns with the way that health insurance “works” – including Medicare (which does pay for SOME elective surgeries) , but to cry crocodile tears because the market has been disrupted and then to blame it on our health care system… I’ve got some swampland to sell those who think that.

    If we had universal health care LIKE THEY HAVE in Canada or Europe or Asia – it would be not so easy to make profits on elective surgeries because in those countries they are not treated the same way they are in this country. There are waiting lists in those countries for elective surgeries because they are not a priority to their health care systems.

    Pays your money and makes your choice but the folks who are currently unemployed – never had access to “gold standard” health insurance and elective surgeries to begin with. Those who actually had health insurance lost it and Medicaid don’t pay for elective surgeries like employer-provided does.

    1. That to me is where this discussion needs to go. The incentives under our current system are all wrong. Why wouldn’t we suspect hospitals (very plural intended) of extracting maximum profit from the current system by doing exactly what they are incentivised to do?! Especially when there’s federal money in the works to pay for it? But after covid is said and done, we still have to consider the lessons learned and what to do about health care generally. I see universal health care in some form comin’ like a freight train and so the question is how to design it so it actually delivers without bankrupting us? We’ve got so much inefficiency in the current system that at comparable cost there’s a lot of room for improvement along the way.

      1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
        Reed Fawell 3rd

        I disagree. Government in America is far worse, completely dysfunctional, dishonest, and corrupted. This is the regime Obama built. Now you want AOC, Bernie and Hillary to fix it?

      2. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        I totally agree, that hospitals – as well as most businesses are incentivized to make profits any way they can figure out with the current rules, regs and tax laws. No question, what so ever.

        But that is the way ANY “market”will work. They adapt to current rules and the incentivize. That’s won’t change unless you do away with Govt and go to a truly unfettered free market.

        The best countries to get a handle on profit-seeking entities in health care are the ones that have univeral health care and get critisized for things like wait times especially for elective surgeries.

        The numbers don’t like – every other country on the planet that has universal healthcare – pays LESS than we do AND they live longer AND they have less infant deaths.

        There is no way around that reality.

        The insurance that works best in the US in terms of keeping costs down are the VA, Medicare and Medicaid… because they have
        essentially taken away incentives by limiting how much they will
        pay- just like other developed countries do.

        In terms of the Hospitals getting Federal Money – yep – and why not if we’re going to give money to big corporations and chain restaurant companies? The hospitals, as far as I can tell, have never said once, that they’re going to turn anyone away even if they cannot pay.

        We think the hospitals should eat this cost? come on………

    2. Steve Haner Avatar
      Steve Haner

      There is zero evidence in the data that the “single payer” systems have done better in dealing with this. Just the opposite. Belgium, Italy, France, etc far more deaths per 1 M population. What works is Stalinist/Maoist style control of the population. Uh oh.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        Steve – WHERE do you get your “evidence”? how about a reference?

        here’s one:

        https://assets.americashealthrankings.org/app/uploads/othernations-fig14.png

  13. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    So now all of us who worked for retirement health insurance such as my wife must surrender it and let government run it. Of course, this means taking away good health coverage from teachers, fire fighters, police, federal, state and local employers. Leave me alone.

    If people want to move to a country with a single payer or single supplier health care system, move.

    1. Steve Haner Avatar
      Steve Haner

      The great irony will be that all of the bills that created the Great Socialist America will have Donald Trump’s signature at the bottom. May be nothing left for Plugs to do.

    2. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      No. Just realize that you got a tremendous subsidy that others did not get and we need to make sure that others have equity in access to health insurance.

      You’d likely not have health insurance at ALL TMT if the insurance company could actually decide who to keep and who to let go. Older
      folks, they’d dump in a heartbeat. The reason they cannot do that
      is that Uncle Sam, on your behalf, won’t let them.

      So why do you deserve that special treatment and others not?

      1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
        TooManyTaxes

        We have health insurance from the Federal Employee Program because my wife worked for more than 40 years for the federal government at NIH, CDC, the Patent Office and the International Trade Commission. So, according to your theory, the United States government will prevent the United States government from canceling our health insurance.

        We talk of equity. How many people made the effort to get two degrees, sacrificing both income and the time and worked for 40 years? Where’s the measurement of contribution? That’s it. Punish those who follow the rules. Reward those who don’t.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          no theory here. I’m pointing out that it is the Govt that keeps the insurance company from cancelling you or increasing your premiums because of your age. Why doesn’t everybody get that protection who also works for 40 years but at a job with no employer-provided health insurance?

          I’m NOT advocating taking away your insurance. I AM asking you WHY you deserve special treatment from the Government that others do not get?

          why are you more deserving of it if others also work hard their whole lives?

  14. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    So now all of us who worked for retirement health insurance such as my wife must surrender it and let government run it. Of course, this means taking away good health coverage from teachers, fire fighters, police, federal, state and local employers. Leave me alone.

    If people want to move to a country with a single payer or single supplier health care system, move.

    1. Steve Haner Avatar
      Steve Haner

      The great irony will be that all of the bills that created the Great Socialist America will have Donald Trump’s signature at the bottom. May be nothing left for Plugs to do.

    2. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      No. Just realize that you got a tremendous subsidy that others did not get and we need to make sure that others have equity in access to health insurance.

      You’d likely not have health insurance at ALL TMT if the insurance company could actually decide who to keep and who to let go. Older
      folks, they’d dump in a heartbeat. The reason they cannot do that
      is that Uncle Sam, on your behalf, won’t let them.

      So why do you deserve that special treatment and others not?

      1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
        TooManyTaxes

        We have health insurance from the Federal Employee Program because my wife worked for more than 40 years for the federal government at NIH, CDC, the Patent Office and the International Trade Commission. So, according to your theory, the United States government will prevent the United States government from canceling our health insurance.

        We talk of equity. How many people made the effort to get two degrees, sacrificing both income and the time and worked for 40 years? Where’s the measurement of contribution? That’s it. Punish those who follow the rules. Reward those who don’t.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          no theory here. I’m pointing out that it is the Govt that keeps the insurance company from cancelling you or increasing your premiums because of your age. Why doesn’t everybody get that protection who also works for 40 years but at a job with no employer-provided health insurance?

          I’m NOT advocating taking away your insurance. I AM asking you WHY you deserve special treatment from the Government that others do not get?

          why are you more deserving of it if others also work hard their whole lives?

  15. Inthemiddle Avatar
    Inthemiddle

    I’m not sure how this discussion got off track – the issue is not private versus public insurance. Sixty-five percent of hospitalizations are for patients under the age of 60 – not covered by Medicare. https://www.wtvr.com/news/coronavirus/virginia-covid-19-outbreaks-sunday-april-19. (The bar chart from 6 News in Richmond does not break out patients 65 and older).

    Unless someone knows how many of those under 60 patients are insured by the government, I’m going to assume most are insured by private insurance or uninsured.

    Back to the issue raised by Jim, we need to look into how hospitals are getting reimbursed for hospitalizations.

    Medicare establishes DRG codes that hospitals use to identify what procedures are appropriate, depending on the diagnosis stated in the patient records. The DRG code establishes the amount of reimbursement due. As far as I know, private insurers use the same codes as Medicare.

    A hospital only receives compensation if the diagnosis supports reimbursement for the procedure. If it does not, the hospital does not get reimbursed.

    It is a felony to falsify a diagnosis. While there is some wiggle room at the margins, Jim’s hypothesis would require wholesale fraud on the part of Virginia’s hospitals and hospital physicians.

    I think the better hypothesis is that Covid patients require hospitalization longer than two weeks of treatement. Perhaps patients coming out of ICU need longer hospital stays.

    Thanks to cjbova for the response to my question about the graph showing the number of admissions over discharges.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      re: ” A hospital only receives compensation if the diagnosis supports reimbursement for the procedure. If it does not, the hospital does not get reimbursed.

      It is a felony to falsify a diagnosis. While there is some wiggle room at the margins, Jim’s hypothesis would require wholesale fraud on the part of Virginia’s hospitals and hospital physicians.”

      you said it much more clearly than I did and it was the second part that I particularly reacted to, the ” wholesale fraud” for most hospitals – just way too much conspiracy mongering going on these days.

      I wish Mr. McDermmot had ALSO addressed that question when he offered comments to BR.

    2. IntheMiddle, thanks for bringing the conversation back on track.

      But I do take exception to your comment that, “while there is some wiggle room at the margins, Jim’s hypothesis would require wholesale fraud on the part of Virginia’s hospitals and hospital physicians.”

      This is a fact: Many hospitals and doctors aggressively “upcode” with great regularity. Maybe not all hospitals and docs all the time, but many game the system to maximize revenue. They push the boundaries. It is impossible to understand how the U.S. healthcare system works without recognizing the ubiquity of this practice.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        Jim – “aggressive upcoding” is NOT fraud nor a conspiracy about hospitals and doctors to commit it.

        Doctors and Hospitals DO maximize the coding – but they’re following the rules when they do that – and the code standards people are tightening codes also if they think abuse is going on.

        It’s when you equate this with “suspected” conspiratorial wrongdoing on a wide scale that things go sideways…. especially when that charge is levied in the middle of a pandemic… you’re putting hospitals in the category of price gouchers… and such.

        My bet is that hospitals are losing their financial butts on COVID-19 and you are actually making that argument over the elective surgery bans… right?

  16. Inthemiddle Avatar
    Inthemiddle

    Aggressively up-coding is like aggressively taking business deductions on your income taxes. The goal is to code at the highest level that is legally permitted, without committing fraud. At the margin, it is possible to push coding to generate a higher level of reimbursement, but that would not generate the kind of fraud we’ve been discussing. (Perhaps an analogy might be – it’s possible to go five mph over the speed limit, but you are likely to face a penalty if you go 20 mph over. )

    The kind of fraud that Jim suggests would require the active participation of the physicians (independent as well as employees), nurses, coding administrators, hospital compliance staff. It would suggest that they are all willing to be part of a criminal conspiracy. This does occur occasionally (as evidenced by prosecutions), but it is generally not the case. Even those who might have that inclination typically don’t have a personal incentive to criminally game the system. Unless they are in the upper levels of management, they don’t share in the gains.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      We agree. You are much better at articulating than I.

  17. Inthemiddle Avatar
    Inthemiddle

    I’m not sure how this discussion got off track – the issue is not private versus public insurance. Sixty-five percent of hospitalizations are for patients under the age of 60 – not covered by Medicare. https://www.wtvr.com/news/coronavirus/virginia-covid-19-outbreaks-sunday-april-19. (The bar chart from 6 News in Richmond does not break out patients 65 and older).

    Unless someone knows how many of those under 60 patients are insured by the government, I’m going to assume most are insured by private insurance or uninsured.

    Back to the issue raised by Jim, we need to look into how hospitals are getting reimbursed for hospitalizations.

    Medicare establishes DRG codes that hospitals use to identify what procedures are appropriate, depending on the diagnosis stated in the patient records. The DRG code establishes the amount of reimbursement due. As far as I know, private insurers use the same codes as Medicare.

    A hospital only receives compensation if the diagnosis supports reimbursement for the procedure. If it does not, the hospital does not get reimbursed.

    It is a felony to falsify a diagnosis. While there is some wiggle room at the margins, Jim’s hypothesis would require wholesale fraud on the part of Virginia’s hospitals and hospital physicians.

    I think the better hypothesis is that Covid patients require hospitalization longer than two weeks of treatement. Perhaps patients coming out of ICU need longer hospital stays.

    Thanks to cjbova for the response to my question about the graph showing the number of admissions over discharges.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      re: ” A hospital only receives compensation if the diagnosis supports reimbursement for the procedure. If it does not, the hospital does not get reimbursed.

      It is a felony to falsify a diagnosis. While there is some wiggle room at the margins, Jim’s hypothesis would require wholesale fraud on the part of Virginia’s hospitals and hospital physicians.”

      you said it much more clearly than I did and it was the second part that I particularly reacted to, the ” wholesale fraud” for most hospitals – just way too much conspiracy mongering going on these days.

      I wish Mr. McDermmot had ALSO addressed that question when he offered comments to BR.

    2. IntheMiddle, thanks for bringing the conversation back on track.

      But I do take exception to your comment that, “while there is some wiggle room at the margins, Jim’s hypothesis would require wholesale fraud on the part of Virginia’s hospitals and hospital physicians.”

      This is a fact: Many hospitals and doctors aggressively “upcode” with great regularity. Maybe not all hospitals and docs all the time, but many game the system to maximize revenue. They push the boundaries. It is impossible to understand how the U.S. healthcare system works without recognizing the ubiquity of this practice.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        Jim – “aggressive upcoding” is NOT fraud nor a conspiracy about hospitals and doctors to commit it.

        Doctors and Hospitals DO maximize the coding – but they’re following the rules when they do that – and the code standards people are tightening codes also if they think abuse is going on.

        It’s when you equate this with “suspected” conspiratorial wrongdoing on a wide scale that things go sideways…. especially when that charge is levied in the middle of a pandemic… you’re putting hospitals in the category of price gouchers… and such.

        My bet is that hospitals are losing their financial butts on COVID-19 and you are actually making that argument over the elective surgery bans… right?

  18. Inthemiddle Avatar
    Inthemiddle

    Aggressively up-coding is like aggressively taking business deductions on your income taxes. The goal is to code at the highest level that is legally permitted, without committing fraud. At the margin, it is possible to push coding to generate a higher level of reimbursement, but that would not generate the kind of fraud we’ve been discussing. (Perhaps an analogy might be – it’s possible to go five mph over the speed limit, but you are likely to face a penalty if you go 20 mph over. )

    The kind of fraud that Jim suggests would require the active participation of the physicians (independent as well as employees), nurses, coding administrators, hospital compliance staff. It would suggest that they are all willing to be part of a criminal conspiracy. This does occur occasionally (as evidenced by prosecutions), but it is generally not the case. Even those who might have that inclination typically don’t have a personal incentive to criminally game the system. Unless they are in the upper levels of management, they don’t share in the gains.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      We agree. You are much better at articulating than I.

Leave a Reply