Outcomes
- St Peter’s Charges fell by 21% below its competitors and the market median
Very positive, with no negative consequences- The fall in charges is positive due to the fact that it did not impact revenue and made care more affordable to the people thereby meeting hospital goals. Personnel at the hospital could have been included in the decision making to improve the outcome.
- A new CFO and controller were hired to strengthen oversight over the revenue cycle at the hospital.
Satisfactory Result, but with some negative consequences- The recruitment of the new CFO and controller allowed the company to meet its goals of exercising greater oversight over the revenue cycle thereby facilitating increased revenue for the hospital. The negative outcome is that the former CFO and controller had to vacate the position.
- Early Sepsis management of sepsis or possible sepsis at the hospital was enhanced by 22%.
Very positive, with no negative consequences- The outcome is classified as very positive due to the fact that it allowed the hospital to decrease cases of severe septic shock or preventable sepsis by 60% in a period of 18 months.
- Provided patients with access to lower-cost medication while saving the hospital $9 million.
Very positive, with no negative consequences- The decision was positive as it no stakeholder within the hospital was negative affect ted by it. The decision allowed for reduced operational costs while enhancing patients’ access to affordable medication.
Recommendations
- The hospital should have encouraged stakeholder participation in making the changes. Full stakeholder participation would reduce the risk of resistance to the changes.
- Instead of reducing the number of mid-level staff, the hospital should have re-tasked the staff into different positions where they could be more effective. This would have helped reduce resistance to the changes.