Community Hospitals
e-Newsletter
Intelligence Unit Special Reports Special Events Subscribe Sponsored Departments Follow Us

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn RSS

'No-Pay' Policy for HAIs Does Not Reduce Infections

Cheryl Clark, for HealthLeaders Media, October 11, 2012

Asked if the CMS penalty for a hospital-acquired infection should be higher, Jha replied, "My personal opinion, not speaking for our group, is that these incentives are very weak, with very small amounts of money on the table.

And I do think we could make the incentives more stringent. For example, CMS could say 'we won't pay for that hospitalization at all."

"The hospital would comp the whole service. If CMS really wanted to shake things up, that would be one potential way," Jha added.

The bottom line, Jha says, "is that we should try things that I think are a little bit bolder and more substantial to see if they work or not. It clearly should be part of the agenda."

The Harvard report, prepared with researchers from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, Boston Children's Hospital, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, validates a 2009 study in the journal Health Affairs by researchers at UC San Francisco. That study predicted a negligible impact on hospital payments for care.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Comments are moderated. Please be patient.

1 comments on "'No-Pay' Policy for HAIs Does Not Reduce Infections"


Howard (10/12/2012 at 9:56 AM)
I'll say it before and I'll say it again, it was a good idea to start out with, but unfortunately you can motivate people by a penalty system on things that can't be helped either way. Chasing zero is a respectable goal in hospital infections, but with the current technology it just isn't realistic.