Great insights - there's a lot of economics involved in what you're discussing. It also reminds me of a comment I heard by a CEO, who basically stated that we often think the most skilled managers and executives are in the top firms in the world, but if these managers were put to run a company or factory in a place that encounters many unforeseeable issues such as rolling electric blackouts, unreliable transport etc, they'd fail within a quarter. Results depend on how well oiled the machine is and if everything is perfect, we can do a lot. But we also need guidelines for situations that are far from perfect.
Thank you. True. 100 per cent work output is possible under optimal conditions with adequate resources. Strain those resources a bit and the work may crumble unless we adapt and improvise.
Another variable in patient care is insurance. Health insurance companies are increasingly involved in decisions about diagnosis and treatment. As an example, my daughter’s oncologist ordered a PET scan only to have her insurance company representative, a pharmacist, say she couldn’t have it. It was wrong to deny my daughter’s physician access to the information she needed to treat her patient.
This is just one example but the problem is getting worse. Something needs to change.
True. That is absolutely horrible. How could a pharmacist understand what's necessary or not necessary? They should have checked with a competent physician instead. Insurance companies should stick to providing insurance and not interfere with patient care.
The oncologist was livid when talking to the pharmacist on the phone. Ostensibly, these reviews of requested services and treatments are “peer reviewed”. A pharmacist is not an oncologist’s peer.
"Illnesses rarely follow a linear path to recovery." That's the key takeaway from this post which usually always follows a linear regression line in controlled environments.
Great insights - there's a lot of economics involved in what you're discussing. It also reminds me of a comment I heard by a CEO, who basically stated that we often think the most skilled managers and executives are in the top firms in the world, but if these managers were put to run a company or factory in a place that encounters many unforeseeable issues such as rolling electric blackouts, unreliable transport etc, they'd fail within a quarter. Results depend on how well oiled the machine is and if everything is perfect, we can do a lot. But we also need guidelines for situations that are far from perfect.
Thank you. True. 100 per cent work output is possible under optimal conditions with adequate resources. Strain those resources a bit and the work may crumble unless we adapt and improvise.
Another variable in patient care is insurance. Health insurance companies are increasingly involved in decisions about diagnosis and treatment. As an example, my daughter’s oncologist ordered a PET scan only to have her insurance company representative, a pharmacist, say she couldn’t have it. It was wrong to deny my daughter’s physician access to the information she needed to treat her patient.
This is just one example but the problem is getting worse. Something needs to change.
True. That is absolutely horrible. How could a pharmacist understand what's necessary or not necessary? They should have checked with a competent physician instead. Insurance companies should stick to providing insurance and not interfere with patient care.
The oncologist was livid when talking to the pharmacist on the phone. Ostensibly, these reviews of requested services and treatments are “peer reviewed”. A pharmacist is not an oncologist’s peer.
Exactly! This is wrong on so many levels.
"Illnesses rarely follow a linear path to recovery." That's the key takeaway from this post which usually always follows a linear regression line in controlled environments.