Local Hospitals Score 3’s and 4’s Out of 5

Another view of Sherman Hospital.

Sherman Hospital.

Medicare has put out patient reviews of hospitals.

There’s a five star rating system and local hospitals got 3’s and 4’s.

Friday the Chicago Tribune had a huge article about the new program, including a list in descending order of the hospitals.

Only one got five stars.  That was Midwestern Regional Medical Center in Zion.

Centegra's McHenry Hospital

Centegra’s McHenry Hospital

The rankings of local hospitals follow:

4 Stars

  • Advocate Good Shepherd in Barrington (4th on the list)
  • (now) Advocate Sherman in Elgin (14th on the list)

3 Stars

  • Centegra – McHenry (23rd on the list)
  • Centegra – Woodstock (24th on the list)

Comments

Local Hospitals Score 3’s and 4’s Out of 5 — 7 Comments

  1. What a joke.

    Advocate gets rewarded because they were active supports of Obamacare.

    Dr. Lee Saks has carried the banner for a heavily bureaucratic, algorithmic, and pro-central government banner as he turns on his own colleagues.

    This is what was really “graded” here.

    All of the health care players that have gotten into bed with government are rewarded by this “grading system”.

    Those who didn’t, got penalized.

    See, this is what happens when government takes over.

    Meritocracy is dumped in favor of reward of simply those who support the political establishment.

  2. CLM, what a bunch of nonsense.

    All – without exception – ALL healthcare systems have “gotten in bed” with the federal government.

    The reason is simple: not a single hospital can stay in business unless they do what Medicare wants them to do.

    So the question is not whether X or Y hospital is more or less “pro-central government” “bureaucratic” or “algorithmic” – because all hospitals are trying hard to be all of the above.

    The question is which hospital is actually able to deliver – and you gotta hand it to Advocate: they have adapted better than anybody else.

    If you have a problem with government taking over the healthcare system, I think you are a few decades too late.

    Obamacare is only the next step in the natural evolution of Medicare.

    Government took over healthcare a long time ago, think LBJ and Great Society, and think EMTALA (passed by Reagan actually).

    So yeah, it has been hopeless for a long while.

    You can thank generations of US representatives for that.

  3. name less.

    We don’t disagree.

    The question is, to what degree is the health care system “in bed” with government.

    Advocate, like the Cleveland Clinic and United Health Care have decided to actively participate.

    In Advocate’s case, they have been promoters of certain clinical algorithms involved in assessing “quality care”.

    Well, if you are the actual definer of the quality, there is a bit of conflict and nefarious assessment of quality, no?

    Your rebuttal of what I say is NOT in contradiction to what I have said.

  4. Why fight over hospital ratings instead concentrate on making them all 5 star so they can serve patients more efficiently and in a less costly manner.

    A lot of people have too much unnecessary tests done mostly due to greedy doctors recommending them and also ads touting them.

    Get the profit out of healthcare.

  5. Slanderous terms like “greedy doctors” are a construct of public relations efforts by those who profit from modern American healthcare industry.

    Doctors cannot, in general, be included in that tiny elite group.

    Doctors don’t make money from tests.

    They are reimbursed for diagnoses which are sometimes based upon test results.

    They are reimbursed by private and public insurers at hourly rates which are far below normalized hourly rates paid to plumbers or public employees such as teachers and school administrators.

    There are diagnostic protocols driven by case law. If a patient has a bad result, ‘whatever test wasn’t ordered’ will be blamed.

    If people are angry about healthcare, they should be angry about government policies which squelch competition and best practices, and the effects of spurious litigation.

  6. “Greedy doctors” are about as greedy as “greedy patients.”

    You want to have that operation for free, don’t you?

    And you want to keep making a profit in your line of work, but God forbid if that healthcare worker makes a profit!!

    If you have ever had a real problem, and if you then ran into a doctor who solved that problem for you – you know that doctor is worth his fee.

    All the “unnecessary tests” are unnecessary only in retrospect.

    Hindsight is always 20/20, and the fact remains that the human body is not the subject of an exact science.

    You must accept some uncertainty when you discuss the human body.

    If you had asked the doctor why he ordered that “unnecessary test,” I am sure he would have explained the reason.

    It may have been that the doctor was completely stumped, or perhaps he had just some uncertainty as to that diagnosis.

    If he doesn’t explain, go find someone else who will.

    A couple of other points I want to make:

    1. When the doctor orders tests, the doctor does not get paid extra. There are a few exceptions such as the rare doctor who owns the entire clinical lab, or the office that owns an MRI machine. Exceptions rather than the rule.

    2. Third party insurance disconnects the patient from direct care costs. If you had to pay cash for every test you would be more inquisitive about the need, reasons, and results of those tests.

    3. As someoone else pointed out, the legal climate around here is not permissive to “common sense.” If you cannot tolerate a little bit of uncertainty on the part of the doctor, you will get more tests.

    4. Accept that not all the hospitals will have 5 stars, just like not all schools will have 5 stars, and not all restaurants will have 5 stars.

    5. Many branches of human endeavor are now suffering from “evidence based” policy making. Whether it is the schools, the hospitals, teenage pregnancy, what have you, there are people with rudimentary training in statistics who have put themselves in charge in all these fields. Well, you have to understand the limits of statistics. As the saying goes, there are liars, damned liars, and then there are statisticians. Many Americans have a poor foundation in mathematics and statistics, and unfortunately that includes many MBA’s that run things. As a matter of practical course, I would IGNORE pretty much all hospital “quality” statistics that are published today. Use anything else you want to use, but do not rely on these silly stars. We will all have to wait until there is absolute uncontested transparency as to how data are collected, processed, and published. That has not happened yet.

  7. Agree with “name less”.

    Especially on the “evidenced based” computer driven algorithms that plague our culture today.

    Karma, what you said may have been 10% true in the 1970s…..but certainly is nothing but a blatantly anti-doctor comment today.

    What you say reveals that you have no idea about the workings of healthcare.

    Jimmy Carter is no longer president, Karma.

    Sorry to share the news.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *