This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Gary N. Fox, MD
The Reading (Pa) Hospital and Medical Center

JAMA. 1990;263(20):2749-2750.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

The article entitled "Routine Use of the Prothrombin and Partial Thromboplastin Times"1 indicates that "education and other types of feedback have been tried with minimal or no long-term reduction in (inappropriate) laboratory use" by physicians. We contend that the reason for this is simple: hospitals generate profit from this testing.

In our institution, Medicare patients represent 34% of the volume on a case basis (50% of the volume on a charge basis because of increased length of stay and complexity of illness). The number of patients eligible for testing is calculated on a case basis. If 50% of patients who undergo prothrombin time and partial thromboplastin time studies were funded on a fee-for-service basis and the markup on these tests were 100%, the hospital would break even. The hospital would have no incentive to intervene at this break-even point because of the cost of instituting educational programs . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?