Mergers and acquisitions - who benefits? Who loses?

Article Abstract:

Health care institutions and organizations are merging in the hopes of becoming more competitive in the market place and offering more cost-effective care. However, this may not be the result, and communities, doctors, and patients may be the losers. Mergers may expand services, permit better integration of services, or reduce overhead. It may also saddle institutions with debt, lead to bankruptcy and hospital closures, diminish responsiveness to the local community's needs, put health care staff out of work, and compromise patient care. Jeopardizing patient care and community services is especially a risk when for-profit companies acquire not-for-profit institutions. The only parties who are invariable winners in these transactions are stockholders, lawyers, and consultants. As yet the federal government has done little to regulate these mergers and acquisitions under federal antitrust laws, although some states are beginning to take a greater interest. So far, accrediting bodies are not set up to monitor the resultant large, complex systems of care.

Mergers, acquisitions and divestments, Medical centers, Quality management, Medical care quality

---

The next transformation in the delivery of health care

Article Abstract:

Online communication via computers between patients and doctors may be the next revolutionary change in the delivery of health care. People are fairly comfortable with the electronic transfer of information, and patients are taking more responsibility for decisions regarding the care of their health. The growth of the Internet, along with menu-driven search tools from private companies, may make electronic communication between patients and doctors more accessible. Patients use home monitoring devices for blood pressure, blood glucose, and to test for pregnancy, so they are becoming conditioned to take part in their own care. Some protection against wrong diagnosis and treatment may be necessary. The electronic delivery of health information and advice may raise issues concerning quality and continuity of care, privacy, accuracy of the information provided, and changes in the doctor-patient relationship.

Innovations, Telecommunications systems, Communication in medicine, Medical communication

---

Private arsenals and public peril

Article Abstract:

It may be time for the federal government to ban the manufacture and sale of semiautomatic weapons in the wake of the shootings in Arkansas that killed 5 people and wounded 15 others. The NRA and others have argued that this was a social problem and not a gun-control problem, but the truth is that the young boys would not have been able to injure so many people so quickly without semiautomatic weapons. They obtained the guns by stealing them from one of the boys' grandfather. There is no reason why private citizens need to own semiautomatic weapons.

Arkansas, Ethical aspects, Shooting, Semi-automatic firearms

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Optimum number of sessions for depression and anxiety. Benefits of salsa classes in treatment of depression. The positive effect of exercise as a therapy for clinical depression
• Abstracts: Frequency and effect of adjuvant radiation therapy among women with stage I endometrial adenocarcinoma. Fluorouracil vs gemcitabine chemotherapy before and after fluorouracil-based chemoradiation following resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a randomized controlled trial
• Abstracts: Genomics and malaria control. COL4A1 mutations and hereditary angiopathy, nephropathy, aneurysms, and muscle cramps
• Abstracts: The effect of toll-like receptors and toll-like receptor genetics in human disease. Array-based DNA diagnostics: let the revolution begin
• Abstracts: The acute respiratory distress syndrome. The prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.