|
medpundit |
||
 |
 |
|
Saturday, October 27, 2007There are two schools of thought when it comes to the business of running a medical practice. The conventional wisdom is that it's a waste of a doctor's productivity to do the small things - rooming a patient, getting the vital signs, giving shots, performing EKG's. It's a better use of resources to have someone else do those things while the doctor concentrates on treating the patient. Some physicians take it even farther - they have ancillary staff take the history and they just concern themselves with the exam and plan. (Not being someone who practices this way, I give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they confirm that history before acting on it.) In theory, this allows them to see more patients. This is basically my style of practice. Except for this short staffed month. This month, I've been almost practicing the ideal micropractice way. In the ideal micropractice the doctor does everything himself to reduce overhead. At least, that's the original intent, but even the micropractice guru has hired a nurse to help him out. One of my friends has a micropractice, and she keeps telling me that I do, too, but I don't believe I do. Once you start hiring staff, are you really a micropractice or just a solo practice? The truth of the matter is that micropractices work only for micropopulations. Most people who practice that way limit themselves to 200-500 patients, whereas traditional practices handle 1500-2000. So which is better for the public good? A practice that can treat more patients and provide jobs or one that sees few patients and has no employees? posted by Sydney on 10/27/2007 09:41:00 PM 5 comments 5 Comments:Is an unhappy physician better for the public good ? Some physicians will function better with staff, some without, some will work solo, some in large groups. The sad thing is when you are in the wrong place and end up hating the practice of medicine. There is no long term public benefit in someone's misery.
By
This is true. Each practice, depending on its size, has to choose the right style for it. It would make no sense for a practice of 500 patients to have three support staff people. But it also makes no sense for a practice of 2000 patients to have no support staff.
First, welcome back. You have been missed.
By Truthfully, it's usually not that bad at a patient panel of 2000 when fully staffed. Every business has times when stuff happens and they find themselves unexpectedly short-staffed. Especially small businesses. It just goes with the territory. Physicians need to embrace concierge medicine as the future to running a profitable practice. By seeing less patients and not having to deal with insurance companies, physicians will be able to provide better care for their patients.
By |
|
