Jump to content

We may need fewer nurses in the hospital...

Nurses   (23,246 Views 177 Comments)
by Chin up Chin up (Member) Member Nurse

Chin up has 26 years experience and specializes in Med surg, LTC, Administration.

5,652 Profile Views; 694 Posts

You are reading page 6 of We may need fewer nurses in the hospital.... If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

CrunchRN has 25 years experience as a ADN, RN and specializes in Clinical Research, Outpt Women's Health.

1 Follower; 4,190 Posts; 30,401 Profile Views

Less nurses, less quality care. You get what you pay for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

talaxandra specializes in Medical.

1 Article; 3,037 Posts; 22,045 Profile Views

Back to the OP: first, I love that, despite mounds of research demonstrated a clear and consistent correlation between skilled nursing care and better health care outcomes (fewer errors, shorter stays, fewer complications, fewer readmissions), nursing is still always the first thing to go.

Second, I don't know how it is in the US but at my (tertiary referral) hospital shorter hospital stays and the growth of hospital-in-the-home services, combined with increased longevity and more co-morbidities means that our in-patient population is significantly more acute than it was even a couple of years ago.

This means we not only need nurses by the bedside but we now have a significant expansion in nursing roles; my ward is piloting a complex discharge co-ordinator position to facilitate quicker throughput of medically and socially complicated patients.

It would be nice to have any of the contributions skilled nursing care makes to patient wellness and recovery (as well as comfort and palliation) recognised by the people who debate our funding and determine our numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

251 Posts; 4,825 Profile Views

It seems to me reducing the number of RN's in hospital is very old news. Where has the author of this article been cocooned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

113 Posts; 2,586 Profile Views

They need to cut MANAGEMENT. The Assistant Director, and the Assistant Director's Assistant, and the other Directors of the Directors, and the Manager under the Director, etc., etc., etc. How many chiefs does the tribe need?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

113 Posts; 2,586 Profile Views

If they cut nurses, there will be more mistakes and death and LAWSUITS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cdsga has 37 years experience and specializes in ICU, PACU, OR.

391 Posts; 9,044 Profile Views

Scary thought when you factor who we care for, the nursing shortage forecast for the next decade (nurses and instructors) and the constant articles related to the number of nurses needed for quality and safety. Will common sense prevail? Who will care for us when we succumb to the need for medical care? Everyone wants to be promoted away from the bedside, but when the pendulum swings-as it will- the beside nurse whether it be in the hospital or home will be desperately needed. We already see empty beds-limited care on specialty units-there are physical beds but not enough staffed beds. So I guess we have to wait and see what prevails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1,530 Posts; 13,846 Profile Views

the problem with mass system is insufficient federal repayment, capitation, and trying to coordinate the 3rd party payers. we need a single federal payer system, ala france, i.e. real socialized medicine. i think fewer nurses are inevitable either way. the money simply isn't there.

you mean the eu country that is closest to bankrupt? hmmm, sounds like a real solution, not!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ZippyGBR is a BSN, RN and specializes in Spinal Cord injuries, Emergency+EMS.

1,038 Posts; 10,096 Profile Views

You mean the EU country that is closest to bankrupt? Hmmm, sounds like a real solution, not!

France is not the EU state closest to bankruptcy , they haven't gone begging cap in hand unlike the Irish who maxxed out their credit cards and thought they'd found the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

113 Posts; 2,586 Profile Views

if they are going to have fewer nurses, then they need to have fewer patients. Oh, yeah, they will - people won't qualify for care and will die. For some reason the united states cannot take care of the elderly. Just let them die. That's the solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

metal_m0nk is a BSN, RN and specializes in ICU.

920 Posts; 13,442 Profile Views

You mean the EU country that is closest to bankrupt? Hmmm, sounds like a real solution, not!

Heh...Have you looked around lately?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

metal_m0nk is a BSN, RN and specializes in ICU.

920 Posts; 13,442 Profile Views

Wow.. you had me about the middle class being raped to pay for the health care of people below AND definitely ABOVE us too.. and with the preventative stuff. Now you just lost me. I don't know what "poor" folks you're seeing but my poor patients definitely werent' living on the high hog and driving brand new cars. hell, I was scrambling with case managemnt for taxi vouchers to take them back to the ghetto. You can get an ipod for 15 bucks now you know.

Here's a concept; how about making the biggest employer in the country, Wal-mart, provide coverage for their employees hospitalizations instead of sticking the rest of us with the bill. After all 17 of the Forbes richest 50 are Walmart heirs and spouses (IE, inherited wealth when Sam died). I'd say they can afford it more than I can. 'Course, I know , having those that can afford to pay is 'socialism' but dumping it on me isn't. Or something.

Anyway...

Yes, there will be reductions in nurses everywhere. Thats' how for profit business works and today, thanks to a host of factors from the Limbaugh radio show to the Tea Party, it's cheered and saluted even by the affected.

So, technology will continue forward to automate nursing functions; cheap immigrants will continue to be hired, Republican governors will continue to attack the nursing unions and state boards that are independent so they can have QMA's give meds instead of RNs' and so forth.

As you sound like your all for the results of crony capitalism, so clearly it's a good thing, right?

First they came for the autoworkers and you didn't speak because you weren't an autoworker..and besides business is business. Then they came for the air traffic controllers... the longshoreman, the high tech workers, the state workers in Wisconsin...and when they finally come for the nurses they'll be nobody left to speak for us.

Speak it. You're right on target.

To add:

Wal-Mart was the top Fortune 500 company in 2008 (beating out Exxon-Mobil, Chevron, and General Motors) and yet, according to the PBS documentary, "Is Wal-Mart Good for America", they actively encourage their employees (over 60% of which are not covered by the company healthcare plan because with the wages they earn, they can't afford it or because the quality of the insurance coverage is sickeningly low) to apply for public assistance to cover healthcare and other expenses. So basically, Wal-Mart doesn't have to pay out significant insurance premiums because tax payers are covering their insurance costs.

Don't people read anymore?

Edit: Turn off Fox News. It rots your brain. Seriously.

Edited by metal_m0nk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

metal_m0nk is a BSN, RN and specializes in ICU.

920 Posts; 13,442 Profile Views

I agree with you. I worked in Canada a few years in the 90's. At the time the US economy was doing fabulously, President Clinton had closed the deficits and created 23 million private sector jobs and yet somehow over half the country tuned into Rush Limbaugh and hounded and hunted him. Having come from Texas, probaby the epicenter of it all, I'd been educated with plenty of rhetoric about the Canadian system.

Imagine my surprise when I got there and was as a worker immediately eligible for better health care than I'd ever gotten here. -granted my health was/is good and I wasn't exactly needing big ticket items. Still, I'd heard the crap about endless waiting lines and rationing - bunk - no more so than any HMO here. A friend there had a positive mammogram and they had her biopsied in less than 48 hours. The hospitals certainly weren't as fancy as many here - form follows function all the way. So what? I don't need fountains and artwork - I'm there for health services.

Hospitals had specialities usually and there would be one or two hospitals competing in a 20 mile radius for being the best in cardiology or cancer - not 5 - that's a real problem in the USA - the inflationary effect of so many redundant specialists. The other thing that turned out to be 100% bunk is that Canadian healthcare is socialized. Er, no, single provincial (state) payer plans is not socialized medicine - it's an efficient payment system.

The providers, pharmas, labs, et al are entirely private and driving their German cars too.

meanwhile the efficiency of single payer and above mentioned sensible practice and skipping worthless luxuries makes their healthcare system far far more affordable. We pay almost triple per capita for healthcare as a nation and still have , what is it now, 80 million uninsured people?

For the average person it is a far better system. Nobody files bankruptcy because a family member got cancer or their kid has an expensive illness. Nobody can raise your premium if God forbid you get these things so you are uninsured. The healthcare I and others got was on par with what i get here. It just cost less. A lot less.

The only problem I see is I think Canada is too generous in letting landed immigrants use the system.

Additionally, a bit of logic that tends to be overlooked is that a capitalistic healthcare or the 'healthcare as big business' model doesn't thrive when the population practices stringent prevention and educated, personal health promotion. Disease progression means increased interventions as the risk for complications increases. Anything that requires a complicated surgical procedure or a lengthy hospital stay is costly. Prevention and health promotion cuts into profits in the long term. It's a glaring conflict of interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×