Multiple sclerosis (MS) clinics by themselves seldom generate profits or break even without significant outside funding. Even when programs work to limit costs and maximize volumes—such as sharing space and employing mid-level providers, respectively—most still operate at a deficit.
However, evaluating the benefits of an MS clinic requires more complicated financial calculus. MS programs typically attract patients that use hospital and ambulatory services at a much higher frequency than average patients. While there is potential for significance downstream revenue, it is important for organizations to consider whether these units of services would have been captured by the organization without a formal MS clinic.
More difficult to quantify—but still important to consider—is the revenue that hospitals may save by preventing unnecessary emergency department (ED) visits. Organizations pursuing population management business models may generate additional benefit from offering a destination site of care to transform care management for a complex patient group.
Four things to consider when launching an MS center
In addition to launching our national meeting series at the end of April, we’re also offering a series of webconferences across the coming months. These webconferences will focus on the outlook for key service lines, providing an overview of key trends in volumes and examining strategies that hospitals can use to continue to transform and grow particular service lines.
The series begins with orthopedics on March 20—we encourage Marketing and Planning Leadership Council members to register today. We’ve included more details, including links to the webconferences, below.
Join us for our service line outlook webconference series
Despite the proliferation of Joint Commission-certified primary stroke centers, there is still ample room for improvement in the medical management of stroke—only a small percentage of stroke patients receive treatment within the “golden hour” time window. Among the 800 certified stroke centers, only a handful have the resources to provide advanced neurointerventional services and be considered, unofficially, a “comprehensive” stroke program.
The Joint Commission has recently proposed more stringent requirements for comprehensive status that would formalize the designation that current “comprehensive” stroke programs have claimed.
As previously featured in Technology Insights' blog, The Pipeline, the new criteria would specify the infrastructure, technology, staffing, and services needed to receive designation as a “comprehensive stroke center.” Under the proposal, comprehensive stroke centers would no longer be defined at the procedural level, but rather by their ability to manage stroke care longitudinally, leaving many organizations out of the running for designation given the higher barrier to entry.
Reassessing development of comprehensive stroke programs