In a recent Becker’s Hospital Review article, John Starcher, President and CEO of Bon Secours Mercy Health, emphasized a crucial point: too often, health systems surrender excessive control in their partnerships. "If you do that, you're doomed for failure. Ultimately, we're responsible for the end product."
This insight is especially relevant to hospital-based wound care. As new models emerge, I worry about the most critical metric in our field—patient outcomes.
I've long believed that hospitals should manage their own wound care programs with external support, rather than handing over full control to turnkey management companies. When too much responsibility is relinquished, wound centers risk straying from the success metrics that matter most to both hospitals and their patients.
A new model has recently gained traction, and I find it deeply concerning. It seems to move even further away from the fundamental mission of wound care centers: ensuring patients heal quickly and responsibly.
This approach essentially transfers ownership of a licensed hospital facility to an independent physician practice affiliated with a skin substitute or amnio product company. The program is no longer hospital-operated, and patients—along with staff and equipment—are effectively "sold" to this new entity. Yet, this center remains on the property of the hospital further blurring the lines between the two entities.
This raises critical questions:
Who is advocating for these patients?
Is the goal truly rapid, responsible healing, or is it to maximize the use of high-reimbursement amnio products?
How will patients manage significantly higher co-pays?
How does the hospital, which remains accountable for patient outcomes, ensure compliance?
And when future changes in skin substitute reimbursement make this model less profitable, what happens to these patients? Are they simply left without care? Are they abandoned?
My greatest concern comes back to one key word: outcomes. As Mr. Starcher pointed out, hospitals remain responsible for the final results—even when patients are essentially handed over or in my mind, "sold" to another entity. These individuals sought care at the hospital’s wound center based on its reputation, a referral, or the trust they placed in the institution.
How does the hospital justify the fact that healing a wound in a traditional outpatient setting costs on the average less than about $5,000 in total over eight weeks, while in this new model, reimbursement can soar to $50,000–$100,000? Are patients healing ten times faster? Are their outcomes ten times better?
After 30 years in this field, I can say with certainty: they are not.
So, I return to Mr. Starcher’s clear warning—how much responsibility and oversight are hospitals giving up in these arrangements? And if the outcomes do not show a clear improvement of care for the dramatic increase in cost, what happens when patients no longer trust us as an industry to do what’s right for them?
As an industry, I believe we are not destined for failure if we prioritize compliance, promote rapid healing for our patients, and focus not only on meeting the needs of today's patients but also on preparing to serve the next generation who will rely on hospital-based wound centers.
About Wound Care Advantage
For over 20 years WCA has supported a national network of wound centers focused on reducing costs and improving patient outcomes. WCA empowers these centers by seamlessly transitioning from outsourced management to in-house support, leveraging Luvo – the industry's most powerful business intelligence platform. How can WCA support you? Learn more at www.thewca.com.
