PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16104346

Dialysis facility joint ventures--current structures and issues.

James B Riley·Robert Pristave
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

With the ongoing consolidation of the health care industry, including renal care, providers and physicians alike are using joint ventures as a means to partner on business transactions. This article discusses the expanding use of joint ventures in health care, including the dialysis industry, and looks at the types of structures being utilized and key legal concerns relating to such structures and issues.

Explore related subjects

Cost-Benefit AnalysisHealth Care CostsHealth Care SectorHemodialysis Units, HospitalHospital-Physician Joint VenturesHumansOrganizational InnovationPolicy MakingProgram EvaluationQuality of Health CareUnited StatesComparative StudyJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

James B Riley, Robert Pristave. 2005. Dialysis facility joint ventures--current structures and issues.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16104346/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Multiplex PCR-based method for identification of common clinical serotypes of Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica.

A multiplex PCR method has been developed to differentiate between the most common clinical serotypes of Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica encountered in Washington State and the United States in general. Six genetic loci from S. enterica serovar Typhimurium and four from S. enterica serovar Typhi were used to create an assay consisting of two five-plex PCRs. The assays gave reproducible results with 30 different serotypes that represent the most common clinical isolates of S. enterica subsp. enterica. Of these, 22 serotypes gave unique amplification patterns compared with each other and the other 8 serotypes were grouped into four pairs. These were further resolved by two additional PCRs. We compared the data from PCR serotyping with conventional serotyping and found that PCR serotyping was nearly as discriminatory as conventional serotyping was. The results from a blind test screening 111 clinical isolates revealed that 97% were correctly identified using the multiplex PCR assay. The assay can be easily performed on multiple samples with final results in less than 5 h and, in conjunction with pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, forms a very robust test method for the molecular subtyping of Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2006

Cost effectiveness of changing health professionals' behavior: training dental hygienists in brief interventions for smokeless tobacco cessation.

OBJECTIVE: Disseminating effective interventions to health care professionals is a critical step in ensuring that patients receive needed advice and materials. This cost effectiveness analysis compared two methods of disseminating an effective protocol for smokeless tobacco cessation intervention. METHOD: Interested dental hygienists (N = 1051) were recruited in 20 Western and Midwestern U.S. communities and randomized by community to receive workshop training, self-study with mailed materials, and delayed self-study training, in 1996-98. Hygienists were surveyed about their smokeless tobacco-related activities with patients at baseline and post-intervention. Data on intervention costs were collected, and incremental costs per unit of behavior change were calculated. RESULTS: Self-study was more cost effective than workshop training under a wide range of assumptions: change in group versus individual behavior, hygienists' time and travel costs included or excluded, and hygienist wage rates at the national median or substantially lower. However, workshops may be as cost effective in producing behavior change among hygienists earning wages substantially higher than the national median. CONCLUSION: Self-study may be a more cost effective method than workshops to achieve behavior change among motivated health professionals.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗