Printer Friendly

Spread the word. (Editorial).

Recently, in working on articles for future issues, our staff came across an interesting paradox. Two articles each focused on a particular facility's "best practices" approach toward staffing and staff organization, respectively. Though neither facility claimed to be the "be all and end all," their programs reflected vigorous action, critical self-assessment, and a commitment to improving their operations.

But here's where the paradox comes in. Our staff, as a sort of quality check, routinely reviews the federal government Web site Nursing Home Compare to examine the recent survey performance of individual facilities we happen to write about. Neither of these facilities looked particularly good, exhibiting several deficiencies each. Most were relatively minor, of the level 2, "affecting a few" type, but still, these data were unsettling. Why should we showcase these facilities?

The answer emerged when we put the picture together. These facilities were working hard to address these problems. They had acknowledged their imperfections and were attempting to do something about them.

It occurred to me: How many facilities out there are in exactly the same situation? How many have been tarred by negative reports, negative perceptions, and generalized badmouthing, but were doing what they could to improve? Early reports from the federal government's Quality Improvement Initiative indicate a high level of interest among nursing homes in improving performance. Isn't this the kind of attitude you'd want displayed by someone caring for your loved ones in need?

Isn't it time, then, that these struggling but conscientious facilities went public with their efforts? If they're upgrading their physical environment, they should invite the community in for a tour. If they've improved the professionalism of their approach to pressure ulcers, dementia, or other clinical conditions, they should ask if they might present on this to local groups of healthcare professionals. If they feel that they have come up with a particularly enlightened approach to staffing, they should get the word out to employment agencies, job banks, and classified advertising departments.

In short, they shouldn't take the negativity lying down. Beyond trying to improve themselves every day, they should "tell the world" about their efforts and their results. Maybe they're not superperformers-yet--but they're trying to do a decent, respectable job. That simple message doesn't always get across in this field. Maybe things would start turning around for nursing homes if it did.

To comment on the editorial, please send e-mail to
COPYRIGHT 2003 Medquest Communications, LLC
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2003, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Peck, Richard L.
Publication:Nursing Homes
Article Type:Editorial
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Apr 1, 2003
Previous Article:Complete furniture solutions. (LTC Mall).
Next Article:Legislative prospects are dim. (View on Washington).

Related Articles
Same business, different problems.
Early editorials hilarious, to the point.
Letting go of daily editorials.
Prevent endorsement burnout by planning.
Heaviest fallout came 7 to 8 days after Lott spoke.
From the editor. (IABC Update).
Good writing needs cadence. (Symposium Secrets to Stronger Editorials).
The art of editing yourself. (Symposium Secrets to Stronger Editorials).
Turf or astroturf? A look at the scope of the "canned letter" phenomenon.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters