South University Conflict of Interest Case Study Evaluation

Introduction:

Tasks:

Case Study Evaluation

Background Statement: What is going on in this case as it relates to the identified major problem?

• What are (only) the key points the reader needs to know in order to understand how you will “solve” the case?

Summarize the scenario in your own words—do not simply regurgitate the case. Briefly describe the organization, setting, situation, who is involved, who decides what, etc. Specifically identify the major problems and secondary issues.

• What are the real issues? What are the differences? Can secondary issues become major problems?
• Present an analysis of the causes and effects.
• Fully explain your reasoning. Declare your role in a sentence or a short paragraph explaining from which role you will address the major problem and whether you are the chief administrator in the case or an outside consultant called in to advise.
• Regardless of your choice, you must justify in writing as to why you chose that role. What are the advantages and disadvantages of your selected role? Be specific.
• Recognize the strengths and weaknesses of the organization.

Identify the strengths and weaknesses that exist in relation to the major problem. Again, your focus here should be in describing what the organization is capable of doing (and not capable of doing) with respect to addressing the major problem. Thus, the identified strengths and weaknesses should include those at the managerial level of the problem. For example, if you have chosen to address the problem from the departmental perspective and the department is understaffed, that is a weakness worthy of mentioning. Be sure to remember to include any strengths/weaknesses that may be related to diversity issues.

• Find out alternatives and recommend a solution.
• Describe the two to three alternative solutions you came up with. What feasible strategies would you recommend? What are the pros and cons? State what should be done—why, how, and by whom. Be specific. Evaluate how you would know when you’ve gotten there. There must be measurable goals put in place with the recommendations. Money is easiest to measure; what else can be measured? What evaluation plan would you put in place to assess whether you are reaching your goals?
• TIP: Write this section as if you are trying to “sell” your proposed solution to the organization. Convince the reader that your proposed solution is the best available and that it will work as planned. Make sure that the goals you identify are worth the effort required to achieve them!
• CASE STUDY Conflict of InterestDale BuchbinderYou are the executive in charge of finances for the operating room at Sleepy Hollow General Hospital. It has come to your attention that you have five major orthopedic surgeons, all using different vendors for their knee and hip implants. You have held several meetings with the implant companies and determined that if you went with one standard set of implants, you could reduce your implant costs by 40%, a potential net savings of $2.8 million to your institution in the next year. This seems to be a reasonable objective, and you set up meetings with the different orthopedic surgeons.First you meet with Dr. Goodcut and tell him you would like to standardize the implants in the hospital. Dr. Goodcut tells you he believes that this is a good idea. However, he will only use the products from Alpha Company. He has used them for many years, he knows how to use the equipment, and feels they are by far the best product.You next meet with Dr. Safari, one of your busiest orthopedic surgeons. You again explain this process. He in turn agrees this is a good idea. However, he will only use the products from Beta Company. He has essentially the same logic and reasons as Dr. Goodcut. This is beginning to seem like a theme.You meet with the three remaining busy orthopedic surgeons to see if they might be interested in switching to another implant company. However, two of the surgeons would like to know what is in it for them if they make the switch. The third surgeon in this group will only use products from Gamma Company. He has the same reasons that you have previously heard from the first two surgeons. At best, you may be able to go with three vendors instead of five;however, this will yield only a $200,000 savings.You are a bit concerned at the surgeons’ reluctance to select a standard implant company. Their reasoning seems insincere to you. You begin to examine the websites of each of these companies. Each company lists physicians who have either been involved in the development of the product, or have played consulting roles with their companies. Additional investigation leads you to the discovery that Dr. Goodcut has been involved with the development of the products at Alpha Company. In addition, he is listed on the patent for several other devices. You find similar relationships between the companies and the other two orthopedic surgeons who are unwilling to switch their implants. You begin to be concerned these surgeons have more reasons than stated to resist switching. Each of them may, in fact, have a conflict of interest.*