Elizabeth Hovde explains that HB 2295 and SB 6101 would give the state more solutions for freeing up needed acute-care beds
Elizabeth Hovde
Washington Policy Center
Getting hospital services at home? A lot of us would like that and have homes conducive to such a setup. Being in your familiar surroundings is working for the patients who have taken part in the optional programs, physicians testify in legislative committees that they like the access solution, and hospitals trying such a program have seen good health outcomes. Win-win-win.
This idea was made possible with a federal waiver in COVID-19 times, and it will expire soon. States need to decide whether to continue the hospital programs. That is what legislation moving in the House and Senate would accomplish.
HB 2295 and SB 6101 would give the state more solutions for freeing up needed acute-care beds. We need those.
Such a program respects patient decisions, offers flexibility in our health care system and is being done in a way that keeps health care quality high. Hospitals report good outcomes, including low readmission and escalation rates, better discharge times and high patient satisfaction.
I’m hopeful the bill makes it through the House and Senate largely unscathed, avoiding additional micromanagement of services hospitals are supplying in homes. Hospital-at-home programs are seeing success in our state and others. If the programs aren’t broken, let’s not make it harder for hospitals and patients to see and experience continued success.
Watch the House Health Care and Wellness Committee hearing where the proposal was considered, and where I offered testimony, on Wednesday.
Elizabeth Hovde is a policy analyst and the director of the Centers for Health Care and Worker Rights at the Washington Policy Center. She is a Clark County resident.
Also read:
- Opinion: When you’ve lost Christine Gregoire, you’ve lost Washington
Former Gov. Gregoire says Washington’s $80B budget reflects a spending problem, not an income problem. - Letter: Present bridge plan has been in the expensive and unworkable planning stage far too long with no real end in sight
Brush Prairie resident Bob Mattila argues the I-5 Bridge plan doubles costs by including light rail on the span. - Letter: Stop turning gas prices into war propaganda
Camas resident Tony Teso fires back at Jonathan Hines, arguing militarism won’t lower fuel costs for working families. - Letter: Compassion requires accountability
A medical provider and downtown Vancouver resident challenges whether current homelessness policies produce measurable results. - POLL: Should C-TRAN taxpayers be protected from paying additional costs tied to extending light rail to Library Square?
C-TRAN’s board asked IBR to extend light rail to Library Square but voted down taxpayer cost protections.
