Urology Marketing Innovative Strategy

PLEASE RESPOND TO BELOW POST
All responses should be a minimum of 300 words, scholarly written, APA formatted, and referenced. A minimum of 2 references are required.
Urology Marketing Innovative Strategy
Marketability is significant for our urology department given competing health networks within the region. Local hospital systems continue to acquire physician practices and seek fresh and unique services to meet community needs (Kirsh & Kapoor, 2021). Moreover, surgical specialties, particularly pursue enhancement of the group repertoire (Kasivisvanathan et al., 2018). Recent view of operating room utilization demonstrated gaps in usage. Additional assessment revealed opportunities for adopting newer surgical interventions to maintain clinical excellence. However, the process for expanding surgical services requires multiple considerations. Our urology department including operations director, lead physician, practice managers, quality coordinator, market analysts reviewed the feasibility of several contemporary minimally invasive urologic procedures for the management of benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH).
The process is complex and included a survey of the studied methods such as Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP), Rezum, Aqua ablation and iTind (Suarez-Ibarrola et al., 2020). The following implications were deliberated:
* Physician training – – How many urologists can be trained and for which procedures? What is the duration of training? What is the surgeon’s learning curve?
* Equipment procurement – – What is the cost of the required surgical equipment? Does the current infrastructure and technology support the new hardware?
* Campus location– Which hospital OR sites will the procedures occur?
* Evidence-based recommendations – – what does the literature reveal about the new technologies?
* Procedural risk profile– what are the risks versus benefits and potential complications of the various innovative techniques? In general, surgical instrumentation is associated with a 10% complication rate of which half are avoidable. Surgeons like many other high-risk professions must deliberate carefully (Abboudi et al., 2012).
* Profitability—Only 12% of endo-urologist perform HOLEP and 75 % of those express concern for reimbursement issues (Wright et al., 2021).
* Staff education – – what procedural patient care is involved? What are the billing nuances?
* Patient information– how will we disseminate information regarding the new procedures and adequately teach?
Our department divided tasks between clinical, managerial and finance. The lead physician and two other surgeons conducted research regarding latest minimally invasive BPH procedures to elicit answers regarding physician in-servicing, best practices, and equipment. The entire urology provider team discussed each procedure in detail during a special session of our morbidity and mortality meeting to review any potential technical, clinical, medico–legal and/or ethical issues that could possibly arise from the implementation of new surgeries. The director of operations conferred with the finance team to obtain cost estimation as well as with marketing to establish regions of highest demand.
The advanced practice clinicians have been charged with an assortment of patient and staff education. There are several physicians who are trained in three different procedures, and one has successfully completed approximately 10 HoLEP cases. The research has shown positive outcomes for HoLEP in diminished cost, post-procedure hospital stays and duration of effect (Elshal et al., 2015). Our urology department is still in the process of finalizing logistics and it will potentially take another 6 months to go live with the remaining three novel procedures.