jack o. bovender chairman & ceo

Investor DayInvestor Day20042004HCAHCA

Jack O. Bovender

Chairman & CEO

Investor DayInvestor Day20042004HCAHCA 22

Health Care Market Outlook StrongHealth Care Market Outlook StrongU

.S. H

ealt

hca

re E

xpen

dit

ure

s($

Bill

ion

s)National Health Care Spending 1990 – 2010National Health Care Spending 1990 – 2010

National Health Care Expenditures as a Share of Total GDP

12.0%13.4%

13.3% 14.8% 15.4% 15.9% 16.4% 17.1%

Source: U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services—National Health Expenditure Projections, 2003

Will the U.S. economy shift 2.3% of GDP to health care services over the next seven years?Will the U.S. economy shift 2.3% of GDP to health care services over the next seven years?


Source: AHA Annual Survey, 1980 - 2002

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

Outpatient Visits

Inpatient Admissions

Ad

mis

sio

ns

(mil

lio

ns)

Ou

tpat

ien

t V

isit

s (m

illi

on

s)

Inpatient Admissions and Outpatient Visits Inpatient Admissions and Outpatient Visits 1980 - 20021980 - 2002


HCA Annual Environmental ReviewHCA Annual Environmental ReviewKey Findings and Actions, October 2003Key Findings and Actions, October 2003

•HCA’s core business strategy is sound. The Company’s focus will continue to be on market-leading positions in large, fast-growing urban communities.

•To compete more effectively in the outpatient area, the Company will establish a senior level operational unit focused on outpatient services. HCA anticipates making strategic acquisitions in outpatient services. (Marilyn Tavenner, President Outpatient Services, effective January 1, 2004)

•The Company intends to reduce capital expenditures from approximately $2 billion in 2003, to approximately $1.8 billion in 2004 (excluding acquisitions).

•HCA anticipates lowering its target ratio of debt-to-total capitalization from 55% to the low 50s by mid-to-late 2005.


HCA Annual Environmental ReviewHCA Annual Environmental ReviewKey Findings and Actions, October 2003Key Findings and Actions, October 2003

•The Company’s current $1.5 billion share repurchase program will be completed in a judicious manner, as dictated by market conditions.

•HCA’s Senior Management and Board of Directors are evaluating a change to the Company’s existing dividend policy and expected to announce any changes in the Company’s existing dividend policy in the first quarter of 2004. (New quarterly dividend of $0.13 per share to be paid June 1, 2004).

•The company has revised its long-term earnings per share growth target after 2004 (rebasing for outlier reductions and higher bad debts) from mid-teens to low-double digits.


Strong Cash Flow Trends Provide Strong Cash Flow Trends Provide OpportunitiesOpportunities

$1,301

$1,584

$2,046

$2,786 $2,822

$0

$3,500

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Net Cash Provided by Operating ActivitiesDollars in Millions

Excluding settlements with government agencies and investigation related costs.

New New Dividend PolicyDividend Policy

Share Share Repurchase Repurchase ProgramProgram

Capital Capital ReinvestmentReinvestment

BalanceBalanceSheetSheet


HCA Capital ExpendituresHCA Capital Expenditures

ER & Outpatient Services19%/$720

Replacement Facilities3%/$98M

New & Expanded Services

18%/$740M

New Facilities10%/$395MBeds

14%/$550M

Surgery/Spec'l Units

22%/$870M

Land & Improvements

14%/$565M

1,565 New Beds

54 Facilities with Surgery and/or ICU/CCU expansions

Four NewFacilities

378 Beds

Open Heart, ImagingCardiology, Oncology, etc.

37 ERExpansions

37 ERExpansions

Distribution of Capital Dollars2002 and Beyond

Distribution of Capital Dollars2002 and Beyond

New Denver FacilityNew Denver Facility

Expansions

$0.0

$0.5

$1.0

$1.5

$2.0

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004E

Billions2000

$1.22001

$1.42002

$1.72003

$1.82004E

$1.8

Routine

Patient Safety & Infrastructure

New Facilities

Expansions


$7.3 Billion$7.3 Billion

244 Million Shares244 Million Shares

38% of outstanding 38% of outstanding sharesshares

Average Price: Average Price: $30.03$30.03

Opportunities Of Having Opportunities Of Having Strong Cash FlowStrong Cash Flow

Share Share repurchase repurchase programprogram

$1.3B: 37.9M Shares1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

20032002

YTD 20041

1: 2004 purchases through 5-6-04 2: Includes other activities affecting share balance (stock option exercises, restricted grants, and ESPP activity).

$33.59/share$22.68/share

$930M: 41M Shares

$1.4B: 55.6M Shares $24.61/share$1.3B: 43.5M Shares $28.65/share$706M: 19.2M Shares$706M: 19.2M Shares $36.88/share$1.1B: 31.1M Shares $35.76/share

$422M: 10.0M Shares$42.19/share

650M Shares 12/31/96

465M Shares2 4/30/04

$282M: 6.2M Shares$45.53/share


Our Commitment To…Our Commitment To…

…Enhancing Shareholder Value

…our Mission & Values

…Ethics and Compliance…Diversity

…Transparency of Earnings

…the Care and Safety of Our Patients

And above all else…

…the Care and Improvement of Human Life

…Reinvestment in Our Facilities


The Genesis of the Bad Debt/Charity The Genesis of the Bad Debt/Charity Care IssueCare Issue

22.222.2%%

23.523.5%%

21.221.2%%

22.222.2%%

17.017.0%%

19.219.2%%

29.729.7%%

23.523.5%%

15.115.1%% 15.415.4%%

19.719.7%%

16.716.7%%20.320.3%%15.415.4%%

19.319.3%%15.915.9%%

16.416.4%%

NationalAverage:15.2% 1

NationalAverage:15.2% 1

18.118.1%%

>20% Uninsured

15-20% Uninsured

<15% Uninsured

25.625.6%%

14.6%

22.822.8%%

HCA is in 14 of the 20 highest uninsured states, with 72% of its hospitals in those states

HCA is in 14 of the 20 highest uninsured states, with 72% of its hospitals in those states

HCAHCAWeightedAverage:22.6% 2

HCAHCAWeightedAverage:22.6% 2

1: U.S. Census Bureau “Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2002”.2: Kaiser Commission: Health Ins. Coverage of Nonelderly Adults 2001-2002.

13.1%13.1%


Bad Debt, Charity Care, and Accounts Receivable Management

Milton JohnsonSenior Vice President & Controller

Joe SteakleySenior Vice President - Internal Audit

Beverly WallacePresident – Financial Services Group


Milton JohnsonSenior Vice President & Controller

22


Bad Debts & CharityQuarterly Trending

$368

$123

$371

$143$411

$156

$431

$156

$428

$182

$577

$209

$566

$229

$636

$201

$694

$218

$0

$1,000

1Q02 2Q02 3Q02 4Q02 1Q03 2Q03 3Q03 4Q03 1Q04

Bad Debts & CharityBad Debts & Charity

$610

$786 $795 $837$1B

$0

$587$567$514$491

Charity Bad Debts

$912

7.6% 8.3%10.6% 11.7%

7.6% 8.6% 8.1%10.3% 11.4%

0%

14%

1Q02 2Q02 3Q02 4Q02 1Q03 2Q03 3Q03 4Q03 1Q04

Bad Debts/Net RevenueBad Debts/Net Revenue

33


Origination of Bad Debt Expense

Source of Bad Debt Expense1:

Uninsured Patients 75-80%

Co-Pay & Deductibles 20-25%

1. Management estimate for 12 month period ending 3/31/2004.

44


199.0 206.9 213.7 200.3 205.3 217.4 233.7 240.2 242.0

0

300

1Q 2002 2Q 2002 3Q 2002 4Q 2002 1Q 2003 2Q 2003 3Q 2003 4Q 2003 1Q 2004

Uninsured VolumeUninsured VolumeSame Facility - Percent Change from Prior YearSame Facility - Percent Change from Prior Year

Source: QMIRS/CASEMIX . Same facility based on current same facility definition for all quarters.

14,72216,087 17,136 16,111 15,782 16,473

18,416 17,961 17,944

0

25,000

1Q 2002 2Q 2002 3Q 2002 4Q 2002 1Q 2003 2Q 2003 3Q 2003 4Q 2003 1Q 2004

UninsuredAdmissions

7.2%vs.

PY2.4%

vs.

PY

7.5%vs.

PY

11.5%vs.

PY

13.7%vs.

PY

Uninsured/CharityER Visits

3.2%vs.

PY

5.1%vs.

PY

9.4%vs.

PY

19.9%vs.

PY17.9%

vs.

PY

(In Thousands)

Two quartersof stabilization

Three quartersof stabilization

55


Uninsured/Charity VolumeUninsured/Charity VolumeSame Facility - Percent of TotalSame Facility - Percent of Total

4.7%4.5%

4.3%4.2%

3.7%

4.1%4.4%

4.1%

3.9%

3%

6%

1Q02 2Q02 3Q02 4Q02 1Q03 2Q03 3Q03 4Q03 1Q04

Uninsured/CharityAdmissions

18.2% 18.9% 19.5%19.2%17.1%17.5%18.3%17.7%17.0%

10%

25%

1Q02 2Q02 3Q02 4Q02 1Q03 2Q03 3Q03 4Q03 1Q04

(Percent of Total)

(Percent of Total)

Source: CASEMIX. Same facility based on current same facility definition for all quarters.

Uninsured/CharityER Visits

66


Uninsured RevenuesUninsured RevenuesConsolidated - Percent Change from Prior YearConsolidated - Percent Change from Prior Year

$486.3 $502.4 $476.6 $469.5 $478.3$518.7

$572.6$620.9

$662.2

$0

$1,000

1Q 2002 2Q 2002 3Q 2002 4Q 2002 1Q 2003 2Q 2003 3Q 2003 4Q 2003 1Q 2004

UninsuredNet Revenue

20.1%vs.

PY

32.3%vs.

PY

38.4%vs.

PY

(In Millions)

1.6%vs.

PY

3.2%vs.

PY

77


Uninsured RevenuesUninsured RevenuesConsolidated - Percent of TotalConsolidated - Percent of Total

Uninsured

Net Revenue

9.7%

11.3% 11.3%10.7%

9.2%

9.5%9.8%10.4%

10.2%

0%

15%

1Q02 2Q02 3Q02 4Q02 1Q03 2Q03 3Q03 4Q03 1Q04

(Percent of Total)

88


Self-Pay Accounts ReceivableSelf-Pay Accounts ReceivableBalance Sheet AnalysisBalance Sheet Analysis

3/31/043/31/04

Total Self-Pay A/RTotal Self-Pay A/R $3,209$3,209

Approximately two-thirds Uninsured and Approximately two-thirds Uninsured and one-third co-pay deductibles A/Rone-third co-pay deductibles A/R

Q1/03-Q1/04 Chg.Q1/03-Q1/04 Chg.

Increase in Self-Pay A/RIncrease in Self-Pay A/R11 $550 $550

Approximately 75% of increase is from Approximately 75% of increase is from uninsured accounts and 25% from co-pay uninsured accounts and 25% from co-pay

& deductibles.& deductibles.

1: Hospital Only1: Hospital Only

99


Unreserved Self-Pay Accounts Receivable(Dollars in Millions)

2Q 03 3Q 03 4Q 03 1Q 04

Total Self-Pay A/R $2,721 $2,867 $3,000 $3,209

Total Allowance for Doubtful Accounts 2,378 2,494 2,649 2,856

Net Unreserved Self-Pay A/R $343 $373 $351 $353

1010


103.6%100.8%

105.1%101.8%

105.9%

100.5% 99.6%103.0%103.5%

49 4950

51 51

4849

5150

90%

100%

110%

120%

130%

140%

150%

1Q 02 2Q 02 3Q 02 4Q 02 1Q 03 2Q 03 3Q 03 4Q 03 1Q 04

30

35

40

45

50

55

Accounts Receivable IndicatorsCash Collections % Adj. Net Revenue / Days in A/R

Cas

h C

olle

ctio

ns

Cas

h C

olle

ctio

ns

% A

dju

sted

Net

Rev

enue

% A

dju

sted

Net

Rev

enue

Days in

Acco

un

ts Receivab

leD

ays in A

ccou

nts R

eceivable

20022002 20032003 20042004

1111


Change in Hospital Accounting PolicyBad Debts

Move to reserving a percentage of Uninsured and Co-Move to reserving a percentage of Uninsured and Co-insurance accounts receivable, insurance accounts receivable, andand unbilled unbilled uninsured revenue during the period.uninsured revenue during the period.

Each hospitals’ uncollectability percentage will be Each hospitals’ uncollectability percentage will be updated quarterly based on the hindsight analysis updated quarterly based on the hindsight analysis results.results.

Aggregate uncollectability percentage will decrease Aggregate uncollectability percentage will decrease due to inclusion of unbilled uninsured revenue in due to inclusion of unbilled uninsured revenue in base.base.

To be fully implemented in 2Q 2004To be fully implemented in 2Q 2004

1212


Joe SteakleySenior Vice President - Internal Audit

1313


Scope of Quarterly Hindsight Project

• Hindsight now performed quarterly

• Over 2,000 hours per quarter to complete

• Each Hindsight Project:– Test approx. 130 hospitals

• Sample comprising 90-95% of the Company’s Hospital billed patient A/R and Net Revenue

– The resulting Day Metric applied to 163 hospitals

– Remaining 27 of 190 Hospitals:• HealthONE – 6

• Recent Acquisitions/New Facilities – 13

• International – 8

1414


Hindsight Theory:

Best Predictor of Current Allowance

is Past Results

January 31, January 31,

2003 2004

1515


55%

30%

100%

13%

2%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

January-03 January-04

Collected/Contractual Recovered Written-Off A/R

1/31/03 - Hindsight Date

A/R > 1 yr

Bad Debt & Charity Write-Offs

2/1/03 <- Hindsight Period -> 1/31/04

Collected or Contractual

Recoveries

Source: 134 hindsight hospitals reviewed 1Q 2004

1616


Hindsight Allowance Calculation

Write-Offs (BD & Charity) as of 1/31/03 A/R (A) $ 1,641

Less: 3-year Avg. Recovery Percent 5.8% (95)

Equals: Net Write-Offs (BD & Charity) (B) $ 1,546

A/R > 1 year at 1/31/04 $ 656

Times: 3-year Avg. Uncollectible Percent 79.3%

Estimated Uncollectible A/R > 1 year (C) $ 520

Hindsight Allowance at 1/31/03 $ 2,066(B+C)

(in millions)

Source: 134 hindsight hospitals reviewed 1Q 2004.

1717


Conversion of Hindsight Allowance to a Day Metric

1/31/03 A/R Agings for a sample size of

134 Hospitals

Allocation of $2,066 million Days

Over 150 $ 1,645 $ 1,645 100%

121-150 291 291 100% 120

91-120 371 130 34.92% (10.48)

0-90 2,931

Total $ 5,238 $ 2,066 109.52

Hindsight Allow. expressed as a Day Metric = 110 days

Hindsight Allow. as a Percent of 1/31/03 Total A/R = 39.4%

Hindsight Allow. as a Percent of 1/31/03 Self Pay A/R = 89.4%

1818


Roll Forward of 110 Day Metric to 3/31/04 Consolidated A/R Agings to Determine the Recommended Allowance

3/31/04 A/R Agings for all Hospitals

Apply Allocation Percents

Recom. Allow.

Over 150 $2,202 100%

100%

34.92%

$ 2,202

121-150 358 358

91-120 429 150

0-90 3,452

Total $ 6,441 $ 2,710

Recommended Allowance based on a 110-day Day Metric = $2,710

Recommended Allowance based on 89.4% of 3/31/04 Self Pay A/R = $2,701

1919


Recorded Allowance as a % of Self Pay A/R

84.6%

87.4%

82.3%

83.6%

82.8%

89.4%

85.2%

82.5% 82.6%

87.0%

88.2%

82.7%

82.4%

81%

83%

85%

87%

89%

91%

93%

Dec-00

Apr-01

Aug-01

Dec-01

Apr-02

Aug-02

Nov-02

Jan-03

Apr-03

Jun-03

Sep-03

Dec-03

Mar-04

Recorded Allow. as % of Self Pay A/R

2020


1Q 2004 Allowance Adjustment

Recommended Allowance Based on Day Metric ($2,710 adjusted for specific hospital deviations)

$ 2,685

Adjustments to Allowance:

- Business Trends (HS% Applied to Self Pay A/R) 42

- Charity (Incremental Increase in Charity w/o’s below

the Day Metric)(26)

Adjusted Recommended Allowance $ 2,701

Allowance as a % of Self Pay A/R 89.4%

(in millions)

2121


New Hospital Allowance Methodology

Self Pay A/R:

Self Pay A/R with no Insurance Due

+ Self Pay A/R with Insurance Due (Co-Pays & Deductibles) $ 2,975

Plus: A/R in Charity 47

Equals: Total Self Pay A/R $ 3,022

Times: Hindsight as a Percent of Self Pay A/R (Based on Quarterly Hindsight):

89.4 %

Needed Allowance for Doubtful Accounts $ 2,701

2222

(in millions)


Beverly WallacePresident – Financial Services Group

2323


Uninsured admissions are relatively small… Uninsured admissions are relatively small… opportunities exist for non-emergent admissionsopportunities exist for non-emergent admissions

MedicareMedicare

103,820103,820

MedicareMedicare

103,820103,820

UninsuredUninsured

13,31313,31374%74%

UninsuredUninsured

13,31313,31374%74%

Managed/ Managed/ MedicaidMedicaid

92,86992,869


92,86992,869

Emergency Emergency 210,002

52%

Emergency Emergency 210,002

52%

Non-EmergencyNon-Emergency 193,662

48%

Non-EmergencyNon-Emergency 193,662

48%

AdmissionsAdmissions403,664 2.5%

AdmissionsAdmissions403,664 2.5%

MedicareMedicare

62,55462,554

MedicareMedicare

62,55462,554

UninsuredUninsured

4,6314,63126%26%

UninsuredUninsured

4,6314,63126%26%


126,477126,477


126,477126,477

52% 48%

74% 26%

Emergency Admissions 6.6% Managed/Medicaid 6.4% Medicare 5.9% Uninsured 15.2%

Non-Emergency Admissions 1.5% Managed/Medicaid 1.5% Medicare 2.1% Uninsured 9.7%

Net % Change 1Q03-04 Net % Change 1Q03-04

1st Quarter 2004 – Eastern & Western Groups

2424


ER has the highest volume of uninsured… ER has the highest volume of uninsured… requires interventionrequires intervention

MedicareMedicare

103,820103,820

MedicareMedicare

103,820103,820

UninsuredUninsured

13,31313,313

UninsuredUninsured

13,31313,313


92,86992,869


92,86992,869

AdmittedAdmitted 210,002AdmittedAdmitted 210,002

ER VisitsER Visits 1,025,639ER VisitsER Visits

1,025,639

ER VisitsER Visits1,235,641 2.3%

ER VisitsER Visits1,235,641 2.3%

MedicareMedicare

109,235109,235

MedicareMedicare

109,235109,235

UninsuredUninsured

231,436231,43695%95%

UninsuredUninsured

231,436231,43695%95%


684,968684,968


684,968684,968

17% 83%

5% 95%

Admitted 6.6% Managed/Medicaid 6.4% Medicare 5.9% Uninsured 15.2%

ER Visits 1.5% Managed/Medicaid 3.3% Medicare 0.5% Uninsured 20.1%

Net % Change 1Q03-04 Net % Change 1Q03-04

1st Quarter 2004 – Eastern & Western Groups

2525


Net Income Improvement OpportunityNet Income Improvement OpportunitySimilar Between Co-Pay/Deductible and Uninsured AccountsSimilar Between Co-Pay/Deductible and Uninsured Accounts

Co-pay & Co-pay & Deductibles Deductibles

Bad DebtBad DebtCharity/Uninsured Charity/Uninsured

Bad Debt Bad Debt

$600 Million$600 Million $2.4 Billion$2.4 Billion25-30%25-30%

$600-720 Million$600-720 MillionCost to HCACost to HCA

Cost to Charge Ratio Cost to Charge Ratio “Full Absorption”“Full Absorption”

20032003

(Carried at Net)(Carried at Net)

(Carried at Gross)(Carried at Gross)

2626


Outpatient Svcs.6%

Direct Admissions

14%

ER Visits41%

Admissions Thru ER39%

75-80%Uninsured Patients

“ “How System is Accessed”How System is Accessed”

20-25%Co-Pay &

Deductibles

Origination of Bad Debt Expense

1Q 01 vs. 1Q 04 front- 1Q 01 vs. 1Q 04 front- end collections end collections 93%, 93%, percent collected percent collected 53%, 53%, co-pays/deductibles co-pays/deductibles 25%25% Intensify collections atIntensify collections at discharge and postdischarge and post dischargedischargeMinimum front-end Minimum front-end deposit requirementsdeposit requirements

2727


Outpatient Svcs.6%

Direct Admissions

14%

ER Visits41%

Admissions Thru ER39%

Bad Debt Action Plan75-80%

Uninsured Patients

Screen all potential non-emergent patients by qualified medical personnelOnce stabilized or deemed non-emergent, proceed with collection effort Mandatory ER case management

Patient Financial Management Committee In-house case management Concurrent financial counseling Standard discharge process

Executive Management approval must be obtained

Minimum deposit standards

Enhanced front-end collection goals

Follow-up care criteria established.

2828


Net Revenue ImpactUnderpayment Recoveries / Overturned Denials

$57.5

$211.7

$137.6

$49.1

-

50

100

150

200

250

2001 2002 2003 1st Q 2004

Mill

ion

s

IncrementalRecoveries

2929


Cost to Collect

Black line indicates Baseline cost

30.00

35.00

40.00

45.00

50.00

55.00

2001 2002 2003 Mar-04

PARS Impact

CTC

3030


Focused Area of Opportunities

1. Improve front-end collections (co-

pay/deductibles)

2. Simplify charity process

3. Case management (ER

& Inpatient)

4. Non-emergent screening (ER

& Inpatient)

3131


Richard M. Bracken

President & Chief Operating Officer


1.1. Patient VolumesPatient Volumes

2.2. Outpatient ServicesOutpatient Services

3.3. Managed Care PricingManaged Care Pricing

4.4. Labor ManagementLabor Management

5.5. Kansas CityKansas City

22


3.5%

2.0%2.6%

1.8%

0.2%

4.3%3.9%

0.9%

2.3%3.4%

2.5%3.0%

0.4%

2.3%1.8%

-0.4%

0.6%2.1%

4.2%3.0%

2.2%

367

388371369373

359

390 397387 388 392

403405

372372

402

366

404 413

380

-10%

-8%

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

1Q99

2Q99

3Q99

4Q99

1Q00

2Q00

3Q00

4Q00

1Q01

2Q01

3Q01

4Q01

1Q02

2Q02

3Q02

4Q02

1Q03

2Q03

3Q03

4Q03

1Q04

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

19991999 20002000 20012001 20022002 20032003 20042004

1,463+2.7%

1,499+2.8%

1,508+2.7%

1,568+2.5%

1,581+0.6%

Same Facility – Admissions in Thousands

Ad

mis

sio

ns

(000

’s)

– %

f

r om

PY

AdmissionsAdmissions

Q1 2004…Inpatient Volumes Q1 2004…Inpatient Volumes Improved From Recent TrendsImproved From Recent Trends

Ad

mi ssi o

ns (000 ’s)

Percent Change from Prior Year

Admissions (000’s)33


Admissions growth rates vary by market Admissions growth rates vary by market A

dm

issi

on

s C

han

ge

Admissions % Change

(1,500)

(1,000)

(500)

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

-15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15%

Total Admissions Determine Bubble

Size

Top 15 Top 15 Markets in Markets in AdmissionAdmissions Growths Growth+11,860/+11,860/

+5.9% vs. +5.9% vs. PYPY


+5.9% vs. +5.9% vs. PYPY

Bottom 15 Bottom 15 Markets in Markets in AdmissionAdmissions Growths Growth

-2,773/-2,773/-2.6% vs. -2.6% vs.

PYPY

Bottom 15 Bottom 15 Markets in Markets in AdmissionAdmissions Growths Growth

-2,773/-2,773/-2.6% vs. -2.6% vs.

PYPY

Average Chg.+2.5% 1

Volume Variance by Market – 1st Quarter – Same Market

Houston-2.6%

So. Cal-5.6%

Indiana-12.3%

Far West Una.-3.2%

Treasure Coast-2.4%

Switzerland-6.4%

Las Vegas-0.8%

Dallas/Dallas/Ft. WorthFt. Worth

+5.6%+5.6%

Tampa Tampa BayBay

+3.1%

Austin +6.1%

El Paso+9.7%

Ft. Myers+5.9%

San Antonio

+3.1%

No. VA-3.9%

N. Cent. Fla.+5.2%

Jacksonville+4.5%

San Jose+3.9%

Panhandle+2.7%

N. Monroe-11.0%

Mid America-5.2%

Columbus+1.6%

S.Carolina0.1%

Rio Grande+12.8%

NW Ga.+12.9%

Mid. GA+0.3%

Cent. La.-1.4%Corpus Christi

-1.7%

Nashville+14.9%

Denver 2+6.1%

Richmond+4.9%

1: Same Facility2: Denver is a non-

consolidating JV Market

44

Investor DayInvestor Day20042004HCAHCA 4747Volume Variance by Market – 1st Quarter – Same Market


Size

Average Chg.+2.5% 1

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

0%

Ad

mis

sio

ns

Ch

ang

e

2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%

Admissions % Change

N. Cent. Fla.+5.2%

Tampa Tampa BayBay+3.1%

Dallas/Ft. Worth

+5.6%

NashvilleNashville+14.9%+14.9%

Rio Grande+12.8%

NW Ga.+12.9%

El Paso+9.7% Austin

+6.1%

Ft. Myers+5.9%

San Antonio

+3.1%

Panhandle +2.7% San

Jose+3.9% Jacksonville

+4.5%

Denver 2+6.1%

RichmondRichmond+4.9%+4.9%


+5.9% vs. +5.9% vs. PYPY


+5.9% vs. +5.9% vs. PYPY

Q1 2004…Top 15 Markets Performing Q1 2004…Top 15 Markets Performing Above Company Average Above Company Average

Top 15 Markets represent 49% of Total Company

Admissions



55


(900)

(800)

(700)

(600)

(500)

(400)

(300)

(200)

(100)

-

100

200

-14% -12% -10% -8% -6% -4% -2% 0% 2% 4%

Average Chg.+2.5% 1

Bottom Bottom 1515 Markets Markets

in in Admissions Admissions

GrowthGrowth-2,773/-2,773/

-2.6% vs. PY-2.6% vs. PY

Bottom Bottom 1515 Markets Markets

in in Admissions Admissions

GrowthGrowth-2,773/-2,773/

-2.6% vs. PY-2.6% vs. PY

Cent. La.-1.4%

Houston-2.6%

So. Cal-5.6%

Switzerland-6.4%

N. Monroe-11.0%Indiana

-12.3%

Mid America-5.2%

No. VA-3.9%

Far West Una.-3.2%

Corpus Christi-1.7%

S.Carolina0.1%

Mid. GA+0.3%

Columbus+1.6%

Las Vegas-0.8%

Treasure Coast-2.4%

Ad

mis

sio

ns

Ch

ang

e

Admissions % ChangeVolume Variance by Market – 1Q 04 vs. PY – Same Facility

Q1 2004…Bottom 15 Markets Performing Q1 2004…Bottom 15 Markets Performing Below Company Average Below Company Average

Bottom 15 Markets represent 25% of Total Company

Admissions


Size

1: Same Facility

66


Q1 2004…“Big Earners” Had Strong Admissions Q1 2004…“Big Earners” Had Strong Admissions Growth Growth

Top 15 Earnings Top 15 Earnings markets (69% of markets (69% of Company’s earningsCompany’s earnings11) ) grew +3.5%grew +3.5%22. . (Company Avg.: 2.5%)(Company Avg.: 2.5%)

1: Includes Denver – A non-consolidating JV Market2: Same facility – Q1 04 vs. Prior Year

Dallas/ Ft.

Worth

Tampa Bay

Houston

RichmondNashville

San Antonio

U.K.S. CarolinaPanhandle

DadeUtah

JacksonvilleN. Cent. Fla.Las Vegas

Denver

77


Capital Placed in Service by YearCapital Placed in Service by Year(D

oll

ars

in M

illi

on

s)

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Western $208 $228 $249 $532 $439 $586

Eastern $341 $145 $427 $691 $434 $143

Total HCA $549 $373 $676 $1,223 $873 $729

2003 projects typically 2003 projects typically approved 24-30 months agoapproved 24-30 months ago

Design&

Permits

Construction

In Service

9 mo.9 mo. 18 mo.18 mo.Approved

Average Timeframe

88


1st Q

uar

ter

Ad

mi s

sio

ns

Ch

ang

e

1st Quarter Admissions % Change

(1,500)

(1,000)

(500)

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

-15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15%


Size

Same Market

$970M$970M in Major in Major Projects completed Projects completed

in 16 Marketsin 16 Markets

$970M$970M in Major in Major Projects completed Projects completed

in 16 Marketsin 16 Markets

Capital Investment Strategy Supports Improved Capital Investment Strategy Supports Improved Admissions GrowthAdmissions Growth

Tampa Tampa BayBay

+3.1%+3.1%

Dallas/Ft. Worth+5.6%

N. Cent. Fla.+5.2%

Jacksonville+4.5%

S. Carolina+0.1%

Austin +6.1%

El Paso9.7%

So. Cal.-5.6%

Panhandle+2.7%

Palm Beach+0.9%

Reston+0.5%

Richmond+4.9%

WesleyWesley+3.3%+3.3%

Denver 2+6.1%

Nashville+14.9%

Rio Grande+12.8%

Markets with Major Project Completions 2Q03-4Q03

Average Chg.+2.5% 1



99


2.4%3.7%

2.6%1.1%

0.1%

4.0%4.4%

2.3%

-0.8%

2.6% 2.5%

-0.7%

0.3%1.8%

3.3%

3.2%4.2%

2.8%

2.2%

1.6%

4.6%

114111 110

119 117 115 114120 120

117 118

127 129 129 128 128 129 130 128131

-12%

-10%

-8%

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

1Q99

2Q99

3Q99

4Q99

1Q00

2Q00

3Q00

4Q00

1Q01

2Q01

3Q01

4Q01

1Q02

2Q02

3Q02

4Q02

1Q03

2Q03

3Q03

4Q03

1Q04

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

Q1 2004…Some Rebound In Q1 2004…Some Rebound In Inpatient SurgeriesInpatient Surgeries

Inpatient SurgeriesInpatient Surgeries

19991999 20002000 20012001 20022002 20032003 20042004

Same Facility – Surgeries in Thousands

Inp

atie

nt

Su

rge

ries

- %

Ch

ang

e f r

om

Pri

or

Ye

ar 444+2.2%

462+3.5%

471+3.6%

514+2.8%

514-0.2%

Inp

atient S

urg

eries

Percent Change from Prior Year

Inpatient Surgeries (000’s)1010


141,627145,139

139,763

134,348

138,121

132,868134,769

137,700

143,672140,647

147,248

136,429

125,000

150,000

50,44252,090

57,944 57,749

52,167 52,70054,414

60,69958,099

59,685

52,07454,387

51,715

50,000

75,000

1Q 01 2Q 01 3Q 01 4Q 01 1Q 02 2Q 02 3Q 02 4Q 02 1Q 03 2Q 03 3Q 03 4Q 03 1Q 04

20012001 20022002 20032003 20042004

HOSPITAL BASEDASC BASED

HospitalBased

Same Facility

Q1 2004…Outpatient trends show slight Q1 2004…Outpatient trends show slight recoveryrecovery

ASCBased

207,135-3.2%

217,887+4.0%

233,475+2.1%

554,969-0.5%

574,153+1.5%

539,501-5.1%

+1.0%1st Qtr.

+3.5%1st Qtr.

Ou

tpat

ien

t S

urg

erie

s

Outpatient SurgeriesOutpatient Surgeries

1111


Q1 2004…Outpatient trends show slight Q1 2004…Outpatient trends show slight recoveryrecovery

20012001 20022002 20032003 20042004

HOSPITAL BASEDASC BASED

-0.5%0.5%

3.2%2.3%

-0.7%

2.1%

3.3%

-4.4%

-5.7%-5.1%

-5.3%

2.2%0.1%-0.3%

-3.8%

2.1%1.0%

-8.3%

-4.0%

2.0%

3.5%

1.3%1.7%

1.9%

4.9%5.3%

-10%

0%

10%

1Q 01 2Q 01 3Q 01 4Q 01 1Q 02 2Q 02 3Q 02 4Q 02 1Q 03 2Q 03 3Q 03 4Q 03 1Q 04

-3.2% +4.0% +2.1%

-0.5% +1.5% -5.1%

ASCBased

HospitalBased

Same Facility – Percent Change from Prior Year

Ou

tpa

tie

nt

Su

rger

ies

- %

Ch

ang

e fr

om

Pri

or

Yea

r

Outpatient SurgeriesOutpatient Surgeries

1212


Outpatient Diagnostic ServicesOutpatient Diagnostic Services

14.3% 14.1%

9.1%7.1%

9.3%

15.2%12.7% 13.7%

19.8%

0%

10%

20%

CT Scan

5.1% 7.0%

0.2% 0.6% 1.5%6.9%

13.7% 12.9%

-0.2%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

MRIMRI

1.5%

11.9%7.7% 7.6% 6.0% 7.6%

14.5% 13.7%

-0.7%-10%

0%

10%

20%

Q1 02 Q2 02 Q3 02 Q4 02 Q1 03 Q2 03 Q3 03 Q4 03 Q1 04

CardiacCath

20022002 20032003 20042004

1313Same Facility – Percent Change from Prior Year


1. Despite improved Q1, too soon to declare recovery

2. Admission growth rates vary widely by market

3. Hospitals comprising majority of revenue base (58% of Revenues) performing better than Company averages (Excluding Houston)

4. Uninsured had modest impact on patient growth rates in Q1

5. Capital investment strategy supports improved admissions growth

6. Surgical trends improved Q1 04

HCA Patient Volume – Key ObservationsHCA Patient Volume – Key Observations

1414


Outpatient ServicesOutpatient Services

1515


9.4%

37.2%

OutpatientOutpatientERER


Outpatient Services comprised of three Outpatient Services comprised of three business linesbusiness lines

12.5%Hospital BasedHospital BasedHospital BasedHospital Based

FreestandingFreestandingFreestandingFreestanding

OutpatientOutpatientDiagnostic Diagnostic ServicesServices


ImagingImagingCardiologyCardiologyOncologyOncologyOrthopedicsOrthopedicsNeurologyNeurology


Hospital BasedHospital BasedHospital BasedHospital BasedOutpatient Outpatient SurgeriesSurgeriesOutpatient Outpatient SurgeriesSurgeries

15.3%ASC BasedASC BasedASC BasedASC Based

70%

30%

2003% of HCA

Net Revenue

As a % of Outpatient Surgeries

1616


Delivered in Two Distinct LocationsDelivered in Two Distinct Locations

1717

9.4%

37.2%











70%

30%

2003% of HCA

Net Revenue

As a %of Outpatient SurgeriesHospital BasedHospital Based

•Service/convenience strategy i.e.: improved Service/convenience strategy i.e.: improved access, dedicated parking, shortened registration access, dedicated parking, shortened registration process and extended hours of scheduling.process and extended hours of scheduling.

•Physician service/preference strategy i.e.: same Physician service/preference strategy i.e.: same day appointments, rapid report turn around, block day appointments, rapid report turn around, block OR scheduling, integrated patient scheduling, and OR scheduling, integrated patient scheduling, and on-line clinical reports.on-line clinical reports.

•Competitive managed care pricingCompetitive managed care pricing



1818

9.4%

37.2%











70%

30%

2003% of HCA

Net Revenue

As a %of Outpatient Surgeries

Freestanding Surgery Centers Freestanding Surgery Centers (ASCs)(ASCs)

76 Centers Operational76 Centers Operational11 new centers coming on line over next 12 months11 new centers coming on line over next 12 months

8 additional projects in various stages of development (12-18 8 additional projects in various stages of development (12-18 month horizon)month horizon)

25 other projects currently under review25 other projects currently under review

* * ** * *• Dedicated division based development teams (increase Dedicated division based development teams (increase

pipeline)pipeline)• Recruiting surgical specialties (offer ownership opportunities as Recruiting surgical specialties (offer ownership opportunities as

a component of recruitment package)a component of recruitment package)• Adding capacity to existing ASCsAdding capacity to existing ASCs• Modifying equity model/re-syndication as appropriateModifying equity model/re-syndication as appropriate• Reserving space in new MOBs for outpatient unitsReserving space in new MOBs for outpatient units



1919

9.4%

37.2%











70%

30%

2003% of HCA

Net Revenue

As a %of Outpatient Surgeries

Freestanding Imaging CentersFreestanding Imaging Centers10-15 sites in planning and expected to come on line over the next 12 10-15 sites in planning and expected to come on line over the next 12

monthsmonths16 sites under review or with letters of intent for acquisition / joint venture16 sites under review or with letters of intent for acquisition / joint venture

* * ** * *

• Investing capital in freestanding imaging, cardiac cath and radiation Investing capital in freestanding imaging, cardiac cath and radiation oncology centers (includes ownership opportunities for physicians)oncology centers (includes ownership opportunities for physicians)

• ““Acquisition strategy” more likely in mature markets such as Florida and Acquisition strategy” more likely in mature markets such as Florida and TexasTexas

• ““Build strategy” more likely in less mature markets such as Colorado, Build strategy” more likely in less mature markets such as Colorado, Virginia, Georgia, and South CarolinaVirginia, Georgia, and South Carolina

• Developing full-service models (oncology, cardiology, orthopedics) as Developing full-service models (oncology, cardiology, orthopedics) as opposed to single modality centers (minimizes risk due to reimbursement opposed to single modality centers (minimizes risk due to reimbursement changes or exclusion from contracts)changes or exclusion from contracts)


Managed Care PricingManaged Care Pricing

2020


2004 Managed Care Contracting

2005 Contract

Pricing Timeline*

6,844 Facility Level Active Contracts

*Anticipated Completion Dates

Pre-2004 1Q04 2Q04 3Q04 4Q04

83% of 2004 and 42% of 2005 contracts 83% of 2004 and 42% of 2005 contracts completed.completed.

83% of 2004 and 42% of 2005 contracts 83% of 2004 and 42% of 2005 contracts completed.completed.

2005Cumulative

42%42% 55%55% 75%75% 95%95%35%35% 100%100%

15.0%

10.5% 11.4%13.0% 13.3%

9.6%7.0% 7.3%

11.1%

0%

16%

1Q 02 2Q 02 3Q 02 4Q 02 1Q 03 2Q 03 3Q 03 4Q 03 1Q 04

11.1% 9.9%

Net Revenue per Adjusted AdmissionManaged Care & Other Discounted

2121


Operating ExpensesOperating Expenses

2222


4.7%

8.1%5.4%

5.6% 5.5% 5.3%

3.8%

6.0%6.2%

7.5%

9.3%

7.4%7.8%

5.5%

10.4%

7.6%

8.9%

10.8%10.2%

8.0%

6.0%7.0%

8.8%8.5%8.0%

5.2%

-1%

1%

3%

5%

7%

9%

11%

13%

15%

1Q 01 2Q 01 3Q 01 4Q 01 1Q 02 2Q 02 3Q 02 4Q 02 1Q 03 2Q 03 3Q 03 4Q 03 1Q 04

20012001 20022002 20032003 20042004

7.0% 9.4%7.4%

6.4%6.7%6.5%

Same Facility – Percent Change from Prior Year

Bad Debt Impact on Operating Expenses per Bad Debt Impact on Operating Expenses per Adjusted AdmissionAdjusted Admission

Op

erat

ing

Exp

en

ses /

AA

– P

erc

en

t C

han

ge

fro

m P

rio

r Y

ear

Operating Expense/AA Operating Expense/AA (Adj. For Bad Debt)

2323


Labor costs: Favorable Trends ContinueLabor costs: Favorable Trends Continue

IncreasingIncreasingLabor RateLabor Rate

7.2%

3.7%5.0%

6.3%8.6%8.1%

9.6%10.4%9.7%

1.6%

9.8%

6.9%

10.3%

0%

15%

7.0%

4.4%4.9%4.7%5.2%5.4%5.0%5.4%7.0%

4.5%4.8%4.8%6.4%

0%

10%

20012001 20022002 20032003 20042004

9.6% 8.3% 5.7%

6.5% 5.1% 4.7%

SW&B/AA% Change% Change

Wage Rate% Change% Change

Same Facility

Utilization ofUtilization ofPremium Premium

Contract LaborContract Labor

38.7%37.7%

38.7%38.4%

39.8%39.6%38.5%

40.1%39.7%

38.3%38.5%38.9%39.8%

35%

42%

1Q 01 2Q 01 3Q 01 4Q 01 1Q 02 2Q 02 3Q 02 4Q 02 1Q 03 2Q 03 3Q 03 4Q 03 1Q 04

SW&B% of Net% of Net

39.4% 39.2% 38.5%

2424


Controlling premium laborControlling premium labor

9.2% 8.7% 8.6%

6.7% 6.2% 6.5%8.0%

9.6%9.4%

4%

12%

1Q 02 2Q 02 3Q 02 4Q 02 1Q 03 2Q 03 3Q 03 4Q 03 1Q 04

$48

$34$41

$29$36

$25

$32

$23

$34

$23

$0

$10

$20

$30

$40

$50

2003 Q1Actual

2003 Q2Target

2003 Q3Target

2003 Q4Target

2004 Q1Actual

15%vs. Q1

15%vs. Q1

$41/APD $28/APD $35/APD$24/APD

(2nd Qtr. Actual) (3rd Qtr. Actual) (4th Qtr. Actual)

$32/APD$22/APD

25%vs. Q1

25%vs. Q1

33%vs. Q1

33%vs. Q1

29%vs. ‘03 Q1

29%vs. ‘03 Q1

(1st Qtr. Actual)

* Eastern and Western Consolidated Operations

Per Adjusted Patient Day

Per Adjusted Patient Day

As a Percent of Salaries

As a Percent of Salaries

NursingTotal Ops.*

Actual

Consolidated

Co

ntr

act

Lab

or

Co

ntr

act

Lab

or/

AP

D

2525


……while employee satisfaction at record levelswhile employee satisfaction at record levels

26.7%25.9%

22.8%

20.1%

18.8%18.3%

17.0% 16.8%

3.5%

3.6%

3.7%

3.8%

15%

20%

25%

30%

2000 2001 2002 2003

3.3%

3.4%

3.5%

3.6%

3.7%

3.8%

3.9%

Employee Satisfaction(Gallup Score)

Employee Turnover

Nurse Turnover

Tu

rno

ver

Rat

eS

atisfaction

Sco

re

2626


5.9%

9.1%

7.3%

7.7%

8.3%

10.2%9.3%

6.0%

8.2%

7.6%

9.5%

7.4%

9.6%

0%

15%

1Q 01 2Q 01 3Q 01 4Q 01 1Q 02 2Q 02 3Q 02 4Q 02 1Q 03 2Q 03 3Q 03 4Q 03 1Q 04

Supply costs driven by new technologySupply costs driven by new technology

20012001 20022002 20032003 20042004

7.3% 8.9% 8.1%

HCA Initiatives• Fully Implemented Shared Services

Model.• Created GPO – now the 3rd largest

group purchasing organization nationally.

• Division based procurement: limited the number of vendors for high volume implants.

• Supply Management Action Teams: hospital level program focused on supply utilization.

HCA Initiatives• Fully Implemented Shared Services

Model.• Created GPO – now the 3rd largest

group purchasing organization nationally.

• Division based procurement: limited the number of vendors for high volume implants.

• Supply Management Action Teams: hospital level program focused on supply utilization.

60%

21%

13%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

TechnologyDriversTechnologyDrivers

Coronary Stents

Spinal Implants

Orthopedic Implants

Single Single LargestLargest Driver Driver of Supply Expenseof Supply Expense

Same Facility % Change from PY

Su

pp

l ies/

AA

%

Ch

an

ge

fro

m P

rio

r Y

ea

r


Ethicsand

ComplianceProgram

Ethicsand

ComplianceProgram

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Net Revenue Plan

Managed Care

Contracting

Net Revenue Plan

Managed Care

Contracting

PatientSafetyPatientSafety

Employer of ChoiceEmployer of Choice

NEXT

GENERATION

NEXT

GENERATIONShared

ServicesShared

Services

Leveraging our economies of scale and prior project experience into new clinical and best practice initiatives

Shared Services (Phase 2)Shared Services (Phase 2)

•Bad Debt ManagementBad Debt Management•Centralized CodingCentralized Coding•Teleradiology/PACsTeleradiology/PACs•Centralized monitoring of patients Centralized monitoring of patients (Digital ICU)(Digital ICU)

•Centralized Lab & Pharmacy Centralized Lab & Pharmacy •Division based physician recruitmentDivision based physician recruitment

•Clinical Initiatives: Clinical Initiatives: •ED efficiency/wait time ED efficiency/wait time •OR utilizationOR utilization•ICU effectivenessICU effectiveness•Perinatal trainingPerinatal training•Nosocomial InfectionsNosocomial Infections

Sharpen the Organizational AgendaSharpen the Organizational Agenda

2828


Market UpdateMarket Update: Kansas City: Kansas CityFinancial Impact to HCA

2003 YTD(April-Dec)

Midwest Division Revenue

$698M $217M

MARGIN (40) b.p. (50) b.p.

EPS ($0.04) ($0.01)

1Q 2004

Dilutive Impact to HCA:

Market Summary & Highlights• New management structure in place• Admission run rate stabilizes & turns positive in first 12 months

• $71M in capital expenditures in 1st year ($450M committed)

• Re-opened Trauma Services and Heart Program in Market

• Recruited 19 new physicians

HCA Midwest Division Hospitals

• Acquired April 1, 2003• 12 Hospitals (1 Mgmt. Contract) • 2 ASCs

• IT Systems deployed• Managed Care Contract renewal complete; ’04 average increase 9%

• Reduced Salaries & Wages $30M or 562 FTEs (190 were overhead & infrastructure)

• Won unionization attempt at Research Med Center (largest facility)

2929


Frank Houser, M.D.Corporate Medical Director & Senior Vice President,

Quality


Electronic Medication Administration Record(eMAR)

• Serious Preventable Adverse Drug Events occur in 2% of all hospital admissions and result in increased costs through extended length of stays, increased resource use, and greater malpractice costs.

• eMAR is proving very effective in reducing medication errors in HCA hospitals by at least one-third.

• eMAR is better patient care that saves money.

22


Electronic Provider Order Management(ePOM)

• 34 hospitals have applied to pilot the ePOM software that our physicians helped develop with Meditech. Ten will be selected.

• The software will provide significant competitive advantage to our hospitals beginning in 2005.

• The combination of eMAR and ePOM will dramatically reduce Medication Errors and Preventable Adverse Drug Events in HCA hospitals.

33


CABG Mortality Rate

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%3Q

98

4Q98

1Q99

2Q99

3Q99

4Q99

1Q00

2Q00

3Q00

4Q00

1Q01

2Q01

3Q01

4Q01

1Q02

2Q02

3Q02

4Q02

1Q03

2Q03

3Q03

4Q03

HCA National

Data Source: HCA Data – CHOIS Nat’l Comparative Data - Solucient

Quality Outcomes

CABG: DRG 106, 107, or 109

44


Cardiovascular

• HCA Cardiovascular Centers of Excellence internal recognition program developed in conjunction with our physician panel to begin in fourth quarter.

55


Perinatal

• All 3,800 Labor and Delivery nurses in the HCA system are AHWONN certified in the interpretation of fetal monitoring.

• Better OB outcomes mean increased C-Sections, less VBACs, and less forceps and vacuum extractions.

• The frequency of OB malpractice claims at HCA have significantly decreased.

• Another competitive advantage for HCA hospitals.

66


Actual Score

Weighted Score

Potential Score

Emory Eastside Med

Ctr %

HCA Average

%

15.0

20.0

5.0

5.0

5.0

5.0

N/S

5.0

6.67

6.66

6.67

5.00

5.0

5.0

5.0

100.00 0

N/S = Not Scored (not applicable, not surveyed, or insufficient data)

Percent of Potential Score

Patient Safety Improvement Submission

Adult ICU Coverage

Patient Safety Improvement Validation

Satisfaction Survey Results

Inpatient Would Return

Physician Would Recommend

Vag Delivery w 3rd / 4th degree laceration Rate

Overall Surg Complication Rate

AMI Mortality Rate

Employee Would Recommend

ER Patient Satisfaction

Outcome Measures

QRS Measures

Surveys

J CAHO Standards Survey

Quality Standards Survey

Patient Safety

Disaster Readiness

TOTAL QRS SCORE

Medical Necessity

Professional Liability Experience

Professional Liability Experience Score

CURRENT

Hospital percent is better than or equal to the HCA percent

Hospital percent is worse than the HCA percent

Acute Med/Surg without CV Surgery

77

jack o. bovender chairman & ceo

Documents