[nojito]

Not sure if you’re serious but just search the name Kaiser in any research search engine.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8032167/

Their secret sauce is their ability to standardize protocols throughout their entire organization.

[guelo]

Study is from 2000-2013, their care has deteriorated significantly since then. I know because I've been a patient the whole time.

[nojito]

Their quality metrics have increased steadily over the last 10 years

https://healthy.kaiserpermanente.org/northern-california/pag...

There’s no best healthcare for everyone but that doesn’t change the fact that Kaiser is objectively one of the best.

[sgarman]

I agree. The last 5 years especially.

[ak217]

Well then their protocols suck. I have many anecdotal data points about them fumbling in major ways when it matters (missed major pathologies, messed up surgeries, etc.).

If you have a choice of hospital networks, research carefully. Kaiser might be fine for many people's needs, it's not fine when it comes to intensive care.

[nojito]

Correct. There’s no uniform healthcare solution that works for everyone.

But it doesn’t change the fact their protocols are top notch as reflected by their quality metrics.

[lostlogin]

That’s the measure for one pathology, but in terms of a provider comparison, what’s the measure? It isn’t dollars versus life span or morbidity.

[bmitc]

Why wouldn't I be serious? And everyone lives in and cares about California.

Plus, a quick Wikipedia glance shows they have a fair share of controversies, including major fines due to poor COVID protocol adherence.