Midei. This means that the management was involved since it stood to gain from the over approximation of the problems that faced the patients. The management also had a laissez faire approach to the management of the actions of the doctor who was deemed to the star cardiologist.
The inability or the unwillingness of the management to control the extent of the activities of the doctor was a major source of the confidence of the doctor to continue with the processes that were against the standard procedure. The installation of the stents in the patients that did not require them was a huge risk for the patients and the management. To the patients, the process of the installation was irreversible. The fact that the medical centre sanctioned the installation out of the clamour to improve the finances of the organization was an indicator that the medical centre was no longer interested in the health of the patients. Another way of looking at the issue of the installations is by comparing the installations with the ones conducted in the rest of the medical centres that are compliant with the rules. The comparison indicates that the hospital may have sanctioned the installation of the stents by the simple act of remaining silent about the issue (Hackney). The supervisory mechanism of the hospital had the capacity of reviewing the installation in the patients making the excuse of poor supervisory mechanism irrelevant in this case. The hospital can be said to have failed at best in the restriction of the practices of the doctor. However, the most appropriate explanation of the medical centre practices can be seen from the willingness of the medical centre to pay the doctor a large sum of money that was significantly different from other cardiologists that are in his working class (Barker and Padfield 150).
The hospital proceeds to distance