As a general disclaimer, I have current experience of both public and private systems but unfortunately do not have expert knowledge on high-tech hospitals. From discussions with colleagues, my understanding is that high-tech is a term created by the health insurance companies to describe hospitals such as Blackrock, Mater Private and Beacon which have certain facilities that other private hospitals do not offer.
To build on your example, we can't compare PET CT in BRC to PET CT in James' as that is comparing private to public - if BRC was the only private hospital with PET CT then it could be legitimate to designate it as high tech, but again I understand that this is a term defined by the health insurance companies, so it could include any number of criteria.
I will make some enquiries and if I can find out definitively I will report back.
Whether people prefer to be treated in a public teaching hospital, private teaching hospital, high tech private hospital, general hospital, smaller private hospital, etc. etc. is entirely a personal decision to make based on what the patient values. Without hard numbers it is difficult to compare apples to apples.
There are some units in major public hospitals that are of excellent quality and other units within the same hospitals that are not up to scratch (per HIQA reports). I don't think it is useful or fair to generalise. I certainly have my own list of procedures that I would prefer done in certain hospitals.
There is a big difference between minor elective procedures and emergency surgery, there is also a significant difference between planned admissions to ICU and emergency admissions to ICU. My experience is that in some private hospitals the ICU service is as comprehensive (if not moreso) than many public hospitals. This may come as a surprise because it is a relatively new development. Another point to consider is that in private hospitals, most shifts are maximum 12 hours and European Working Time Directive compliant so the NCHDs are better rested - sadly, the same cannot be said for most public hospitals.
UPMC ran the cancer services in Beacon Hospital when the hospital was owned by the original consortium and operated by Triad. There were financial difficulties and Triad pulled out. At one stage Johns Hopkins were considering taking it over. Instead, about 5 years ago UPMC bought a controlling share and took over the running of the entire hospital. They have steadily worked to reduce losses and are due to be in the black in the near future, per public accounts and media analysis.
As for the non-consultant hospital doctors (NCHDs) in private hospitals, you are correct that they are generally not on training programmes; however that is changing and varies widely between hospitals. For example, Mater Private cardiology, oncology and anaesthetics registrars (senior NCHDs) are on public training programmes. The Bons in Cork has interns on training programmes. The Beacon has several in-house doctors who are actually on the consultant register but are employed to provide cover for their specialty across the hospital and support other consultants (similar to the US system).
Private hospitals are now attracting some of the highest calibre NCHDs, mainly because of HSE working conditions and administrative restrictions on non-EEA doctors. On the bright side, there are plans afoot to harmonise training programmes across public and private hospitals. I am concerned that current government policy will continue to drain consultants from the public to the private system. This will cause huge problems for the public system.
