3 ms·

My question is, why is the system designed such that she would be admitted to the ER in the first place? Why aren't hospitals redirecting patients to urgent car

My question is, why is the system designed such that she would be admitted to the ER in the first place? Why aren't hospitals redirecting patients to urgent care facilities, or better yet, why don't hospitals have urgent care facilities attached?? If costs in emergency rooms are extremely high - and I can understand why they would be higher to a certain extent - why aren't hospitals employing some sort of dispatch mechanism?

singron 9y ago
Urgent care facilities often don't have equipment like a CT scanner, so they can end up redirecting patients to the ER anyway.
FireBeyond 9y ago
The thing is, for acute, severe, lower abdominal pain, the ER -is- the place to go, speaking as a health professional. While the minor issues (constipation, and the like) are indeed resolvable in urgent care, any serious issue is likely to require some form of surgical intervention. Additionally, the diagnosis of such issues is likely to require sophisticated imaging. While Urgent Care can use US (ultrasound), CT, possibly with contrasts, and such, are still best handled at an ER. Most likely this patient would have presented at Urgent Care and be transferred, likely by ambulance, to ER anyway. Now, do I think there is massive reform required to the healthcare _model_ in the US? Absolutely, including the use of more urgent care models. I work in the system as a paramedic, and I definitely agree with that, and I realize that your question was more broad, but in this instance, ER was the right place to go, even if the final diagnosis was benign.
michaelt 9y ago
If hospitals and medical insurers were run for charity, or out of a genuine desire to help people, you may well expect that. But hospitals and medical insurance are for-profit businesses. If you're running an ER to maximise profit, and today you make $12,000 off a visit, why would you spend money on urgent care facilities that would make you less money?

singron 9y ago

Urgent care facilities often don't have equipment like a CT scanner, so they can end up redirecting patients to the ER anyway.

FireBeyond 9y ago

The thing is, for acute, severe, lower abdominal pain, the ER -is- the place to go, speaking as a health professional. While the minor issues (constipation, and the like) are indeed resolvable in urgent care, any serious issue is likely to require some form of surgical intervention. Additionally, the diagnosis of such issues is likely to require sophisticated imaging. While Urgent Care can use US (ultrasound), CT, possibly with contrasts, and such, are still best handled at an ER. Most likely this patient would have presented at Urgent Care and be transferred, likely by ambulance, to ER anyway. Now, do I think there is massive reform required to the healthcare _model_ in the US? Absolutely, including the use of more urgent care models. I work in the system as a paramedic, and I definitely agree with that, and I realize that your question was more broad, but in this instance, ER was the right place to go, even if the final diagnosis was benign.

michaelt 9y ago

If hospitals and medical insurers were run for charity, or out of a genuine desire to help people, you may well expect that. But hospitals and medical insurance are for-profit businesses. If you're running an ER to maximise profit, and today you make $12,000 off a visit, why would you spend money on urgent care facilities that would make you less money?