2 ms·
> Geez, this could make corporate PR people blush. Yeah, it’s embarrassing. I am not “thrilled” to talk to a doctor directly. I pay for it, and when I do it’s
by kergonath 3y ago
> Geez, this could make corporate PR people blush.
Yeah, it’s embarrassing. I am not “thrilled” to talk to a doctor directly. I pay for it, and when I do it’s because I have a reason to, which kind of limits the thrilling aspect. I expect it, and I need it, sure. But it’s not being able to talk to my doctor that elicits an emotional response, and it tends to be anger.
- skzv 3y agoI'm thrilled to be able to message a doctor, even if I have to pay for it. In Canada I had no such option.
- qudat 3y agoHmm. I'm not sure if this is just a difference between private practice and hospitals, but there is a ton of questions that can and should be serviced by non-physicians (e.g. RNAs, nurse practitioners, physician assistants). Their role in patient care is consistently growing in importance. It's rare for me to send a message through a patient portal and have a physician answer it. It's always someone on the staff.