Posts Tagged underinsured
Turfed too
Posted by redlinedoc in Medicine, Universal HealthCare on August 22, 2009
It amazes me that in the land of the best healthcare we’re more in the business of denying care than providing it.
I get a call the other day that a kid has stepped on a piece of glass. Its off hours but I say “sure, bring him in, I’ll take a look”.
A pale frightened 13y/o arrives at the clinic with parents. Apparently yesterday he jumped up off a picnic table (in the way that 13 year old males do) and sprang directly onto a wine glass lying on the ground. The glass shattered into the bottom of his foot. The parents, correctly, take him to the nearest emergency room. He waits approximately 3 1/2 hours since its “only a bleeding foot”. Xrays show glass in the wound and the physician diagnoses tendon injuries to the tendons of the toes. Ahh, you say, a case for the surgeons.
Not so fast. He has a state option child health insurance. They sew up the foot (with the glass inside) and direct him to a private practice clinic the following day. He continues to bleed, slowly, through the night. Mom and dad pack him off to the local recommended doctor only to find that he (nor most others) do not accept this insurance. They are tempted to return to the emergency room but call me.
He cannot be treated here. He needs advanced care which we cannot offer to him. I make some calls with the assistance of our pediatrician. He’s transferred to a tertiary care facility. By 4PM he’s in an operating room and being cared for.
What went wrong? Why didn’t the emergency room transfer him inter-hospital when they realized they had a severe injury they couldn’t handle? Why did they refer him through out patient when clearly there was no real outpatient option?
Insurance. When the insurance pays so poorly that even the most basic of services are covered but lose money, then the hospitals, left to chose to bleed monies or to restrict services chose the latter. In the land of ‘the best healthcare” we are forced into rationing that healthcare based not on need, not on priorities but on the needs of the stockholders of insurance companies.
Again and again
Posted by redlinedoc in Universal HealthCare on August 13, 2009
Why can’t we pay for health care for everyone? Why is it that is this country we have such a divide? Is it our puritanical upbringing which says work hard and you’ll get your rewards?
Sadly folks, the Puritan’s didn’t have it all that wonderfully. Life was hard but it was short. There were no antibiotics, no x-rays, no casts, no real surgery (with anesthesia). Hospitals were to be avoided as pest houses and physicians themselves at the time knew they did little for their patients. Some cures were probably worse than the diseases.
If we have modernized medicine, why can’t we modernize the way we provide care for our citizens. Why do we in the land of the brave, home of the free, live with a 3rd world medical care system. Sure people come here. The Sultan of Brunei came here and got wonderful care. M. D., a fictional name, in the north end of Hartford got turfed. Hmmm. Would the divide and provision of care have to do with money?
Indeed it does. The wheels grind exceeding slowly for those with limited funding.
All the Michaels are dead…
Posted by redlinedoc in Universal HealthCare on August 13, 2009
How did we allow the discussion to move away from health to how we should save the health insurance industry? How did that conversation move from a public healthy option to saving the profits of some of the most profitable companies in the world?
As there is increasing talk in Washington about the AMA time clicks by. And to whom are the insurance companies responsible? Ahhh shareholders, the same folks who brought us the current bank debacle, to whom we the people pay extravagant sums so that they can support CEO’s in a style to which they’d like to become accustomed. As there is continued agglomeration of insurers, they flock together, eat each other, thereby decreasing real market competition, in the guise of bringing lower cost to the consumer.
In medicine we speak for the patient. In insurance they speak for the money. There’s an inherent split here. When it comes down to it, shall we authorize care OR shall we make 0.02 for the stockholder, the stockholder and CEO options always win out. Duplicity is the name of the game. When Hurricane Andrew roared across the South Florida Pennisula devastating the area. Aetna group was the major insurer holding more than 4 billiion dollars in losses. That past year they golden parachuted their worthy CEO for 987 MILLION dollars (or there abouts) and then cried the blues that they didn’t have monies for claims. Hmmmm
I personally have run into the dealings of insurers. Serveral years ago one of the Connecticut health insurers sent out a note that all billing should henceforth be sent to a POB in Enfield. We all did send claims there and as weeks went by and no claims information was forthcoming, we were told that the claims were lost or that they should be re-submitted. Whoops. Someone bad in the company made an error and there is no POB in Enfield for our claims. We’re really sorry but you’ll have to re-submit them all over again. Hmmmm
I’ve had several friends who’ve suffered death at the hands of insurers, not in any direct sort of way but the usual games playing with existing conditions and difficult to access portals.
Working in a safety net group we see patients bounced from one provider to another, mostly based on non paying insurances. I think most of us are insulted when the insurers talk about the Medicare program, and how it fails to work. It succeeds with a 5% overhead, a draconian fraud unit, and coverage that most of us envy. Are there faults? Are there fixes to be made? Of course. We can in one swoop, make our system succeed. It needs a government backed program, devoid of usurious profits, not socialism, just good medicine.
We need to recenter the discussion, not about death notes but about how to prevent the needless deaths from an unwieldy bloated system which spends much of its monies not on patient well being but on corporate well being. Straight speak or soon, all the Michaels will be dead
Just want to dip my beak …..
Posted by redlinedoc in Universal HealthCare on July 9, 2009
Strange you say. Governor Rell (I’m a yankee) just vetoed Sustinet. Sustinet? Sustinet was a plan to insure every citizen in Connecticut starting with the most vulnerable, including state employees and rolling in small businesses and non-profits to make a large coverage group competing with private insurance companies for benefits and coverages. No one would be forced to enter Sustinet (other than the current state medicaid/safetynet and employees) and it would have to stand on its own merit. It was broadly supported and overwhelmingly voted in both senate and house chambers in the state.
Why veto it? Governor Rell seems to have forgotten some history here. In the 1700′s the citizens of Connecticut recognizing that they didn’t want to replicate the Dickensian debtor prisons of England, established havens for those to sick or unable to work; town farms. The town farms were by no means a happy haven but residents there worked on the farm as they could, helped to be self sustaining, had some funding from the Selectman’s budget in the town and had food and clothings and housing and medical care. This, from the compassionate citizens of Connecticut. Fast forward. When larger government programs superseded the Town Farm System, the program became State Aid to General Assistance (SAGA) one of the safety net programs here in Connecticut.
No one wants to see SAGA patients. Getting referrals from primary care (I work in an FQHC) to tertiary or upper level care is nearly impossible. SAGA pays poorly for advanced care and since its coverage mostly (a devilish word) is for poor folk; Who cares. The devil in the mostly is that folks who have worked all their lives but had some dreadful disease may find themselves on SAGA. Folks who have a sickness in the family, monies wiped out by the vagaries of the current ‘he who has the gold makes the rules insurance system’ may find themselves on SAGA. The list goes on. The poor line up and are anointed with the least of the least.
Sustinet looks in ways to fix this, to level the playing field by making no distinction between rich and poor by allowing all access to health care. Bah Humbug they should pull up their bootstraps, you say. WHO will pull up the bootstraps. My 24 year old daughter recently fell into the hole between parental coverage and no coverage from work. Luckily she had her health. Needed medications, however, consumed a fair bite of her savings.
Whats with the beak dipping? Governor Rell is a leftover from the Rowland administration here in Connecticut. She distanced herself from John Rowland (who spent some time waiting for a better paying government job — quel suprise!). Republican administrations believe that business will make it all perfect. That the shareholder marketplace will bring equity and equanimity to the medical system. Each of the stakeholders will ‘dip his beak’ only taking a fair share of the monies, pleasing the boards and CEO’s. I think this more akin to crows feasting at the carcass. There isn’t much money and pleasing the shareholders never improved wellness. There is a finite supply of monies and pleasing the CEO’s and padding their golden parachutes never helped struggling parents with sick children. Dipping their beaks, sucking up the juice.
Ahh for sure, all that will be left of Sustinet will be the bones, no juice, no meat, no insurance, no coverage. And the fat cats will be daubing their beaks with linen napkins.
You’ve been turfed!
Posted by redlinedoc in Commentary of the times, Medicine, Universal HealthCare on June 21, 2009
More of my patients are being turned away at the gates every day. Often they need advanced care which we at the primary care level can’t give them.
I have always felt that we were most lucky, we are a smallish state and have a training institution and hospital which are owned and operated by the state. This hospital should be seeing the those at the fringe, those in great need. For many years the hospital was located in the center of an immigrant community. In the 70′s it relocated to a suburban location, very upscale. At first there was a bus to take people from the community but that quickly was quashed. Now it takes two busses and a local jitney at the heath centet, about 2.5 hours, to get there. Not much of a barrier.
Patients going to his greater facility of learning often encouter trolls at the gates. Trolls? Admission to this center of ‘much higher learning’ requires the proper insurance, not some of the lower paying kinds that our patient’s possess. When they call, the answer is frequently, call back when you have better insurance.
A few weeks ago, after some harsh notes from our facility, several well dressed physicians show up to try to make arrangements to expedite the admission of our patients into the gleaming tertiary care facility, state owned and supported. To show magnanimity one of the docs takes out a card with driving directions and some special parking near his clinics. There is muffled laughter as we tell him that the majority of our patients don’t drive nor own cars. He’s a bit culturally disconnected.
Lest you think that this is peculiar to the country estate hospital, the in-city institutions answer similarly.
Recently a patient shows on a Friday afternoon, all hunched over, the Groucho Marx walk, right upper quadrant pain, rather classic gallbladder symptoms; a surgical problem. She is referred, complete with small note from the doc, and ambulance transported to the in citty emergeny room to prevent her from having to find transport. The attending physician there concurs but adds the diagnosis ‘shitty insurance’ and instead of wheeling Senora Patient to a holding area for surgical admission, gives her back a note with the names of two surgeons in the area saying she needs urgent and immediate care. She of course calls those offices only to find that neither surgeon participates with her insurance. Quel suprise! Monday morning, quite more hunched over she comes back to our primary care clinic, sicker, with the note and no scar. A nasty note and a phone call, she’s retransported and admitted for care. This is a good outcome?
With all the ballyhoo about insurance companies participating in health care, and contrary to their every present advertisements that ‘they take care of you’ we need remember that there’s a profit motive totally separated from any health provision. The recent squealing and wheezing from the health insurance companies and their paid compadres in government about the death of health care should we use single payor or government sponsored health care is quite self serving, serving only their investors.
The only investors in Medicare are we the users. Its far from perfect. It has a 5-8 percent overhead, unmatched anywhere in the insurance industry, even with draconian plans which provide and income source for the insurance companies not safety nor security for their policy holders.
We need to re-direct our efforts and energies toward providing a comprehensive Medicare type system. A single payor system will insure fairness. I see no reason why the private companies can’t compete for business as they do in every other country with single payors. Lets see them for what they are, trolls at the gates.
fairness, Health+insurance, Medicare, poverty, single+payor, turfed, underinsured
No Comments