There are some problems with this story:
-I am not sure when you had your accident but since the COBRA legislation it
is actually a violation of federal law to discuss finances prior to
initiating what is vaguely termed a "medical screening exam". Of course it
should be expected that hospitals will be collecting payment information but
there is a BIG disconnect between payment information and medical decision
making in general, unfortunately both to the benefit and the detriment of
the patient.
-It is also an EMTALA violation, which carries significant financial
penalties for both the hospital and the physicians, for an on call physician
to refuse to respond when called by the ED. There is no requirement,
however, that there be plastic surgeons or, for that matter, any other
specialty coverage at all hospitals.
-There is also a requirement for physician to physician contact. It is
unlikely that nurses would be placed in a position of searching for a
plastic surgeon to respond to a need for consultation as this clearly would
be the responsibility of the physician. Clerical people or even nurses may
be making phone calls however and that may cause some confusion. It is
frequent that people will assume that all the females in the hospital are
nurses and all the males are doctors. This does somewhat [censored] of virtually
everyone who is mislabeled, by the way.
-An osteopath, or DO, is a doctor just like an MD. They go to osteopathic
school and have equivalent training.
I think that often people assume that all the people they meet in a hospital
encounter are acting as agents of the physician. This is most definitely
not the case. In fact many times the physician is acting at odds to the
hospital and even more often the specific hospital employees. There are
lots of different schemes that are used but most generally EM physicians do
not collect directly from the patients they see. They may be employees of a
group, contract management company or the hospital. They may be paid
hourly, split fees with a group or some other scheme. Even in the
situations where they are paid directly related to what is, somewhat
euphemistically, called production there is so much separation between the
service delivered and the amount paid that it is difficult to really make
much of a connection. In many EDs a significantly large portion of the
patient population is uninsured so seeing another uninsured patient is very
unlikely to change how you would generally do things.
The situation is different in a private office of course. There is a more
direct connection between the finances and the services delivered in that
setting so consequently it would be easier to see economics making an effect
on decision making.
I am not surprised by the statement about the reduction in amount of the
bill, although the magnitude is a bit bigger than I would expect. It is
common that insurance companies will negotiate (or more accurately demand)
deep discounts. This, combined with the fact that governmental payers
(Medicare, Medicaid, etc.) pay set fees for services regardless of amount
billed and that there are a substantial number of patients that don't ever
pay, make it so that the fee for services (the "sticker" price) is
substantially higher than the actual market value. The hapless person that
pays cash for service ends up paying this "sticker" price, in effect
covering the underpayment by no pays, insured and governmental payers. I
have calculated that for our group if we were paid cash at the time of
service, like most businesses, we could charge roughly 20% (not 20% less ...
20%) of what we currently charge and still make the same amount of money.
It is a crazy business.
I also feel compelled to point out that being between jobs does not
necessarily keep you from purchasing insurance. You do not have to get your
insurance through an employer. Major medical insurance, which has a high
deductible but would cover a substantial portion of a large bill like Tom's,
can be purchased individually often for less money than many people spend on
beer and cigarettes. Pre-existing conditions may make individual medical
insurance difficult or impossible to purchase but there are often groups
purchase insurances that people can get outside of their employment. USA
Cycling has, at least in the past, offered this sort of program. For the
most part here in the US the crisis of people lacking medical insurance is
primarily an issue of people electing NOT to purchase rather than being
unable to purchase.
--
Mike Murray
"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:Mike, when I smashed my toe in a lawnmower accident and went to the EM
one of the first questions was "Do you have insurance". I was between
jobs and didn't and even in my pain I would hear the nurse calling
plastic surgeons on the phone and in the first sentence they would say,
"no insurance". No plastic surgeons were available and so an osteopath
cut it off.
Now I was in so much pain that I wasn't about to complain, but the fact
is that I'm pretty sure that the toe could have been saved and some
walking problems avoided if the question of insurance had never come
up.
The funny thing is that when I went to my next job after recovery they
had a health insurance guy there who described almost the identical
injury to another person - he bragged that his company could reduce
that $16,000 bill so that they only paid $1,900. The interesting part
was that my injuries cost me $18,000 in medical expenses which I paid
within 6 months.
I'm sure that there are doctors such as yourself who aren't worried
about being paid all that rapidly, but there most certainly are a large
number of doctors who are.