He saw a large, swollen bruise on his three-year-old sons head several days after falling off his scooter. Other than the bruise, no other abnormalities were mentioned. He took the boy to "one of the top pediatric emergency rooms in the country" to have a CT scan done. It showed "a small, 11-day-old bleed inside his head, which was healing, and insignificant."
Dr. David received a bill for $20,000, $17,000 of which had been paid by his insurance company. He was responsible for the remaining $3000.
He noted a $10,000 charge for a trauma team activation which he said never happened. After a lengthy series of exchanges with the hospitals billing department and Dr. David having to prove that a trauma team activation was unwarranted and not permitted by certain regulations, he was able to have the charge rescinded.
The essay went on for some 1200 words listing the steps that he went through. He correctly described what a mess American healthcare delivery is and why as long as overuse and upcoding are rewarded, the Affordable Care Act will not fix it.
Dr. David was right to contest the $10,000 charge for a trauma team activation that wasnt indicated and didnt even occur.
What he didnt address was this.
Why would a doctor who said that he had "served on trauma teams in two of the busiest hospitals in New York City" feel the need to take his apparently asymptomatic son with an 11-day-old injury to an emergency room for a CT scan?
Doesnt this imply overuse of a different type?
Secondary questions:
Did anyone bring up the issue of radiation from the CT scan?
Did the docs in the ED think a CT scan was necessary?
"Inside his head" is a rather odd phrase. Does it mean intracranial? Intracerebral?
Was "one of the top pediatric emergency rooms in the country" the only option or could this asymptomatic boy have been seen in a doctors office?
Why is the charge for a trauma team activation $10,000?
.jpg)
.jpg)
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar