Slashdot Mirror


Hospital Turns Away Ambulances When Computers Go Down

CurtMonash writes "The Indianapolis Star reports that Tuesday Morning, Methodist Hospital turned away patients in ambulances, for the first time in its 100-plus history. Why? Because the electronic health records (EHR) system had gone down the prior afternoon — due to a power surge — and the backlog of paperwork was no longer tolerable. If you think about that story, it has a couple of disturbing aspects. Clearly the investment in or design of high availability, surge protection, etc. were sadly lacking. But even leaving that aside — why do problems with paperwork make it necessary to turn away patients? Maybe the latter is OK, since there obviously were other, more smoothly running hospitals to send the patient to. Still, the whole story should be held up as a cautionary tale for hospitals and IT suppliers everywhere."

15 of 406 comments (clear)

  1. Welcome to the paperless office by Moryath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    please bring your own toilet paper.

    But seriously... this is one of the biggest problems with the "paperless" society. Yes, it's nice to have electronic copies of things, but magnetically-stored data (or even optically-stored data) degrades far faster than a paper copy.

    We can try and try to hope otherwise, but at the end of the day I worry we're dooming ourselves with our "modernized" recordkeeping. Sure, we have "tidbits" of things from 1000,2000,3000,4000 years ago... but 1000 years from now, most of our own records - much like the oral histories of certain societies that didn't get heavily into good recordkeeping on more solid forms - may well be completely gone.

  2. A one word answer by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "But even leaving that aside - why do problems with paperwork make it necessary to turn away patients?"

    Lawyers.

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    1. Re:A one word answer by TinBromide · · Score: 5, Informative

      The prevailing attitude in the medical industry is that unless patients are telling you where it hurts, they're lying. Doctors will tell you that patients are "forgetful" or possibly "confused about their past conditions and may not understand what was wrong with them". Their lawyers tell them that patients are drug addicts looking for the next narcotic hit or looking to sue them for a big fat malpractice settlement. If I say I'm allergic to iodine, but forget about an allergic reaction I had to antibiotics when I was 3, and they administer antibiotics, they're still on the hook if I decide to sue. "Look at my file! It says I'm allergic ot antibiotics! I said I was allergic, but he wasn't listening!"

      --
      Is it sad that I am more likely to recognize you and your posts by your sig than your name or UID?
  3. It's Not Just Any Beaurocracy by 4e617474 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why do problems with paperwork make it necessary to turn away patients?

    In an ER, "paperwork" includes information on whether they'll kill you if they give you a certain drug or transfusion. Stuff like that.

    --
    Finally modding someone offtopic when they rant about what "Begging the Question" means: priceless.
    1. Re:It's Not Just Any Beaurocracy by tomhath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They sent word to out the ambulances to divert to another hospital. It's not like they turned them away at the door. Basically they couldn't keep up with the number of patients without compromising patient safety or having incomplete records. In a real emergency they could still have treated patients, but in a lawsuit happy country like the USA they don't dare skip record keeping in a non-emergency situation.

    2. Re:It's Not Just Any Beaurocracy by aukset · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Turning away ambulances" is not how it really happens. Let me describe it for you:

      The hospital determines it is nearing its capacity to handle emergent cases. The hospital contacts the regional EMS dispatch to let them know. In my area, this is the county Fire Control. When an ambulance calls in that they have arrived on scene, the dispatcher will say, in this case, "Methodist Hospital is the only closed facility." The crew will let the patient know that they can't take them to that hospital. Also, when the crew calls dispatch for a clearance to transport the patient, if the hospital they are going to is closed, dispatch will tell them so (in NY, a patient can demand to be transported to even a closed hospital, but we do our best to convince them to go somewhere else). A hospital ED cannot turn away patients at the door, even if they come by ambulance.

      So what if its a truly life threatening situation that can't be stabilized in the field? Say, full cardiac arrest, or uncontrollable arterial bleed? The ambulance will go to the closest facility, even if that is the closed facility, and will not be turned away. The ambulance will contact the receiving hospital directly and give a report on route, giving the hospital time to clear an appropriate room and mobilize the necessary staff to receive the patient.

      Hospitals can close for a lot of reasons. Sometimes, a few staff members call in sick and they can't find coverage, so the capacity of the system is reduced. Sometimes a lot of patients come in all at once. Sometimes the hospital's support systems like EMR fail, but it could even be their admissions and billing system that decides to fail and causes the hospital to divert patients. It happens, but the system is designed to handle it.

      --
      No sig now
  4. Treating patients in a vacuum by capt.Hij · · Score: 5, Insightful

    why do problems with paperwork make it necessary to turn away patients?

    It may not be necessary, but it is a cautious move. Information is important when treating patients. Their history is important. When making decisions on what treatments to provide the doctors consider the patient's history. If you do not have their history and a nearby hospital does then it seems like an easy choice to send the patient elsewhere.

  5. More-words answer. by TrebleJunkie · · Score: 5, Informative

    Lawyers, patient safety, and actually getting paid. Vast amounts of documentation must be provided to Medicare/Medicaid and Insurance companies in order to get paid for services. Event the smallest amount of missing or inaccurate documentation can be the difference between getting paid $5 and $5000, the difference between getting paid and getting fined and losing your ability to bill Medicare, etc...

    --

    Ed R.Zahurak

    You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.

  6. Re:Nurse != Secretary by wealthychef · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We don't know that human lives were at stake here. First of all, the situation lasted from 1AM to 3AM on a Wednesday morning, so I doubt if anyone was even turned away. Also, the summary implied that there were other options for the patients. Hospitals now are very complex systems, and losing track of a patient could mean making an error that bodes worse for the patient than not admitting them, like administering the wrong medicine or applying the wrong procedure. We don't know the whole story, but I'm thinking it's not as bad as the sensation-grabbing news reporters might like it to seem.

    --
    Currently hooked on AMP
  7. Re:Nurse != Secretary by AlecC · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, secretaries are reverting to their original function, except that the job title has changed to Personal Assistant. A secret-ary was an assistant who was entrusted with your secrets (hence Secretary of State, Foreign Secretary). The job title that typists and data-entry staff should have had was "clerk" (if not typist or data-entry clerk). But secretary was more prestigious, and a good job title always helps keeping people satisfied with low pay. The people who were unable to perform their function in this hospital when the computers died were data-entry clerks.

    --
    Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
  8. Re:Nurse != Secretary by johnshirley · · Score: 5, Funny

    Here's the miniskirt. Here's the coffee. If you're looking for something else sometimes provided by secretaries, you'll have to look elsewhere.

  9. Re:Nurse != Secretary by Gilmoure · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was an EMT and LPN in the Air Force, back in late 80's and worked 2 years in military and VA hospitals. While there were computerized records, the actual treatment notes stayed on a clipboard that was on the end of the patient's bed. Any pre-existing issues were also noted there.

    The dangers of treatment without prior records sounds pretty tenuous. I wonder if this has more to do with the dangers of not being able to bill 'accurately'? Nicest thing about working in a socialized medical system (military medicine is set up as such) was not having to worry about every nickel and dime. Doctors I spoke with liked it, even though they were paid a lot less than they would be in civilian practice. They didn't have to worry about office expenses, insurance, etc. and didn't have HMO's second guessing their work and suggesting cost-saving measures.

    --
    I drank what? -- Socrates
  10. As a former EMT by drachenfyre · · Score: 5, Informative

    The hospital going on divert simply means "If you can take a patient somewhere else without threatening their well being, please do so". It doesn't mean that if I rolled up with someone in cardiac arrest that they'd refuse my patient and send me elsewhere. Hospitals go on divert hundreds of times a day in this country. This isn't news. Move along.

  11. Re:Nurse != Secretary by Abstrackt · · Score: 5, Funny

    Slashdot, Slashdot, home to so many misogynists :(

    Really? I never saw him mention women once in that post. Which raises a far more disturbing thought...

    --
    They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
  12. Re:Nurse != Secretary by Ironica · · Score: 5, Informative

    A monopoly, of any kind, is a bad idea. Imagine the DMV or Amtrak running your hospitals - no thanks. I prefer the freedom of choice where if I don't like Country General I can go visit St. Josephs instead. If they are crap I can to to John Hopkins or Mt. Sinai or any other place within driving difference.

    Unless the pain in your abdomen is so intense, you ARE GOING to the closest hospital no matter who runs them, because you don't know what's going on and whether you have time to go to the next one.

    We were in that situation about a year and a half ago. There's a Catholic Healthcare West hospital just a mile from our house. CHW played a large role in my cousin's death, and given all the lawsuits pending against them for their billing practices, I had vowed never to darken their door. But when my husband had a kidney stone (and we had no idea what was going on), and the next hospital was several more miles away, I took him to the closest ER anyway.

    That's why healthcare is a market failure. There is not perfect access, or anything even approaching it. You cannot make informed decisions based on quality of service and cost and all that when you think you might be dying. You'll go wherever's closest, no matter HOW badly they do their job, if you think that they're at least basically competent WRT lifesaving.

    BTW, JC Penney has much better quality than Macy's. You might try "Nordstrom" in that last slot.

    --
    Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?