2 Comments:

 Anonymous said...

Interesting post on our story.

It seems you're defining medical care as only the shooting of the X-ray.

Let's review the differences:

At Lenox Hill Radiology:

-- it takes two weeks to get an appointment.

-- If your scan needs to be redone, you're long gone before that's known, so you'll have to come back.

-- Your diagnosis comes in the mail about nine days later.

-- You never get a copy of your scans. Nor does your doctor.

-- You don't talk with a radiologist.


At New York Private Medical Imaging:

-- you could walk right in. Our patient was told she could get an appointment the next business day. We chose to delay to the second day.

-- your scan is read right away, while you're there, so you can have it redone if needed.

-- your diagnosis is immediate.

-- You leave with your scans in hand.

-- The radiologist gives you the diagnosis and answers your questions.

So clearly the differences are more than the robe.

The point here was that two different levels of service were being offered to patients who came on the same day to the same clinic for the same service by the same technicians on the same equipment. You can say, as a medical insider, oh, those aren't real differences in health care, because health care is defined only by the actual scan and reading of the scan, and yet the differences remain: quicker screening, quicker answers, actual interaction with a physician and a chance to ask questions, a chance to reshoot a blurry scan, copies of the scans for you and your doctor.

Does your experience and training tell you that those are not elements of health care? Or would you classify all of these as frills?

Clearly, some patients would say they'll save the money and go in Door 1. Other patients will go in Door 2.

But whatever their choice, now they'll know what they're choosing. I would assume that you think that's a good thing, no?

Bill Dedman
msnbc.com (not MSNBC --that's the TV channel)
bill.dedman@msnbc.com

November 24, 2009 11:48 PM  

 Stacey Butterfield said...

Bill,
Thanks for your comment, but it seems like you may have misunderstood my point. I think your article provided a valuable service pointing out the differences between the two practices. My point--which was only in disagreement with Arthur Caplan, not your apparently objective coverage--was that I don't think we should condemn practices for setting up systems like this until it's clear that there's a difference in outcomes.

November 25, 2009 10:08 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home