If you have something to say, post a comment. I will not respond to anonymous commenters, so if you care to joust with the GROUCH, open yourself a FREE GMAIL account and get yourself an ID so I'll know who you are.

If you'd like to be a guest contributor, email me at:
Opinions of the guests are not necessarily the opinion of the GROUCH!

Sunday, April 5, 2009

Sunday in the ER

I'm on a roll.

See my previous post:
Government health care, the cure that kills?

The patient today was diagnosed with a "strep throat" Friday (2 days ago), given a shot of Bicillin by the nurse practitioner, and told,"If you're not better in a couple of days, you need to rush to the ER."

So here is this person who has been appropriately treated for a strep throat. She's here today 2 days later cause she still has a sore throat.


Bicillin does not treat the acute illness associated with strep throat. All it does is prevent the development of rheumatic fever.


Why does the nurse practitioner apparently not know the facts?

Why would you tell someone who you treated appropriately for a sore throat to rush to the ER 2 days later for the same sore throat??? Why not instead advise them to make a followup appointment in the clinic?

There was nothing I could specifically do for this woman other than tell her to drink fluids, gargle salt water, and spray with Chloroseptic. (My Momma could have figured that one out.)

This woman's ER bill will be 5 to 6 times what it would have cost her to go to the clinic, but that's probably OK since, "My insurance will take care of it." but many times the insurance WILL NOT take care of it if there is no emergency as was the case today.


She should be required to pay the woman's ER bill!

1 comment:

  1. That was stupid, no way the woman would be well in two days. I feel sorry for the patient in this case, the nurse practitioner probably scared her into showing up at the ER.

    Debbie Hamilton
    Right Truth