Patient Satisfaction (1 Viewer)

[fatness]

Not even worth engaging that mess and trying to keep it non-political.

Well at least you're contributing by using the laughing smilie to mock their posts.
/s

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Not even worth engaging that mess and trying to keep it non-political.

Well at least you're contributing by using the laughing smilie to mock their posts.
/s

Want to stick to the topic or troll? You’re famous for the thinking emoji on every post of mine you disagree with. What’s your point here?

 

[Sparky Polastri]

And again, the influence of corporations may not be something we should talk about here.

Yep. You either go down a political route or you people accusing you of "feels over facts". Not even worth engaging that mess and trying to keep it non-political.

"feels over facts" is layman's term for "subjective over objective" or "emotional over logical". All our decisions are made through one of those two lenses (sometimes a combo of both). That's psych 101. It's not an "accusation" and it's definitely not political. Its literally how we process information biologically.

 

[Joe Bryant]

And again, the influence of corporations may not be something we should talk about here.

Yep. You either go down a political route or you people accusing you of "feels over facts". Not even worth engaging that mess and trying to keep it non-political.

"feels over facts" is layman's term for "subjective over objective" or "emotional over logical". All our decisions are made through one of those two lenses (sometimes a combo of both). That's psych 101. It's not an "accusation" and it's definitely not political. It’s literally how we process information biologically.

I’m not saying that’s what’s happening here as I don’t claim to know what people really mean except for what they actually say but “Facts over Feelings” is commonly used condescendingly or dismissively.

Guys like Ben Shapiro do this a lot.

To the point I used the phrase internally with our Footballguys staff a while back and they asked me not to use it again as it was so closely associated with negativity and Shapiro.

I’m not saying it’s not sometimes accurate. But I see it commonly used negatively.

And again, I’m not saying that’s how it’s used here.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

What’s most interesting to me is the contrast between what patients want/think is good for their health, versus what the data actually shows.

I can understand distrust, and even a little contempt for authority, along with suspicion for secondary gain. These feelings are compounded by the trope of egomaniacal, dismissive doctors with god-complexes, churning patients to ensure early tee times. And alt medicine capitalizes on it.

But even if you have the critical thinking skills and scientific background, it’s reaalllly hard to know what you don’t know. And it’s not just because the information is complex; it’s evolving.

Doctors are humans, so of course they’re fallible, and there are bad apples. Still, training and experience have to count for something.

Lastly, I’ll mention how important delivery is to optimize the message. I was shocked how quickly the other thread went off the rails, largely due to my word choice. No amount of reason or evidence can overcome an unreceptive listener.

Not sure why you're surprised GB. Mis/disinformation is more readily available than anything. It travels fast. Throw on top of that, the research and data is collected and reported with other scientists in mind. The target audience isn't your average Joe Schmoo. Most don't have the capacity to process things in that form IF they even know where to go to find the studies and research.

BTW, your word choice isnt the problem in that other thread.

I think most people who already have the inclination to “do their own research” are equally adept at - let’s use another equally absurd word as D1siF0r/\/\@tIoN, FACT CHECK the articles they’re viewing.

The overreacting and hyperbole about this and any/all topics is annoying. It’s not one or the other. One side doesn’t have to be Jenny McCarthy and the other Fauci.

The middle people - find it again.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

And again, the influence of corporations may not be something we should talk about here.

Yep. You either go down a political route or you people accusing you of "feels over facts". Not even worth engaging that mess and trying to keep it non-political.

"feels over facts" is layman's term for "subjective over objective" or "emotional over logical". All our decisions are made through one of those two lenses (sometimes a combo of both). That's psych 101. It's not an "accusation" and it's definitely not political. It’s literally how we process information biologically.

I’m not saying that’s what’s happening here as I don’t claim to know what people really mean except for what they actually say but “Facts over Feelings” is commonly used condescendingly or dismissively.

Guys like Ben Shapiro do this a lot.

To the point I used the phrase internally with our Footballguys staff a while back and they asked me not to use it again as it was so closely associated with negativity and Shapiro.

I’m not saying it’s not sometimes accurate. But I see it commonly used negatively.

And again, I’m not saying that’s how it’s used here.

good to know. not a fan of shills like that, so I don't have any idea how they use the terms. Sounds like another perfectly fine term hijacked by a doofus or set of doofuses. I explained how I use it. Wasn't intended to offend in any way.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

What’s most interesting to me is the contrast between what patients want/think is good for their health, versus what the data actually shows.

I can understand distrust, and even a little contempt for authority, along with suspicion for secondary gain. These feelings are compounded by the trope of egomaniacal, dismissive doctors with god-complexes, churning patients to ensure early tee times. And alt medicine capitalizes on it.

But even if you have the critical thinking skills and scientific background, it’s reaalllly hard to know what you don’t know. And it’s not just because the information is complex; it’s evolving.

Doctors are humans, so of course they’re fallible, and there are bad apples. Still, training and experience have to count for something.

Lastly, I’ll mention how important delivery is to optimize the message. I was shocked how quickly the other thread went off the rails, largely due to my word choice. No amount of reason or evidence can overcome an unreceptive listener.

Not sure why you're surprised GB. Mis/disinformation is more readily available than anything. It travels fast. Throw on top of that, the research and data is collected and reported with other scientists in mind. The target audience isn't your average Joe Schmoo. Most don't have the capacity to process things in that form IF they even know where to go to find the studies and research.

BTW, your word choice isnt the problem in that other thread.

I think most people who already have the inclination to “do their own research” are equally adept at - let’s use another equally absurd word as D1siF0r/\/\@tIoN, FACT CHECK the articles they’re viewing.

The overreacting and hyperbole about this and any/all topics is annoying. It’s not one or the other. One side doesn’t have to be Jenny McCarthy and the other Fauci.

The middle people - find it again.

This takes my point further. If they are fact checking articles in lieu of reviewing the studies and data produced, that's a rather large problem.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

What’s most interesting to me is the contrast between what patients want/think is good for their health, versus what the data actually shows.

I can understand distrust, and even a little contempt for authority, along with suspicion for secondary gain. These feelings are compounded by the trope of egomaniacal, dismissive doctors with god-complexes, churning patients to ensure early tee times. And alt medicine capitalizes on it.

But even if you have the critical thinking skills and scientific background, it’s reaalllly hard to know what you don’t know. And it’s not just because the information is complex; it’s evolving.

Doctors are humans, so of course they’re fallible, and there are bad apples. Still, training and experience have to count for something.

Lastly, I’ll mention how important delivery is to optimize the message. I was shocked how quickly the other thread went off the rails, largely due to my word choice. No amount of reason or evidence can overcome an unreceptive listener.

Not sure why you're surprised GB. Mis/disinformation is more readily available than anything. It travels fast. Throw on top of that, the research and data is collected and reported with other scientists in mind. The target audience isn't your average Joe Schmoo. Most don't have the capacity to process things in that form IF they even know where to go to find the studies and research.

BTW, your word choice isnt the problem in that other thread.

I think most people who already have the inclination to “do their own research” are equally adept at - let’s use another equally absurd word as D1siF0r/\/\@tIoN, FACT CHECK the articles they’re viewing.

The overreacting and hyperbole about this and any/all topics is annoying. It’s not one or the other. One side doesn’t have to be Jenny McCarthy and the other Fauci.

The middle people - find it again.

This takes my point further. If they are fact checking articles in lieu of reviewing the studies and data produced, that's a rather large problem.

I thought it was pretty obvious that “articles” was inclusive of all “data”.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

What’s most interesting to me is the contrast between what patients want/think is good for their health, versus what the data actually shows.

I can understand distrust, and even a little contempt for authority, along with suspicion for secondary gain. These feelings are compounded by the trope of egomaniacal, dismissive doctors with god-complexes, churning patients to ensure early tee times. And alt medicine capitalizes on it.

But even if you have the critical thinking skills and scientific background, it’s reaalllly hard to know what you don’t know. And it’s not just because the information is complex; it’s evolving.

Doctors are humans, so of course they’re fallible, and there are bad apples. Still, training and experience have to count for something.

Lastly, I’ll mention how important delivery is to optimize the message. I was shocked how quickly the other thread went off the rails, largely due to my word choice. No amount of reason or evidence can overcome an unreceptive listener.

Not sure why you're surprised GB. Mis/disinformation is more readily available than anything. It travels fast. Throw on top of that, the research and data is collected and reported with other scientists in mind. The target audience isn't your average Joe Schmoo. Most don't have the capacity to process things in that form IF they even know where to go to find the studies and research.

BTW, your word choice isnt the problem in that other thread.

I think most people who already have the inclination to “do their own research” are equally adept at - let’s use another equally absurd word as D1siF0r/\/\@tIoN, FACT CHECK the articles they’re viewing.

The overreacting and hyperbole about this and any/all topics is annoying. It’s not one or the other. One side doesn’t have to be Jenny McCarthy and the other Fauci.

The middle people - find it again.

This takes my point further. If they are fact checking articles in lieu of reviewing the studies and data produced, that's a rather large problem.

I thought it was pretty obvious that “articles” was inclusive of all “data”.

I'd never make a connection between "fact checking articles" and reviewing the data produced. Those are very different mediums to people in the sciences. There is no "fact checking data" outside of reproducing the results from an experiment, and no the average person is not equally adept at doing the later. That said, people CAN look at data and formulate different opinions on what it says, but I don't think anyone in any of these threads would suggest people aren't capable of forming opinions. They are like buttholes, everyone has one.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

And again, the influence of corporations may not be something we should talk about here.

Yep. You either go down a political route or you people accusing you of "feels over facts". Not even worth engaging that mess and trying to keep it non-political.

"feels over facts" is layman's term for "subjective over objective" or "emotional over logical". All our decisions are made through one of those two lenses (sometimes a combo of both). That's psych 101. It's not an "accusation" and it's definitely not political. It’s literally how we process information biologically.

I’m not saying that’s what’s happening here as I don’t claim to know what people really mean except for what they actually say but “Facts over Feelings” is commonly used condescendingly or dismissively.

Guys like Ben Shapiro do this a lot.

To the point I used the phrase internally with our Footballguys staff a while back and they asked me not to use it again as it was so closely associated with negativity and Shapiro.

I’m not saying it’s not sometimes accurate. But I see it commonly used negatively.

And again, I’m not saying that’s how it’s used here.

IMHO those that get upset when faced with facts and logic are the problem. it's not pejorative, it's reality.

 

[Joe Bryant]

And again, the influence of corporations may not be something we should talk about here.

Yep. You either go down a political route or you people accusing you of "feels over facts". Not even worth engaging that mess and trying to keep it non-political.

"feels over facts" is layman's term for "subjective over objective" or "emotional over logical". All our decisions are made through one of those two lenses (sometimes a combo of both). That's psych 101. It's not an "accusation" and it's definitely not political. It’s literally how we process information biologically.

I’m not saying that’s what’s happening here as I don’t claim to know what people really mean except for what they actually say but “Facts over Feelings” is commonly used condescendingly or dismissively.

Guys like Ben Shapiro do this a lot.

To the point I used the phrase internally with our Footballguys staff a while back and they asked me not to use it again as it was so closely associated with negativity and Shapiro.

I’m not saying it’s not sometimes accurate. But I see it commonly used negatively.

And again, I’m not saying that’s how it’s used here.

IMHO those that get upset when faced with facts and logic are the problem. it's not pejorative, it's reality.

Understood. I'm just noting that the most common way I see this used is arrogantly and condescendingly with guys like Ben Shapiro.

I personally am a believer in it as facts do rule. I just often see it commonly used negatively and thought it was interesting when my staff asked me to stop using the phrase as it was so associated with that.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

And again, the influence of corporations may not be something we should talk about here.

Yep. You either go down a political route or you people accusing you of "feels over facts". Not even worth engaging that mess and trying to keep it non-political.

"feels over facts" is layman's term for "subjective over objective" or "emotional over logical". All our decisions are made through one of those two lenses (sometimes a combo of both). That's psych 101. It's not an "accusation" and it's definitely not political. It’s literally how we process information biologically.

I’m not saying that’s what’s happening here as I don’t claim to know what people really mean except for what they actually say but “Facts over Feelings” is commonly used condescendingly or dismissively.

Guys like Ben Shapiro do this a lot.

To the point I used the phrase internally with our Footballguys staff a while back and they asked me not to use it again as it was so closely associated with negativity and Shapiro.

I’m not saying it’s not sometimes accurate. But I see it commonly used negatively.

And again, I’m not saying that’s how it’s used here.

IMHO those that get upset when faced with facts and logic are the problem. it's not pejorative, it's reality.

Understood. I'm just noting that the most common way I see this used is arrogantly and condescendingly with guys like Ben Shapiro.

I personally am a believer in it as facts do rule. I just often see it commonly used negatively and thought it was interesting when my staff asked me to stop using the phrase as it was so associated with that.

i've never listened to shapiro. and at a quick glance it looks like i'm better for it. but the negative connotation is because people don't like to be wrong. they need to get over it.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

Yeah, if they are getting exposed to stuff like that by Shapiro, I can see why they'd think it's negative. As I said before, not the intent. Its the reality of how the brain and being work/process their worldview. That people would use it as a way of putting someone down says more about that person and their mindset than anything else.

 

[Gally]

This begs chicken-or-the-egg questions, as well as suggesting pleasing patients, as customers, may not always be right.

When dealing with hard truths the idea of "pleasing the customer" (aka patient) is likely not a good thing.

For me, in order to be "happy" with my healthcare service it is more to do with wasting my time and money more than anything. For example, I had a pretty bad stomach pain for a couple days and ended up getting to a feverish stage. I decided to go to the ER because it was unlike anything I had felt before. I walked into the ER (this was about 7pm on a Monday Night). There was nobody in the waiting room. I checked in and took about 15 minutes before I was brought back. That was just to a middle room where they took my vitals and asked me the basic questions. Another 15 or so minutes before I was brought back into an exam room.

Once I was in the exam room I was there maybe an hour before I was even seen. The room was in an area where I could see out into the nurses station/area (kind of like a bullpen area of workers). The doctor finally showed up and did his poking and prodding. Wanted to take blood and a urine sample and thought it may be appendicitis and was betting that I was going to have to have it removed. It took about another hour before they drew blood. He then ordered an ultrasound of the abdomen to get some confirmation. It took about 2 hours before I had the ultrasound and then they needed the ultrasound evaluated by the radiologist but since it was "after hours" the film was put on line into a repository where doctors (radiology experts) from around the world could check in and complete the evaluation. Of course this was done on a critical basis (as it probably should be) but because of that there was no estimate on a time on when mine would be read. The doctor that checked me out looked at the images and said I had diverticulitis and it appeared to be a standard case that wouldn't require surgery or anything immediate but he couldn't release me until he got the official word from the radiologist.

So I sat in that room for hour after hour just waiting for it to be looked at. All told I was there for 8 hours (it was now 3am) and still no confirmation. I finally asked the doctor (when I could finally get his attention - most of the time he was just sitting in the bull pen area talking to nurses and going over charts and laughing and joking as one would do when there wasn't much going on and you were just waiting around) if I could just go home and have them call me if there were complications or issues. He had said before it was probably a 95% chance it was standard and the only "prescription" would be bowel rest, liquids, and minimal diet to see if it cleared on its own.

It was just a miserable 8-9 hours with very little information or interaction. I was getting pissed off at the lack of communication. Finally he agreed that I could go and he would call once he got the official results. He called about 8am and said it was just as he thought and to follow the diet etc that he gave me info on. The bout cleared up in a couple days and I was back to normal.

If I filled out a customer satisfaction survey it would have been an F and marked as low as possible - and that was even with liking the doctor for the most part. The overall experience was just terrible. There has to be a better way but I have no idea how to fix it since I don't know the medical world. This experience has basically made it so unless I have parts of me falling off or pointing in the wrong direction there is virtually no way I ever go back to the ER.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

And again, the influence of corporations may not be something we should talk about here.

Yep. You either go down a political route or you people accusing you of "feels over facts". Not even worth engaging that mess and trying to keep it non-political.

"feels over facts" is layman's term for "subjective over objective" or "emotional over logical". All our decisions are made through one of those two lenses (sometimes a combo of both). That's psych 101. It's not an "accusation" and it's definitely not political. It’s literally how we process information biologically.

I’m not saying that’s what’s happening here as I don’t claim to know what people really mean except for what they actually say but “Facts over Feelings” is commonly used condescendingly or dismissively.

Guys like Ben Shapiro do this a lot.

To the point I used the phrase internally with our Footballguys staff a while back and they asked me not to use it again as it was so closely associated with negativity and Shapiro.

I’m not saying it’s not sometimes accurate. But I see it commonly used negatively.

And again, I’m not saying that’s how it’s used here.

IMHO those that get upset when faced with facts and logic are the problem. it's not pejorative, it's reality.

Understood. I'm just noting that the most common way I see this used is arrogantly and condescendingly with guys like Ben Shapiro.

I personally am a believer in it as facts do rule. I just often see it commonly used negatively and thought it was interesting when my staff asked me to stop using the phrase as it was so associated with that.

i've never listened to shapiro. and at a quick glance it looks like i'm better for it. but the negative connotation is because people don't like to be wrong. they need to get over it.

You sound like everything is black and white in your world. In terms of patient care, you don't think there's more than one answer that could be right? Or one person could say sugar is awful for you and another say no it's not because it's not banned by the FDA. Both could be correct, right? When someone goes down the feels over facts route, it comes off to me as a condescending way to dismiss someone elses thoughts usually by someone who thinks they are always right about everything. Just my experience.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

And again, the influence of corporations may not be something we should talk about here.

Yep. You either go down a political route or you people accusing you of "feels over facts". Not even worth engaging that mess and trying to keep it non-political.

"feels over facts" is layman's term for "subjective over objective" or "emotional over logical". All our decisions are made through one of those two lenses (sometimes a combo of both). That's psych 101. It's not an "accusation" and it's definitely not political. It’s literally how we process information biologically.

I’m not saying that’s what’s happening here as I don’t claim to know what people really mean except for what they actually say but “Facts over Feelings” is commonly used condescendingly or dismissively.

Guys like Ben Shapiro do this a lot.

To the point I used the phrase internally with our Footballguys staff a while back and they asked me not to use it again as it was so closely associated with negativity and Shapiro.

I’m not saying it’s not sometimes accurate. But I see it commonly used negatively.

And again, I’m not saying that’s how it’s used here.

IMHO those that get upset when faced with facts and logic are the problem. it's not pejorative, it's reality.

Understood. I'm just noting that the most common way I see this used is arrogantly and condescendingly with guys like Ben Shapiro.

I personally am a believer in it as facts do rule. I just often see it commonly used negatively and thought it was interesting when my staff asked me to stop using the phrase as it was so associated with that.

i've never listened to shapiro. and at a quick glance it looks like i'm better for it. but the negative connotation is because people don't like to be wrong. they need to get over it.

You sound like everything is black and white in your world. In terms of patient care, you don't think there's more than one answer that could be right? Or one person could say sugar is awful for you and another say no it's not because it's not banned by the FDA. Both could be correct, right? When someone goes down the feels over facts route, it comes off to me as a condescending way to dismiss someone elses thoughts usually by someone who thinks they are always right about everything. Just my experience.

Nope. You sure seem to want to fight about this subject.

I’m the last person to say that there’s only one way to skin a cat. I’ve fought every attempt drs have made to put me on pills. Sometimes successfully. I posted on here extensively about my journey with gout.

But when it comes to facts and proven science, yes it’s pretty black or white for me.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

And again, the influence of corporations may not be something we should talk about here.

Yep. You either go down a political route or you people accusing you of "feels over facts". Not even worth engaging that mess and trying to keep it non-political.

"feels over facts" is layman's term for "subjective over objective" or "emotional over logical". All our decisions are made through one of those two lenses (sometimes a combo of both). That's psych 101. It's not an "accusation" and it's definitely not political. It’s literally how we process information biologically.

I’m not saying that’s what’s happening here as I don’t claim to know what people really mean except for what they actually say but “Facts over Feelings” is commonly used condescendingly or dismissively.

Guys like Ben Shapiro do this a lot.

To the point I used the phrase internally with our Footballguys staff a while back and they asked me not to use it again as it was so closely associated with negativity and Shapiro.

I’m not saying it’s not sometimes accurate. But I see it commonly used negatively.

And again, I’m not saying that’s how it’s used here.

IMHO those that get upset when faced with facts and logic are the problem. it's not pejorative, it's reality.

Understood. I'm just noting that the most common way I see this used is arrogantly and condescendingly with guys like Ben Shapiro.

I personally am a believer in it as facts do rule. I just often see it commonly used negatively and thought it was interesting when my staff asked me to stop using the phrase as it was so associated with that.

i've never listened to shapiro. and at a quick glance it looks like i'm better for it. but the negative connotation is because people don't like to be wrong. they need to get over it.

You sound like everything is black and white in your world. In terms of patient care, you don't think there's more than one answer that could be right? Or one person could say sugar is awful for you and another say no it's not because it's not banned by the FDA. Both could be correct, right? When someone goes down the feels over facts route, it comes off to me as a condescending way to dismiss someone elses thoughts usually by someone who thinks they are always right about everything. Just my experience.

Nope. You sure seem to want to fight about this subject.

I’m the last person to say that there’s only one way to skin a cat. I’ve fought every attempt drs have made to put me on pills. Sometimes successfully. I posted on here extensively about my journey with gout.

But when it comes to facts and proven science, yes it’s pretty black or white for me.

I seem to want to fight? You aren't real good with your facts. Have a good one I'm out. You can play right and wrong game with yourself.

 

[Terminalxylem]

This begs chicken-or-the-egg questions, as well as suggesting pleasing patients, as customers, may not always be right.

When dealing with hard truths the idea of "pleasing the customer" (aka patient) is likely not a good thing.

For me, in order to be "happy" with my healthcare service it is more to do with wasting my time and money more than anything. For example, I had a pretty bad stomach pain for a couple days and ended up getting to a feverish stage. I decided to go to the ER because it was unlike anything I had felt before. I walked into the ER (this was about 7pm on a Monday Night). There was nobody in the waiting room. I checked in and took about 15 minutes before I was brought back. That was just to a middle room where they took my vitals and asked me the basic questions. Another 15 or so minutes before I was brought back into an exam room.

Once I was in the exam room I was there maybe an hour before I was even seen. The room was in an area where I could see out into the nurses station/area (kind of like a bullpen area of workers). The doctor finally showed up and did his poking and prodding. Wanted to take blood and a urine sample and thought it may be appendicitis and was betting that I was going to have to have it removed. It took about another hour before they drew blood. He then ordered an ultrasound of the abdomen to get some confirmation. It took about 2 hours before I had the ultrasound and then they needed the ultrasound evaluated by the radiologist but since it was "after hours" the film was put on line into a repository where doctors (radiology experts) from around the world could check in and complete the evaluation. Of course this was done on a critical basis (as it probably should be) but because of that there was no estimate on a time on when mine would be read. The doctor that checked me out looked at the images and said I had diverticulitis and it appeared to be a standard case that wouldn't require surgery or anything immediate but he couldn't release me until he got the official word from the radiologist.

So I sat in that room for hour after hour just waiting for it to be looked at. All told I was there for 8 hours (it was now 3am) and still no confirmation. I finally asked the doctor (when I could finally get his attention - most of the time he was just sitting in the bull pen area talking to nurses and going over charts and laughing and joking as one would do when there wasn't much going on and you were just waiting around) if I could just go home and have them call me if there were complications or issues. He had said before it was probably a 95% chance it was standard and the only "prescription" would be bowel rest, liquids, and minimal diet to see if it cleared on its own.

It was just a miserable 8-9 hours with very little information or interaction. I was getting pissed off at the lack of communication. Finally he agreed that I could go and he would call once he got the official results. He called about 8am and said it was just as he thought and to follow the diet etc that he gave me info on. The bout cleared up in a couple days and I was back to normal.

If I filled out a customer satisfaction survey it would have been an F and marked as low as possible - and that was even with liking the doctor for the most part. The overall experience was just terrible. There has to be a better way but I have no idea how to fix it since I don't know the medical world. This experience has basically made it so unless I have parts of me falling off or pointing in the wrong direction there is virtually no way I ever go back to the ER.

Sorry for your terrible experience. It’s highly unusual for an ER not to be busy at 7 pm, so one would expect things to proceed more quickly. That said, you don’t know what was going on with every other patient in the ED, or hospital. It's entirely possible other providers were dealing with a SHTF situation, tying up resources like radiology (which extends to all facilities served by the outsourced radiologists).

Without test results, the ED doctor faced a dilemma: should he send you home without a definitive diagnosis?

To answer that question, he needs to determine the severity of your condition, and likelihood you can follow up promptly, if necessary. Along with those decisions, he will probably factor in his liability, if you die after discharge (from a perforated appendix, for example).

From your description, you didn’t sound very sick, but that can change quickly with ruptured intestines. We also know that overtesting in ERs is rampant (again, liability concerns). So an argument can probably be made both ways.

Based on the information you provided, I’d err on the side of the doctor being lame. If there really was suspicion for a life-threatening diagnosis like appendicitis, you should have been seen more quickly. I suspect much of the tests were CYA medicine, and the doctor felt obligated to pursue the work up to its logical conclusion, before discharging you.

Now that’s just my gestalt, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there is more to this story, that wasn’t apparent from your side of the curtain.

 

[fatness]

I walked into the ER (this was about 7pm on a Monday Night). There was nobody in the waiting room. I checked in and took about 15 minutes before I was brought back.

As an ER experience, that timeframe is really good. And then step by step by step by step the whole experience went to hell for you. Sorry to hear it went so badly for you but I'm not surprised. ER's around here are notoriously slow, mostly due to understaffing, lack of enough beds, and understaffing. Also, understaffing.

I went with my wife to the ER last year when she fell down some concrete steps and screwed up her ankle and ended up in the ER. The triage area is literally rows of beds on each side of 2 long hallways. Random nurses topped by to see her at random times, and finally a doctor stopped by to discuss her X-rays. Nothing was broken, she needed to get a small cast, wait for the swelling to go down, see an orthopedist. Just had to wait to be released by the main doc, whose time was totally taken up filling out forms/information/records on a computer. He finally got a break, said he could release her and did she want a cast they could provide. She said yes, and that was another 45 minute wait. She was there 8 hours, in a hallway bed. All the staff I saw there were busy, they were all helpful except the main doc, but there wasn't room for every patient and there were gobs of time that, if there'd been adequate staff, could have been used to easily halve her time there, if not more.

 

[Joe Bryant]

This begs chicken-or-the-egg questions, as well as suggesting pleasing patients, as customers, may not always be right.

When dealing with hard truths the idea of "pleasing the customer" (aka patient) is likely not a good thing.

For me, in order to be "happy" with my healthcare service it is more to do with wasting my time and money more than anything. For example, I had a pretty bad stomach pain for a couple days and ended up getting to a feverish stage. I decided to go to the ER because it was unlike anything I had felt before. I walked into the ER (this was about 7pm on a Monday Night). There was nobody in the waiting room. I checked in and took about 15 minutes before I was brought back. That was just to a middle room where they took my vitals and asked me the basic questions. Another 15 or so minutes before I was brought back into an exam room.

Once I was in the exam room I was there maybe an hour before I was even seen. The room was in an area where I could see out into the nurses station/area (kind of like a bullpen area of workers). The doctor finally showed up and did his poking and prodding. Wanted to take blood and a urine sample and thought it may be appendicitis and was betting that I was going to have to have it removed. It took about another hour before they drew blood. He then ordered an ultrasound of the abdomen to get some confirmation. It took about 2 hours before I had the ultrasound and then they needed the ultrasound evaluated by the radiologist but since it was "after hours" the film was put on line into a repository where doctors (radiology experts) from around the world could check in and complete the evaluation. Of course this was done on a critical basis (as it probably should be) but because of that there was no estimate on a time on when mine would be read. The doctor that checked me out looked at the images and said I had diverticulitis and it appeared to be a standard case that wouldn't require surgery or anything immediate but he couldn't release me until he got the official word from the radiologist.

So I sat in that room for hour after hour just waiting for it to be looked at. All told I was there for 8 hours (it was now 3am) and still no confirmation. I finally asked the doctor (when I could finally get his attention - most of the time he was just sitting in the bull pen area talking to nurses and going over charts and laughing and joking as one would do when there wasn't much going on and you were just waiting around) if I could just go home and have them call me if there were complications or issues. He had said before it was probably a 95% chance it was standard and the only "prescription" would be bowel rest, liquids, and minimal diet to see if it cleared on its own.

It was just a miserable 8-9 hours with very little information or interaction. I was getting pissed off at the lack of communication. Finally he agreed that I could go and he would call once he got the official results. He called about 8am and said it was just as he thought and to follow the diet etc that he gave me info on. The bout cleared up in a couple days and I was back to normal.

If I filled out a customer satisfaction survey it would have been an F and marked as low as possible - and that was even with liking the doctor for the most part. The overall experience was just terrible. There has to be a better way but I have no idea how to fix it since I don't know the medical world. This experience has basically made it so unless I have parts of me falling off or pointing in the wrong direction there is virtually no way I ever go back to the ER.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t sound unusual for an ER experience these days. I’ve been connected to 3 in the last couple of years (wife, father and father in law) in 3 different hospitals and they were unfortunately similar. I’m sure they are doing the best they can and they’re awesome people. But very unsatisfactory experiences.

 

[Terminalxylem]

This begs chicken-or-the-egg questions, as well as suggesting pleasing patients, as customers, may not always be right.

When dealing with hard truths the idea of "pleasing the customer" (aka patient) is likely not a good thing.

For me, in order to be "happy" with my healthcare service it is more to do with wasting my time and money more than anything. For example, I had a pretty bad stomach pain for a couple days and ended up getting to a feverish stage. I decided to go to the ER because it was unlike anything I had felt before. I walked into the ER (this was about 7pm on a Monday Night). There was nobody in the waiting room. I checked in and took about 15 minutes before I was brought back. That was just to a middle room where they took my vitals and asked me the basic questions. Another 15 or so minutes before I was brought back into an exam room.

Once I was in the exam room I was there maybe an hour before I was even seen. The room was in an area where I could see out into the nurses station/area (kind of like a bullpen area of workers). The doctor finally showed up and did his poking and prodding. Wanted to take blood and a urine sample and thought it may be appendicitis and was betting that I was going to have to have it removed. It took about another hour before they drew blood. He then ordered an ultrasound of the abdomen to get some confirmation. It took about 2 hours before I had the ultrasound and then they needed the ultrasound evaluated by the radiologist but since it was "after hours" the film was put on line into a repository where doctors (radiology experts) from around the world could check in and complete the evaluation. Of course this was done on a critical basis (as it probably should be) but because of that there was no estimate on a time on when mine would be read. The doctor that checked me out looked at the images and said I had diverticulitis and it appeared to be a standard case that wouldn't require surgery or anything immediate but he couldn't release me until he got the official word from the radiologist.

So I sat in that room for hour after hour just waiting for it to be looked at. All told I was there for 8 hours (it was now 3am) and still no confirmation. I finally asked the doctor (when I could finally get his attention - most of the time he was just sitting in the bull pen area talking to nurses and going over charts and laughing and joking as one would do when there wasn't much going on and you were just waiting around) if I could just go home and have them call me if there were complications or issues. He had said before it was probably a 95% chance it was standard and the only "prescription" would be bowel rest, liquids, and minimal diet to see if it cleared on its own.

It was just a miserable 8-9 hours with very little information or interaction. I was getting pissed off at the lack of communication. Finally he agreed that I could go and he would call once he got the official results. He called about 8am and said it was just as he thought and to follow the diet etc that he gave me info on. The bout cleared up in a couple days and I was back to normal.

If I filled out a customer satisfaction survey it would have been an F and marked as low as possible - and that was even with liking the doctor for the most part. The overall experience was just terrible. There has to be a better way but I have no idea how to fix it since I don't know the medical world. This experience has basically made it so unless I have parts of me falling off or pointing in the wrong direction there is virtually no way I ever go back to the ER.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t sound unusual for an ER experience these days. I’ve been connected to 3 in the last couple of years (wife, father and father in law) in 3 different hospitals and they were unfortunately similar. I’m sure they are doing the best they can and they’re awesome people. But very unsatisfactory experiences.

Was the waiting room empty in any of those experiences?

Excluding peak covid, our ER is swamped, except the wee hours of the morning. Even then, due to lack of hospital beds, patients are boarded in the hallways a good % of the time.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Was the waiting room empty in any of those experiences?

Medium full a couple of times. Fairly busy the other.

Talking to people locally, it seems to be, unfortunately, the norm.

 

[Gally]

Sorry for your terrible experience. It’s highly unusual for an ER not to be busy at 7 pm, so one would expect things to proceed more quickly.

I am not in a big town or busy city. We have about 40K people total but I was very surprised there was nobody in the waiting room. That got my hopes up that it wouldn't be a long process. Even when I got taken back to an exam room the area didn't look busy. There weren't a lot of patients in the various exam rooms (all of them had glass walls with curtains that were open so you could see in).

What irked me the most was that I could see the nurses station in the center of all the rooms. Most of my waiting time I could see the ER doc and the nurses talking and just sitting there. Some were on computers filling things out but much of the time it appeared they were just hanging out talking. No urgency in their demeanor and just waiting around. I would have felt better about the experience if the doc or nurse would have stopped their conversation in the middle of the room and came and updated me more than once every 90 minutes (at the earliest). I mean I could see them just sitting there talking (not filling out paperwork or looking at charts).

I have no doubt much of my delay was based on not having the staff to serve what was needed. For example, the person that came and took my blood. I chatted them up a bit to see how their day was going and they apologized for the delay saying they were the only person on at the time and was really backed up (understaffed). The radiology seemed to be in the same situation.

Now granted I wasn't buckled over in pain or have a bone sticking out but I did have a fever (ranged from 101-103) and did have periodic abdominal pain that was quite intense. I debated even going in because I half expected this type of experience and figured there wasn't really much they could do. However, with the fever and the severe (at times) pain in the abdomen I could tell this wasn't a normal thing and just wanted to be sure it wasn't something that needed immediate attention.

The second thing that was the most frustrating was that I got the ultrasound at about 11pm and there was no feedback all the way until 3am when I eventually left after talking the doctor into letting me go and that I would come back immediately if he called with bad news once he got the results. I understand being understaffed but waiting 4+hours (and ended up being more like 10 hours by the time the doctor actually called to confirm after he got the results) to get a standard Ultrasound read seems ridiculous.

Based on this (and confirmed by most of the comments saying it's a typical experience) I probably won't go back unless bones are sticking out or I am in so much pain I can't do anything about it. It just seems like a colossal waste of time.

ETA: Diverticulitis is no fun and I don't recommend it. Lucky for me a little fasting and easy on the bowels food usually does the trick if I can feel it coming on. But it's pretty miserable if it hits.

 

[Gally]

As an ER experience, that timeframe is really good. And then step by step by step by step the whole experience went to hell for you. Sorry to hear it went so badly for you but I'm not surprised. ER's around here are notoriously slow, mostly due to understaffing, lack of enough beds, and understaffing. Also, understaffing.

I have no doubt understaffing was the biggest factor but seeing the doctor and nurses standing around talking and laughing while I was left in a room for hours on end with nobody coming in with an update just slowly boiled over my frustrations. Even if they are understaffed it would be calming if they came in every half hour or so to just check on things and let me know they knew I was still there over seeing them standing around appearing to do nothing (weren't at a computer filling out forms or stocking stations or anything useful). I am not generally all that needy and don't really want them coming in every 5 minutes or anything but being left there with no updates or no nothing for 90+ minutes at times while waiting for blood to be drawn or taken to the radiology department was quite frustrating. Even if they came in and said the phlebotomist was 15 minutes out or running behind or I am in X in line for radiology would have been better. But no communication of status of the next step for hours on end was terrible.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Sorry for your terrible experience. It’s highly unusual for an ER not to be busy at 7 pm, so one would expect things to proceed more quickly.

I am not in a big town or busy city. We have about 40K people total but I was very surprised there was nobody in the waiting room. That got my hopes up that it wouldn't be a long process. Even when I got taken back to an exam room the area didn't look busy. There weren't a lot of patients in the various exam rooms (all of them had glass walls with curtains that were open so you could see in).

What irked me the most was that I could see the nurses station in the center of all the rooms. Most of my waiting time I could see the ER doc and the nurses talking and just sitting there. Some were on computers filling things out but much of the time it appeared they were just hanging out talking. No urgency in their demeanor and just waiting around. I would have felt better about the experience if the doc or nurse would have stopped their conversation in the middle of the room and came and updated me more than once every 90 minutes (at the earliest). I mean I could see them just sitting there talking (not filling out paperwork or looking at charts).

I have no doubt much of my delay was based on not having the staff to serve what was needed. For example, the person that came and took my blood. I chatted them up a bit to see how their day was going and they apologized for the delay saying they were the only person on at the time and was really backed up (understaffed). The radiology seemed to be in the same situation.

Now granted I wasn't buckled over in pain or have a bone sticking out but I did have a fever (ranged from 101-103) and did have periodic abdominal pain that was quite intense. I debated even going in because I half expected this type of experience and figured there wasn't really much they could do. However, with the fever and the severe (at times) pain in the abdomen I could tell this wasn't a normal thing and just wanted to be sure it wasn't something that needed immediate attention.

The second thing that was the most frustrating was that I got the ultrasound at about 11pm and there was no feedback all the way until 3am when I eventually left after talking the doctor into letting me go and that I would come back immediately if he called with bad news once he got the results. I understand being understaffed but waiting 4+hours (and ended up being more like 10 hours by the time the doctor actually called to confirm after he got the results) to get a standard Ultrasound read seems ridiculous.

Based on this (and confirmed by most of the comments saying it's a typical experience) I probably won't go back unless bones are sticking out or I am in so much pain I can't do anything about it. It just seems like a colossal waste of time.

ETA: Diverticulitis is no fun and I don't recommend it. Lucky for me a little fasting and easy on the bowels food usually does the trick if I can feel it coming on. But it's pretty miserable if it hits.

First of all, diverticulitis may be a consequence of your diet, principally inadequate fiber intake. If your bowel movements aren’t soft and regular, you should do something about that - more fruits/veggies, and/or a fiber supplement.

They should have given you something for your fever (typically Tylenol, which can be redosed every 4-6 hours) and pain (whatever works, to make it tolerable). And something for nausea, if needed. If they didn’t, and only checked on you infrequently, that’s bad care.

I’m not sure your expectation for the ultrasound is realistic, however. Remember, there’s a lot of other patients, even if you don’t see them all, limited radiology techs, and outsourced radiologists, who probabably prioritized reading the most emergent studies from multiple facilities.

Best case scenario, all that might happen in a couple hours, but 4ish for the study + read isn’t terrible. The delay probably reflects a small town ER, along with near universal problems delivering care in an emergency setting.

 

[Terminalxylem]

As an ER experience, that timeframe is really good. And then step by step by step by step the whole experience went to hell for you. Sorry to hear it went so badly for you but I'm not surprised. ER's around here are notoriously slow, mostly due to understaffing, lack of enough beds, and understaffing. Also, understaffing.

I have no doubt understaffing was the biggest factor but seeing the doctor and nurses standing around talking and laughing while I was left in a room for hours on end with nobody coming in with an update just slowly boiled over my frustrations. Even if they are understaffed it would be calming if they came in every half hour or so to just check on things and let me know they knew I was still there over seeing them standing around appearing to do nothing (weren't at a computer filling out forms or stocking stations or anything useful). I am not generally all that needy and don't really want them coming in every 5 minutes or anything but being left there with no updates or no nothing for 90+ minutes at times while waiting for blood to be drawn or taken to the radiology department was quite frustrating. Even if they came in and said the phlebotomist was 15 minutes out or running behind or I am in X in line for radiology would have been better. But no communication of status of the next step for hours on end was terrible.

Every half hour check ins only happen for critically ill patients, which you were not.

Also, nurses don’t know the phlebotomist’s schedule/workload, and may or may not have insight into the ultrasonographer’s (who may not be on site after hours) either.

 

[Gally]

As an ER experience, that timeframe is really good. And then step by step by step by step the whole experience went to hell for you. Sorry to hear it went so badly for you but I'm not surprised. ER's around here are notoriously slow, mostly due to understaffing, lack of enough beds, and understaffing. Also, understaffing.

I have no doubt understaffing was the biggest factor but seeing the doctor and nurses standing around talking and laughing while I was left in a room for hours on end with nobody coming in with an update just slowly boiled over my frustrations. Even if they are understaffed it would be calming if they came in every half hour or so to just check on things and let me know they knew I was still there over seeing them standing around appearing to do nothing (weren't at a computer filling out forms or stocking stations or anything useful). I am not generally all that needy and don't really want them coming in every 5 minutes or anything but being left there with no updates or no nothing for 90+ minutes at times while waiting for blood to be drawn or taken to the radiology department was quite frustrating. Even if they came in and said the phlebotomist was 15 minutes out or running behind or I am in X in line for radiology would have been better. But no communication of status of the next step for hours on end was terrible.

Every half hour check ins only happen for critically ill patients, which you were not.

I wasn't expecting that frequency but seeing the nurses and doctor play grab a$$ for hours and not getting any updates or estimates on when I may be seen for blood or Ultrasound got frustrating. Like I said. Better communication is all I expected.

 

[Terminalxylem]

As an ER experience, that timeframe is really good. And then step by step by step by step the whole experience went to hell for you. Sorry to hear it went so badly for you but I'm not surprised. ER's around here are notoriously slow, mostly due to understaffing, lack of enough beds, and understaffing. Also, understaffing.

I have no doubt understaffing was the biggest factor but seeing the doctor and nurses standing around talking and laughing while I was left in a room for hours on end with nobody coming in with an update just slowly boiled over my frustrations. Even if they are understaffed it would be calming if they came in every half hour or so to just check on things and let me know they knew I was still there over seeing them standing around appearing to do nothing (weren't at a computer filling out forms or stocking stations or anything useful). I am not generally all that needy and don't really want them coming in every 5 minutes or anything but being left there with no updates or no nothing for 90+ minutes at times while waiting for blood to be drawn or taken to the radiology department was quite frustrating. Even if they came in and said the phlebotomist was 15 minutes out or running behind or I am in X in line for radiology would have been better. But no communication of status of the next step for hours on end was terrible.

Every half hour check ins only happen for critically ill patients, which you were not.

I wasn't expecting that frequency but seeing the nurses and doctor play grab a$$ for hours and not getting any updates or estimates on when I may be seen for blood or Ultrasound got frustrating. Like I said. Better communication is all I expected.

Yeah, I understand your frustration.

It may have been an unusually slow night too, and instead of prioritizing/spending extra time with patients, the staff was trying to decompress.