Throwing money at a problem does not
get improved results. This from a study about how hospitals have
invested heavily in new heart attack care programs, yet only see a
one (1) percent improvement in access to that care. This seems to be
a problem for much of the medical community.
So what is the problem? Apparently,
the distance people have to travel before they can receive the needed
attention. So of course in areas of heaviest population, people near
hospitals have the best opportunity to get the needed care, while in
the most rural areas of our country, care is often not available
within the time frame required to treat patients before damage is
done.
It does not matter that the hospitals
have spent large sums of money for heart attack care programs when
people are not able to get to the hospitals in time. Once the damage
is done, no amount of care will be able to completely reverse the
damage. Very few people are going to move closer to a hospital just
to be within driving distance for heart attack care.
The study only gave two possibilities
for improved care and I have to wonder if this is the only best
answer. Yes, I can agree with the proposal as being needed,
especially for many areas of the US that need enhanced ambulance
services and establishing well-positioned heart care programs in the
more rural areas. The key is well-positioned programs. Many rural
hospitals are near closing because of financial problems that will
reduce the number of places for well-positioned heart care programs.
Where will the funds come from for
these programs? This is of course not the position of the study to
state. This is a problem that needs addressing in the months and
years ahead. This needs to be resolved for more than just heart
care, but for several other diseases as well.
This study does highlight one of the
problems happening now and needs to be solved.
No comments:
Post a Comment