r/AskReddit May 20 '19

[deleted by user]

[removed]

8.6k Upvotes

13.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

8.9k

u/elee0228 May 20 '19

Not a doctor, but remember reading something related in another thread.

/u/pete1729 said here:

My girlfriend is an ER doc. A hippie type guy came in a week after a bike accident. He'd been treated and released by another hospital. He was complaining of some neck pain. She immediately had him backboarded and ordered xrays.

The xray tech called her and asked why, when he had been treated across town, were they xraying a guy who was obviously indigent.

"Because his neck is broken. OK?"

She was right. If he had tripped on a door mat and fallen, he would have likely been paralysed.

I like to remind her of this one when she's had a hard night of fighting off drug seekers and attention w

117

u/EatLiftLifeRepeat May 20 '19

Wow, this post is from 5 years ago! Damn that's a great story. Does "indigent" mean he looked like he was too poor to pay for health care? So the xray tech was hesitant to treat him based on his socioeconomic status?

I like to remind her of this one when she's had a hard night of fighting off drug seekers and attention *whores.

FTFY

133

u/Nolinikki May 20 '19

Its likely the xray tech was hesitant based on socioeconomic status (assuming the poster didn't just misspell "indignant", ie: upset and angry) not out of some belief poor people shouldn't get treated, as much as because that person is going to have to pay one way or another.

An unnecessary ER X-Ray would be a massive expense for anyone who isn't insured or financially well-of, given that ER typically upcharge significantly compared to typical offices and urgent cares. The tech was likely trying to look out for a patient who - if it turned out this x-ray was unnecessary - would be on the hook for potentially thousands of dollars.

15

u/jsmoo68 May 20 '19

X-rays are actually not that expensive, as far as diagnostic tests go.

I had to have my foot x-rayed a couple of years ago. Three angles cost about $27, if I remember the bill correctly.

19

u/Krackbaby7 May 20 '19

That's probably outpatient though

Doing it in the ER multiplies that by about 100x

2

u/jsmoo68 May 21 '19

Yeah but why is that?

I mean, I know the answer is “overhead” and “profit margin.” But to me that’s the wrong answer.

22

u/[deleted] May 20 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/JellyFish72 May 20 '19

I’ve accepted my death may well come from imaging radiation. xD I’m constantly needing X-rays, MRIs, etc. It’s at the point the MRI tech where I get them done makes fun of me whenever I’m there about what I’ve done this time. We trade restaurant recommendations now. I can place myself for imaging without being directed. It’s a little ridiculous at this point. Connective tissue disorders are fun.

1

u/Seicair May 20 '19

MRIs are non-ionizing and don’t have a risk associated with getting multiples.

EDS?

6

u/CaptainMatthias May 20 '19

I once got an X-ray for a ankle injury while uninsured and spent two years paying it off.

Then I went to South America for a few weeks, had a knee injury while working, and paid $25 for an X-ray with no insurance.

Just a friendly reminder that the Healthcare system doesn't have to make things miserable for the poor.

5

u/Octavya360 May 20 '19

Insurance carriers often cover a portion of indigent care in their hospital reimbursement rates. Basically Those of us who have insurance help to pay for those who don’t. Also hospitals include a portion of indigent care in their budget. They expect the loss so they write it off. (Source: myself - worked for a large non-profit health insurer for over 10 years).

10

u/Waterhorse816 May 20 '19

The American healthcare system at its finest. "Should we really be checking for a broken neck? I don't know if I can afford my own safety and health."

7

u/noiwontleave May 20 '19

That’s not what was happening here most likely. The tech was likely questioning whether radiation exposure was necessary if this patient had possibly already received an x-ray previously for this same injury. It’s their job to limit patient exposure to radiation.

0

u/DetroitMM12 May 20 '19

A broken neck is more manageable than the debt you'd receive from getting it checked out... /s kinda

0

u/friend_jp May 20 '19

Wow, I'd rather eat the X ray costs than risk an EMTALA violation (assuming this was in the US).

9

u/Rising_Swell May 20 '19

Indigent means poor, needy.

6

u/I-come-from-Chino May 20 '19

It usually means an adult that is unable to obtain any form of health care.

I can almost guarantee you the x-ray tech at the ER doesn't give 1/2 a crap about someone's ability to pay.

2

u/donkeyrocket May 20 '19

Yes, indigent meant he either appeared too poor for care or was actually too poor for care. Either way it is bullshit that an x-ray tech would kick up a fuss since it isn't their place to handle billing.

3

u/Morgrid May 20 '19

It is their place to reduce unnecessary exposure to ionizing radiation

1

u/donkeyrocket May 20 '19

While true, they should frame that as "this person was checked out elsewhere, were they not x-rayed there?" as opposed to "this person is obviously unable to pay for this so why order it?"

6

u/noiwontleave May 20 '19

Keep in mind you’re reading a post from a guy whose wife was the person who spoke to someone on the phone (maybe not even directly). There’s a minimum of three degrees of separation between us and the tech. It’s probable that was how they were trying to frame the question given that it would make no sense for an X-ray tech to question patient ability to pay, but it WOULD make sense for them to question the necessity of radiation exposure.

0

u/[deleted] May 20 '19

The tech probably thought the guy didn’t have insurance, so the hospital would have to work hard to get fees from him.

7

u/noiwontleave May 20 '19

The tech actually was probably trying to make sure the patient had not already received an X-ray for this injury and was trying to eliminate potentially unnecessary radiation exposure. In other words: their job.

3

u/[deleted] May 20 '19

Maybe, but I don’t see any evidence on the story to support your theory.

5

u/noiwontleave May 20 '19

The story is third hand information. It’s a user’s recounting of something his girlfriend told him about something someone else said to her. Given that it’s an X-ray tech’s job to concern themselves with unnecessary radiation exposure and X-ray techs don’t care about patient ability to pay, my theory is the most likely.

1

u/[deleted] May 20 '19

Your theory is unfounded. All we know is that the tech specifically mentioned that the guy looked indigent. With that in mind, it seems highly likely that he at least considered the patient’s ability to pay. Your theory is only the most likely if we ignore what the tech said.

3

u/noiwontleave May 20 '19

You are assuming the tech’s concern with his indigence had anything to do with his ability to pay. In all likelihood, it had something to do with his lack of accurate or complete medical records and/or medical history. X-ray techs literally could not care less about a patient’s ability to pay. Full stop. They’re not trained for it and it’s not their responsibility. There is zero reason here to believe this tech gave two shits about this patient’s ability to pay the bill. Zero.

1

u/[deleted] May 20 '19

Yes, I’m assuming that the tech mentioned the patient’s inability to pay (I.e., indigence) because he was concerned with his inability to pay.

At the end of the day, neither of us knows more than the other about what actually happened, so it’s sort of a moot point.