“Uninsured patients with traumatic injuries, such as car crashes, falls and gunshot wounds, were almost twice as likely to die in the hospital as similarly injured patients with health insurance, according to a troubling new study.
The findings by Harvard University researchers surprised doctors and health experts who have believed emergency room care was equitable.” (Truthdig)
Missing from this is any discussion of the characteristics of the uninsured and insured populations. Were the uninsured trauma victims perpetrators of crimes? Were the insured patients either crime victims or innocent bystanders? Was insurance status dominated by other factors, like race or economic status? The relative mortality rates might have other explanations; matching injuries isn’t enough to control the many exogenous factors. ED staff are affected by their patients’ stories; perhaps studying that would have been more useful.
LikeLike
It probably isn’t the fact that they are uninsured per se, as ER clinical staff are usually not even aware of the insurance status of their critically ill patients. Insurance status is certainly correlated with other factors such as economic disadvantage which have an adverse effect on health, stamina, etc., and could impact on survival from serious injuries. But uninsured patients may defer care longer or go to substandard facilities simply because of their concerns about medical bills. No one is claiming that it isn’t complicated!
LikeLike