Patient Rejected By 3 Hospitals
-
Hahaha - I still remember someone criticising the British NHS a few years ago.Originally posted by ShutterBug:This shortage of beds is not new.
Some year ago a malay man died of a stroke, because he was made to wait 6 friggin hours when he was brought to SGH A&E by his family!
Imagine, a stroke patient half conscious and convulscing, made to wait 6 friggin hours!
Healthcare? More like Hellcare! -
the unspoken word is GO TO PRIVATE HOSPITALS IF YOU CAN AFFORD!!!
-
The pay for doctors in private hospitals is three times as high. Everyone is moving out into the private sector...half the doctors in Singapore are in private practice but they only handle half the load of public hospitals. So who wants to work in public hospitals for less pay, more work and always getting the flak from the public?
Doctors who remain in the public sector are only there to do research and build a name for themselves before they leave or else they are there because nobody wants them outside. -
agreedOriginally posted by rathcycle:They reserve it for the richer and more influential people in singapore. -
Ok, so there is the trend.
But do you all know why all the doctors are moving to private sectors?
WHAT caused them to do so?
Why does it costs so much in private hospitals?
YOU can all make a wild guess! -
I think its already explained why.... scroll up...Originally posted by ShutterBug:Ok, so there is the trend.
But do you all know why all the doctors are moving to private sectors?
WHAT caused them to do so?
Why does it costs so much in private hospitals?
YOU can all make a wild guess!
-
The underlying causes, are less obvious than just that.Originally posted by mhcampboy:I think its already explained why.... scroll up... -
The issue of bed shortage is a problem to be shared between the patients and the hospitals.
There are many 'spoilt' patients who check themselves in, sometimes with no visible illnesses but simply complain of backaches, headaches etc. As per protocol, they are treated as per a standard patient and warded for observation, taking up one bed.
After checks turn out ok, they refuse to vacate their beds, requesting to stay one or two more nights just to make sure - kiasu mentality kicks in. And their argument is always: i'l paying for the bed, why can't i stay?
That's the problem with such patients and their relatives - they think money can solve everything. They don't realise there is always a person who physically needs it more than these psychological weaklings. They think the hospital provides a SERVICE, not medical assistance. They have mentally perceived hospitals as belonging to the HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY, where customer is king.
Hospitals on the other hand, are falling into the same trap as schools. ISOs and improvement projects are becoming centerstage over helping patients and saving lives. Kaizen projects which supposedly boasts of fast bed turnovers and speedy service at hospital clinics are empty claims, especially when such medical related processes depend on the patient rather than the hospital: i.e. you can't 'hurry' a patient out if he/she is physically incapable to do so. Therefore how does a hospital show faster turnover of beds????
Is it just me or are our brillant minds playing trial and error to see which method suits the hospital management best, instead of a thoroughly-planned system to custom-meet the daily demands? -
i don't think they are playing trial and error... i think they are just trying to promote their career, damn the patients...
being the one who has "led the hospital to achieving ISO-whatever" is something significant to put in the CV...
with that, everything else, including patient-care becomes secondary..
or am i too cynical?
the other side of the coin? could it be that the administrators assume that the "consultants" know what they are doing and blindly follow every recommendation..
either way, the patients suffer..Originally posted by BillyBong:The issue of bed shortage is a problem to be shared between the patients and the hospitals.
There are many 'spoilt' patients who check themselves in, sometimes with no visible illnesses but simply complain of backaches, headaches etc. As per protocol, they are treated as per a standard patient and warded for observation, taking up one bed.
After checks turn out ok, they refuse to vacate their beds, requesting to stay one or two more nights just to make sure - kiasu mentality kicks in. And their argument is always: i'l paying for the bed, why can't i stay?
That's the problem with such patients and their relatives - they think money can solve everything. They don't realise there is always a person who physically needs it more than these psychological weaklings. They think the hospital provides a SERVICE, not medical assistance. They have mentally perceived hospitals as belonging to the HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY, where customer is king.
Hospitals on the other hand, are falling into the same trap as schools. ISOs and improvement projects are becoming centerstage over helping patients and saving lives. Kaizen projects which supposedly boasts of fast bed turnovers and speedy service at hospital clinics are empty claims, especially when such medical related processes depend on the patient rather than the hospital: i.e. you can't 'hurry' a patient out if he/she is physically incapable to do so. Therefore how does a hospital show faster turnover of beds????
Is it just me or are our brillant minds playing trial and error to see which method suits the hospital management best, instead of a thoroughly-planned system to custom-meet the daily demands? -
my understanding is doctors are required to work at govt hospitals or clinics for a few years before they go private right?
or either they do it for the experience. -
Some time ago, doctors were leaving hospitals because of friction with the administration dept. They want to show doctors who's the boss or what?
The salary is not the issue. Some doctors not motivated by money.
Ask Khaw Boon Guan. He knows. -
khaw boon guan, the minister of health?Originally posted by googoomuck:Some time ago, doctors were leaving hospitals because of friction with the administration dept. They want to show doctors who's the boss or what?
The salary is not the issue. Some doctors not motivated by money.
Ask Khaw Boon Guan. He knows. -
basically, I hear that there is simply too much politics inside a gov hospital.
Red tapes are what dogs the efficiency of hospitals. -
Local patients are subsidized. The more locals go into our public hospitals, the more the government has to subsidize. A recent change in funding policy has seen the budget given to public hospitals fixed at a certain amount each year. That means the best way to earn money in a public hospital is not to have any patients at all and not to do any operations. As KBW said, if our public hospitals have no patients, he will jump up and clap hands.Originally posted by the Bear:i don't think they are playing trial and error... i think they are just trying to promote their career, damn the patients...
being the one who has "led the hospital to achieving ISO-whatever" is something significant to put in the CV...
with that, everything else, including patient-care becomes secondary..
or am i too cynical?
the other side of the coin? could it be that the administrators assume that the "consultants" know what they are doing and blindly follow every recommendation..
either way, the patients suffer..
Administrators run the hospitals now, not doctors who are just employees. The CEOs of hospitals are MBAs and the few who are doctors haven't practised medicine for years. Consultants do not 'blindly follow' the administrators, they are required to do so....
Hospital administrators have to bring in private patients to balance the hospital's finances. What choice do administrators have? The subsidy from the givernment is fixed. If more subsidized patients come to you (and you cannot refuse them), when patients demand to have more attentive service (in comparison you can easily wait up to 12 hours in a British NHS hospital on weekends...I have seen it), how are you going to balance the books and meet patient demands? Staff are overworked...do you increase staff? Where's the money coming from? You cannot increase charges or patients will kpkb. You cannot employ more staff because the government won't give you more money and anyway, there is a directive to cut manpower by 2% each year. So staff becomes disillusioned, unhappy and leave, which exacerbates the problem for remaining staff.
Hospitals like TTSH with a vast majority of local subsidized patients have a big challenge to remain in the black. Remember that if your hospital loses money, doctors will not have salary increase. Keep doctors' salaries low, they will leave for the private sector or overseas hospitals. Talk is cheap, what would you do differently in their shoes?
Everyone is looking for a better life, a higher salary. Doctors are the same...If you can earn more in the private sector with less work and more autonomy, being your own boss...why not move out?
If local patients who can afford it go to private hospitals instead of public hospitals, that would be very welcomed by hospital administrators, the Minister and staff of public hospitals. With fewer patients, they can finally offer the better care that they want to provide but are unable to due to lack of resources.
If you can afford to go private, perhaps it is more ethical for you to go, so that poor patients can get better care in public hospitals. -
That is true and I have complained about it to the authorities. The problem is that if Singapore wants to earn money from foreign patients, you need all these forms of accreditation. And we do need the money now...foreign patients pay full rates and subsidize our local patients in subsidized classes. If Thailand's hospitals have a certainb accreditation standard, we cannot afford not to have it or we will lose out to them.Originally posted by BillyBong:Hospitals on the other hand, are falling into the same trap as schools. ISOs and improvement projects are becoming centerstage over helping patients and saving lives.
But it is true that these accreditation programs take up too much of our time and reduce the resources available for patients. Some accreditation programmes are probably necessary...but there are far too many. -
Ai yah everywhere in the world is the same .
In south africa, I heard if you are poor and above 45 and have a heart attack - they send you home because they have to treat the public patients who can still contribute to their economy - not ones who can't.
In Australia, not enough acute public beds also and not enough staff .
In UK , NHS is collapsing and more worse off than Australia.
In USA , no insurance , mati liow.
In canada , they got staffing problems also.
Hello...no such thing as a perfect public health system .
Got money? Then you got perfect (private) health system to get consultants and nurses to fawn over you. What do you expect? Equality does not exist physically - only money gets you your so called healthcare rights. -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
"As Khaw said if govt hosp have no patient ......."
Local patients are subsidized. The more locals go into our public hospitals, the more the government has to subsidize. A recent change in funding policy has seen the budget given to public hospitals fixed at a certain amount each year. That means the best way to earn money in a public hospital is not to have any patients at all and not to do any operations. As KBW said, if our public hospitals have no patients, he will jump up and clap hands.
Administrators run the hospitals now, not doctors who are just employees. The CEOs of hospitals are MBAs and the few who are doctors haven't practised medicine for years. Consultants do not 'blindly follow' the administrators, they are required to do so....
Hospital administrators have to bring in private patients to balance the hospital's finances. What choice do administrators have? The subsidy from the givernment is fixed. If more subsidized patients come to you (and you cannot refuse them), when patients demand to have more attentive service (in comparison you can easily wait up to 12 hours in a British NHS hospital on weekends...I have seen it), how are you going to balance the books and meet patient demands? Staff are overworked...do you increase staff? Where's the money coming from? You cannot increase charges or patients will kpkb. You cannot employ more staff because the government won't give you more money and anyway, there is a directive to cut manpower by 2% each year. So staff becomes disillusioned, unhappy and leave, which exacerbates the problem for remaining staff.
Hospitals like TTSH with a vast majority of local subsidized patients have a big challenge to remain in the black. Remember that if your hospital loses money, doctors will not have salary increase. Keep doctors' salaries low, they will leave for the private sector or overseas hospitals. Talk is cheap, what would you do differently in their shoes?
Everyone is looking for a better life, a higher salary. Doctors are the same...If you can earn more in the private sector with less work and more autonomy, being your own boss...why not move out?
If local patients who can afford it go to private hospitals instead of public hospitals, that would be [b]very welcomed by hospital administrators, the Minister and staff of public hospitals. With fewer patients, they can finally offer the better care that they want to provide but are unable to due to lack of resources.
If you can afford to go private, perhaps it is more ethical for you to go, so that poor patients can get better care in public hospitals.
[/b]
Can the quote be true?If there is no patient,the govt has to close shop.All the staff would lose their jobs.The minister would be in trouble!
One solution to the problems is means testing. -
compared to some countries waiting time.....i think we fare average..........there are some pathetic countries whose wait time can really kill......about which country i think i need not say...........they should know their own pathetic standardsOriginally posted by dragg:because there are no beds. all because of pneumonia!!
arent we a medical hub? -
Chicken LITTLEOriginally posted by rathcycle:Who ar who ar ? -
One thing I have to point out is the the NHS is free, and they have to deal with a population of 60 million.Originally posted by fymk:Ai yah everywhere in the world is the same .
In south africa, I heard if you are poor and above 45 and have a heart attack - they send you home because they have to treat the public patients who can still contribute to their economy - not ones who can't.
In Australia, not enough acute public beds also and not enough staff .
In UK , NHS is collapsing and more worse off than Australia.
In USA , no insurance , mati liow.
In canada , they got staffing problems also.
Hello...no such thing as a perfect public health system .
Got money? Then you got perfect (private) health system to get consultants and nurses to fawn over you. What do you expect? Equality does not exist physically - only money gets you your so called healthcare rights. -
some doctors or professors ah... really got no heart of compassion.
-
If every staff of public hospital does his job properly,then there would be no problem.Then the minister can 'rest in peace'.
-
Contrary to one forum memeber said,most of our public hospitals are led by doctors and not by administractors.
-
If you would notice , I didn't put the countries as homogenous variables...I just dump and lump them in, from USA to UK ...Originally posted by lwflee:One thing I have to point out is the the NHS is free, and they have to deal with a population of 60 million.
The only homogenous variable is the lack of beds.
And ........same thing everywhere -
Want the best? Just pay in ca$h ....mo'money mo mo money. -
All countries are the same,but S'pore should be different because we are only the size of a city (but run by a state govt).