Question for those who have national health care
Friday, April 25th, 2008 08:39 amI have been told that in nations with socialized medicine (my correspondent uses the UK as their example) a person who has broken their hip will wait an average of three months for treatment.
Can anyone tell me if this is so?
Thanks.
Can anyone tell me if this is so?
Thanks.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-25 01:17 pm (UTC)A broken hip is an acute injury; those get priority treatment (as in, ambulance ride to hospital and immediate admission).
Chronic non-life-threatening conditions are another matter. Things like hip joint operations for osteoarthritis may end up with queues because the emergency stuff gets prioritized.
But waiting three months for a broken hip? Is a scare story intented out of whole cloth, probably by someone with a vested interest in making money out of the US system's inefficiency.
(Sorry. As a sometime ex-NHS worker, this sort of slander -- which is particularly common in US medical circles -- really pisses me off. Not your fault; it just hit one of my hot buttons.)
no subject
Date: 2008-04-25 01:26 pm (UTC)I broke my hip and pelvis, I had treatment as soon as I said there was something wrong.
I don't think I had to wait for anything -- it was a long time ago, but maybe physio. I've usually had to wait for weeks for physiotherapy.
And if you really had to wait three months with a broken him you'd die, wouldn't you? I mean that's just crazy.
I expect your informant was confusing it with a wait for a hip replacement.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-25 02:59 pm (UTC)A hip that needs replacement can also kill, but it takes a *lot* longer. If Mom had waited an extra 3 months for her hip replacement, it might have killed her... but she'd already waited about 1.5 years past the point where a normal person would have had it done, since she was very young for a hip replacement. With how long she waited, she was starting to have bone death, but it was still very early stages.