Qantas Grounded?

[pennyk]

I take it you mean The SAN penny?

Good hospital and far better than Norwest.Particularly cardic. However they typically won't do major trama. You'll end up in the public system at RNS or Westmead. I would also take my kids to Westmead Childrens ahead of both the SAN and Norwest.

Actually it was Norwest.. I've had lots of services from Hills/ Norwest over the years and always been happy, but never been to San.
I wouldnt expect to go there for major trauma (or any private hospital), but I think for things like broken bones or possible heart attacks etc, I would happily pay the money than wait at the public hospital.

 

[Belbo]

I am merely pointing out the reasons why there are nurses and bed shortages as described in above posts, and bringing to ya's all attention the real reasons behind the Industrial Action being proposed - all after someone here with no real knowledge of the issues made a wild statement about them.

Ha! I hope that someone was me, because I can't help but feel that you get a buzz out of getting into a nice solid public debate, and good on you for that.

 

[BayView]

But that is not what we were discussing. I was commenting that there are emergency departments in private hospitals. They will look after most of the stuff that fills the emergency wards in public hospitals.

Public patients (which is most people) won't go to them because they have to pay, and anyone really bad won't be sent from one public ER; they will stay there where the facilites to treat very serious patients are better (yes; they are generally better than private ER's and theaters) unless they are able to be sent home. If they are a monor case and a private patient, then they would get sent to a private hospital.

We had many cases in Frangers ICU where say; a private patient heart attack victim was shunted out to Peninsula Private after they were assessed as being less than crit-care.

I'm not talking arms hanging off or car crashes

Penny made the statement she could swan into the private ER and get fixed...not if you are really bad, and not if you are a public patient..

Wouldn't you agree that many of the cases filling the corridors and outside the doors of the public emergency department could easily be looked after in the local doctor's surgery?

The people on gurneys in corridors need to go to the ward beds.
Many of the people in waiting rooms could be look at in the doctor's surgeries and go home after. Or; they are too sick and get triaged to the ER and wait for a bed if they are a very sick one.

The people whom use the ER like a doctor's surgery simply get triaged back into the waiting room until there is no-one left who is sicker who needs to be attended to.

 

[pennyk]

That is about all they can handle as a general rule. Small stuff.

Try turning up with a suspected Triple-A and see how ya's go, or an arm hanging off after car accident, or an emergency caesar with internal bleeding.

Sidenote; ACA/TT/Channel Whatever News - love to bleat on about the patient who waited for 30 hours for a bed on a gurney in the corridor.....horrifying.

Wait and see how it goes when the ratios go from 4 to 5 or 6, and the nurses miss their obs and the patient suffers a relapse due to a missed med.

As per Wylie, I wouldnt go for major trauma.. but for emergency caesar I definitely would go private, particularly if that was where I was booked in with the obstetrician...

I've had to "grace" the public hospital ER's on a number of occassions with my mum having had falls before she died. She went via ambulance from the Nursing Home. We went to Hornsby 2x, Ryde 1x and Westmead 1x, where she died. We never waited too long to be seen initially. It was usually the subsequent scans etc that took the time.

What I found interesting each time was the high % of elderly in similar situations in the ER. In most cases, it was half elderly, half all other conditions. Even Westmead on a Saturday night!! It highlighted the importance of falls prevention work with the elderly...

In general, I would say the service levels I experienced, as the carer of someone arriving by ambulance were similar between all the hospitals (private vs public).

 

[BayView]

Ha! I hope that someone was me, because I can't help but feel that you get a buzz out of getting into a nice solid public debate, and good on you for that.

Yes, you're right.

Sorry for my going on about this issue, but I had my chained pulled by a mis-informed poster, and this is one issue that is something i know a good deal about, and is close to home.

Apart form that; I feel it is important that the real issues about healthcare provisions are made more well known.

My wife and I (and her colleagues) sit in front of the teev and seethe when we here the BS that the media push down our throats...

Always quick to point out the bloke in the corridor, the baby swap, the wrong medication or whatever...

It is unfortunate, but it is the 1/100000 case in an otherwise job well done, and the stupid Gubbmint is trying to make the likelihood of it happen more likely.

 

[BayView]

As per Wylie, I wouldnt go for major trauma.. but for emergency caesar I definitely would go private, particularly if that was where I was booked in with the obstetrician...

Penny,

if it is an emergency caesar, you ain't got the choice of being booked in, love - you are rushed to the operating theater and a path is cleared to get you in asap before either you or the baby dies..

Normal caesars are booked in - my wife had two - and they are booked in weeks or months in advance most times.

In most private hospitals, you would be lucky to find an Ob or anaesthetist on duty in the place unless they are there for a specific op list; they would be paging him/her.

Ob wards are a bit different from yer normal accident victim in the ER of course; not really comparing apples with apples because sometimes the obstetrician is there doing a delivery as a matter of course.

 

[pennyk]

Penny,

if it is an emergency caesar, you ain't got the choice of being booked in, love - you are rushed to the operating theater and a path is cleared to get you in asap before either you or the baby dies..

Normal caesars are booked in - my wife had two - and they are booked in weeks or months in advance most times.

In most private hospitals, you would be lucky to find an Ob or anaesthetist on duty in the place unless they are there for a specific op list; they would be paging him/her.

Ob wards are a bit different from yer normal accident victim in the ER of course; not really comparing apples with apples because sometimes the obstetrician is there doing a delivery as a matter of course.

I didnt mean you would get booked in for the emergency caeser.. but if there was an ER attached to where i was booked in for the birth, then I would go there first rather than a private hospital. The doctors/ anaesthetists are used to getting there in a hurry, and its better to have continuity of care.

 

[weg]

pennyk, you're right that most of that waiting is for scans/results/observation. Generally if you wait a long time to be seen in an ER it's because you're not urgent (and are unlikely to be admitted).

The last 2 hospitals where the media reported unacceptable waits, they failed to mention one was having some major restructuring/renovation done in the ER, and both had the usual winter 'coughs and colds' clogging up the place.

BV, this is the same ol' hysterical union stuff that rears it's head during EVERY EB (they rotate the problems list a bit). When they want a pay rise it's all the more justifiable to raise these other issues - they do it every time.

Staffing levels to reduce, nurse or ward attendants to replace RN's, nurses to be forced to do split shift, shorter shifts, longer shifts, etc.; have heard all these many times over 30 years.

I seriously can't see the nursing degree downgraded, but I can see more ward attendants doing non nursing duties (why pay nurses 100K to make beds or tasks that don't require any assessment or patient contact).

Most FT nurses working for a few years and doing shift work would be close to 100K - many earn more (the ability to do so is not that hard).

Edit: I would always choose a public ER over a private one.

 

[wylie]

I seriously can't see the nursing degree downgraded, but I can see more ward attendants doing non nursing duties (why pay nurses 100K to make beds or tasks that don't require any assessment or patient contact).

For me, this is a "biggie". I sat every day for hours per day, for three and a half months, in three different hospitals whilst my mother was dying.

To me, nurses are worth their weight in gold (well... most of them).

If some of the non-nursing duties could be done by ward staff (and I met many of them taking my mother to and from various scans and treatments), then the nurses would have more time for "nursing".

I did as much for my mother as I possibly could, but I do believe there are a lot of "button pushers" in hospitals, buzzing the nurse to get them to do things that could easily be done with a little effort, or done by a wardsman (or woman). It must be hard to deal with those types of patients, when there are others really needing more care.

 

[BayView]

BV, this is the same ol' hysterical union stuff that rears it's head during EVERY EB (they rotate the problems list a bit). When they want a pay rise it's all the more justifiable to raise these other issues - they do it every time.

Staffing levels to reduce, nurse or ward attendants to replace RN's, nurses to be forced to do split shift, shorter shifts, longer shifts, etc.; have heard all these many times over 30 years.

The old "log of claims"....

I seriously can't see the nursing degree downgraded, but I can see more ward attendants doing non nursing duties (why pay nurses 100K to make beds or tasks that don't require any assessment or patient contact).

In the USA they now have "theater techs" - doing nursing work in theater.

Most FT nurses working for a few years and doing shift work would be close to 100K - many earn more (the ability to do so is not that hard).

Quick comparison - my wife: Grade 2 Year 10 with Diploma, Masters and Certificates.
If she works 40 hours per week, both weekend days and 3 midweek days, doing 5.30pm-1.30am.

Now; keep in mind we have 2 kids - one is 2 year old, so to do 40 hours of these hours is not practicable. (I work 7.30 to 5.00pm mon-fri currently).

normal rate - $32.642 p/hr x 40hrs = $1305 p/w
5 x afternoon shift allowance @$ 23.40 = $ 117
5 x night shift temp allowance @54.50 = $ 272
13 x 16.32 (time/half sat/sun) @ 16.32 = $ 212.17
Laundry allowance = $ 1.11

TOTAL PER WEEK = $19072.28 gross per week.

TOTAL PER YEAR = 99178.56

Now, for a woman with kids, this is is a very big ask; no evenings or weekends free. Our son wakes at 6.00am, I'm up around then to cover his activities until work at 7.30, so her best sleep would be 5.30 hours.

If she worked a full-time night shift (not going to happen with a 2 year old), she would earn more of course.

If she worked a basic 40 hour week with no frills; she would earn $67895.36.

So, the multitudes of nurses you talk of must be yer 50 year old nannas with grown up kids and husband who can't stand to be near her (or vice versa ) who works only night shifts?

 

[wobbycarly]

For me, this is a "biggie". I sat every day for hours per day, for three and a half months, in three different hospitals whilst my mother was dying.

To me, nurses are worth their weight in gold (well... most of them).

If some of the non-nursing duties could be done by ward staff (and I met many of them taking my mother to and from various scans and treatments), then the nurses would have more time for "nursing".

I did as much for my mother as I possibly could, but I do believe there are a lot of "button pushers" in hospitals, buzzing the nurse to get them to do things that could easily be done with a little effort, or done by a wardsman (or woman). It must be hard to deal with those types of patients, when there are others really needing more care.

Don't mean to hijack, but this tickled and thought I'd try to lighten it up a bit... I have a mate who is a nurse and weight in at about 110-120kg. Worth his weight?

 

[weg]

Most nurses I know work FT 13 hour days, 3 days a week, with a month or 2 of nights thrown in. They usually work every second weekend. A 3 day week for 102K is not that horrid, even if the job is .

Btw, the ones that prefer the nights are usually the ones with young kids - because they're around before and after school.

Many others with young kids do agency shifts hours that suit them, where it suits them - up to $750 per shift.

 

[pully]

yes that sounds like the case. there is great flexibility and opportunity for those that want to work.
the smart ones often combine shifts with other study or employment and even a completely different path, like investing in real estate.

the nurses are not the problem its the unions and in particular the union leaders that have their eye on a position in the labor govt.
its an accepted career path.

meanwhile the general public suffer their fate. ok if you have an acute emergency perhaps, less so if non acute, low care. like say an elderly person with a medical problem, or anyone needing palliative care managent as an inpatient.
great if you have private insurance, seeking elective care but otherwise it can be a zoo in a public hospital.

 

[BayView]

Many others with young kids do agency shifts hours that suit them, where it suits them - up to $750 per shift.

Yeah, the rates are very good for agency.

The $750 shifts are typically yer weekend 12 hour shift - most hospitals will call every staff and bank nurse they have before they bite the bullet and call an agency, so these shifts are not that plentiful.

I remember on several occasions listening to the NUM sitting on the phone making 10, 15 phone calls trying to drum up one of her own staff to fill a shift in ICU. - most times she could do it, so they used agency very sparingly.

My wife has done agency and is now back on the list to do more...

The only drawback with agency is waiting for the phone to ring for shifts, and it often doesn't....I know that these days the hospitals are trying to use them less and their own staff more to cut costs.

Years ago my wife was making herself available for shifts on most days, and she got quite a few because she basically never said "no" when they rang. They like that and will call you first in future.

 

[Token Funder]

Yes if everyone was on half the commissions, the cost of living would go down for sure. Why do you think it costs $10 these days for a pre-made foccacia? High broker commissionsfilter through the entire system - and you as the borrower end up paying for it. That is why the cost of borrowing in places with low commissions(like HK, USA etc) is low but affordable for the average borrower.

Fixed it for you.

 

[Aaron_C]

Fixed it for you.

Well relatively speaking I'd still be the same

 

[Deltaberry]

Pretty simplistic I'd say......



ciao

Nor

Hahaha is that the only constructive thing you have to say?

 

[Deltaberry]

Firstly, if you have any sort of emergency, you won't be taken to a private hospital. They don't have ER's of any sort of major use.

If you are really sick, you will most likely stay in a public hospital anyway, but as a private patient until you are well enough to be transported to a lower level of care private hospital.

In my job at the Frankston Hospital I went to the ER almost every shift.

It was always packed with people, and often times there was a "Code Yellow" - ambulance by-pass. This means there were simply not enough available beds to take any more patients, so they were forwarded on to either Monash, or the Alfred etc.

For what it's worth; I reckon the staff at Frangers did a bloody damn fine job given the overcrowded and stressful circumstances.

The other problem with public hospital ER's is the public now use them as a feee clinic when they are slightly off colour instead of going to the doctor now that many of the clinics don't bulk-bill any longer, so this adds to the over-crowding.

I'll bet they don't divulge that fact on the News or ACA.

Yea that's right.

Several years ago my father had chest pains. I took him to a public hospital and no one attended to him for a long time - a good hour or so, even though he was visibly in pain and I was complaining to the nurses who just palmed me off.

Until one of the doctors walked past and recognised him (ie recognised my father) - then quickly rushed him in. Otherwise he would've been left there and who knows, could even have died.

Turned out his chest pains was a heart attack and a third of his heart was destroyed as a result, partly because ER didn't operate on him fast enough. Of course, the moment he was able to be transported we got him back out to Epworth straight away.

I hope no one here has to go through this because if it wasn't for the fact that a doctor recognised him, he could've been triaged and left there to die.

 

[Deltaberry]

Have to agree whole-heartedly with Bayview here. I would always choose public hospital for any emergancy, as they have better treatment and resources for complex cases. You can always elect to be a private patient in a public hospital - single room etc...

However for Elective surgery, I'd go Private anyday as I can choose where, when and who treats me. But anything more than that - public system.

Yea there actually is no choice. If it's an emergency you have to go public as BayView said.

But re public emergency, see my story above.

 

[weg]

Yea that's right.

Several years ago my father had chest pains. I took him to a public hospital and no one attended to him for a long time - a good hour or so, even though he was visibly in pain and I was complaining to the nurses who just palmed me off.

Until one of the doctors walked past and recognised him (ie recognised my father) - then quickly rushed him in. Otherwise he would've been left there and who knows, could even have died.

Turned out his chest pains was a heart attack and a third of his heart was destroyed as a result, partly because ER didn't operate on him fast enough. Of course, the moment he was able to be transported we got him back out to Epworth straight away.

I hope no one here has to go through this because if it wasn't for the fact that a doctor recognised him, he could've been triaged and left there to die.

Something like chest pain related to heart attack would be deemed a triage catagory 2, and would be seen within 10 minutes (cat 1 is immediately).

Unless an extremely large number of patients of cat.1 or 2 have come through the doors at the one time this would be very rare. Sounds like some sort of boo boo occured through incompetence.

It's also rare to have lots of incompetent people on at one time (a manager or Dr. would be screaming to have some removed), however saying that one hospital ER here in SA is a bit of a worry in that respect (or was).

Edit: oops, just remembered they were a public/private partnership arrangement.