Injured man dies after rejection by 14 hospitals

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,677
161
63
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
CTV.ca | Injured man dies after rejection by 14 hospitals

TOKYO -- After getting struck by a motorcycle, an elderly Japanese man with head injuries waited in an ambulance as paramedics phoned 14 hospitals, each refusing to treat him.

He died 90 minutes later at the facility that finally relented - one of thousands of victims repeatedly turned away in recent years by understaffed and overcrowded hospitals in Japan.

Paramedics reached the accident scene within minutes after the man on a bicycle collided with a motorcycle in the western city of Itami. But 14 hospitals refused to admit the 69-year-old citing a lack of specialists, equipment and staff, according to Mitsuhisa Ikemoto, a fire department official.

The Jan. 20 incident was the latest in a string of recent cases in Japan in which patients were denied treatment, underscoring health care woes in a rapidly aging society that faces an acute shortage of doctors and a growing number of elderly patients.

One of the hospitals agreed to provide care when the paramedics called a second time more than an hour after the accident. But the man, who suffered head and back injuries, died soon afterward of shock from loss of blood.

The injured man might have survived if a hospital accepted him more quickly, Ikemoto said. "I wish hospitals are more willing to take patients, but they have their own reasons, too," he said.

The motorcyclist, also hurt in the accident, was denied admission by two hospitals before a third accepted him, Ikemoto said. He was recovering from his injuries.

Ah... age discrimination.

The death prompted the city to issue a directive ordering paramedics to better co-ordinate with an emergency call centre so patients can find a hospital within 15 minutes. But hospitals cannot be punished for turning away patients if they are full.

So in other words, putting the onus on the paramedics and solving nothing.

Similar problems have occurred frequently in recent years. More than 14,000 emergency patients were rejected at least three times by Japanese hospitals before getting treatment in 2007, the latest government survey showed.

In the worst case, a woman in her 70s with a breathing problem was rejected 49 times in Tokyo.

There was also the high-profile death of a pregnant woman in western Nara city in 2006 that prompted the government to establish a panel to look into the hospitals' practice of refusing care.

In that case, the woman was refused admission by 19 hospitals that said they were full. She died eight days later from a brain hemorrhage after falling unconscious during birth.

Health Minister Yoichi Masuzoe told a parliamentary committee last year that the rising number of elderly patients hospitalized for months was taking up space that could be used to treat emergency cases.

Masuzoe urged the development of a community-wide support system to ease the burden on hospitals. The government also announced plans to increase the number of doctors and improve co-ordination among ambulances, emergency call centres and hospitals.

Remind me not to head to Japan.... um.... ever...
 

tracy

House Member
Nov 10, 2005
3,500
48
48
California
It isn't just a Japanese problem. It happens everywhere. Hospitals sometimes have to go on diversion. The only alternative would be to take more patients than the hospital can safely care for and then they'd still get the blame when someone dies. It's really scary sometimes.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
I once heard that people use more medical resouces in the last 2 months of their lives than the rest combined, anyone know if that is true?
 

tracy

House Member
Nov 10, 2005
3,500
48
48
California
I always heard the last 6 months, but either way, what else would you expect? People who are dying are usually very sick. Very sick people need medical resources very much.

I laugh a bit because my patients are mostly the opposite. I've sent home countless million dollar babies in my time. I can't imagine them racking up more medical bills over the rest of their lives compared to their first 6 months.
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
I've had that spouted off by my in-laws as their main argument against euthanasia. They strongly feel that given the medical costs for people in the end of their lives, docs will use any legalized euthanasia as a way to liquidate elderly people requiring medical care.
 

tracy

House Member
Nov 10, 2005
3,500
48
48
California
That's one way to look at it I guess. I don't believe in providing futile care (medical resources with no ability to benefit the patient), but I don't think resources used to try to help people are wasted. One of my uncles has just been diagnosed as terminal. I'm sure he'll use lots of resources in the time he has left, all of them hospice/palliative care. It's money well spent IMO.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
I always heard the last 6 months, but either way, what else would you expect? People who are dying are usually very sick. Very sick people need medical resources very much.

I laugh a bit because my patients are mostly the opposite. I've sent home countless million dollar babies in my time. I can't imagine them racking up more medical bills over the rest of their lives compared to their first 6 months.

The saying I've heard (if you can call it a saying) is the first six months and the last six months.