Just to point out and discuss another common theme on these threads----that UHC advantage restricts my choices so I cannot go see "the best".
There are 135 pages of participating physicians and just about every hospital in the region their handbook. It should not be all that hard to find a quality specialist. There are some hospitals, such as Shands and Mayo that do not participate. If you are already hooked into that system you have a tough choice
Now for a word about "the best":
Let's pick on cardiology as an example. There are 27,076 cardiologists in the US, 1854 in Florida. Only one can be "the best". But he/she cannot see 330 million patients, so somebody gets "second best", and third best, and so on down to 27,000th "best". There are minimum standards they all have to meet, I think the standard is too low, but I also understand that if the bar is set too high it will affect access to care.
So let's say you are "lucky" enough to get an appointment with "the best" cardiologist in the country. You will probably find that he is a zero personality academic jerk who pawns you off on his assistants as he rushes off to his research lab, or to his office to write his next paper for the NEJM, or to fulfill his teaching responsibilities. So why does he have a practice at all, you may ask:
1) It may be a requirement of his faculty position
2) It is fertile grounds to find new and unusual CASES. Note the word "cases", since in his world, you are not a patient, you are a "case"
3) It is fertile ground for him to find people to sign up for his latest experimental drug or procedure. That now makes you a "guinea pig" instead of a "case"
As far as my own care goes, give me a solid above average caring and personable cardiologist, say number 6 or 7000th on the list. I'll take him over "the best" any day.
I'd be interested if the other retired physicians and nurses agree with this assessment.
|