|
Post by AussieMeg on Aug 18, 2014 3:33:21 GMT
I was in Japan for my appedectomy and I was in for about 3 weeks. Not kidding! I was hit by a truck the following year (off my bicycle) and I was in for 2 weeks. That is just normal for there. A C section is a month's stay. No questions asked. A month stay for a C section?!?!?! I'm all for giving women time for recovery but that just seems waaaaaaaaaaay over the top. Who would even want to stay in hospital that long?
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 18, 2014 18:09:57 GMT
My sister had a double mastectomy outpatient I had my mastectomy (one side only) outpatient ... I know it's considered hugely offensive that this is how they do it at some hospitals, but I wanted to go home after mine. It really wasn't any worse/harder to recover from than the lumpectomy I'd had a few weeks earlier. I would have been miserable staying in the hospital overnight. If they had tried to keep me, I would have been resistant.I wasn't in any pain to speak of. The only special care required afterwards was emptying the drains for a few days, and that was no big deal. For my mom to do.
|
|
|
Post by cadoodlebug on Aug 18, 2014 18:30:16 GMT
Lucy, you make a good point. Having someone to help out/care for you at home is huge.
ETA: When I had my DS he was 3 1/2 weeks early so my sister couldn't get up here from San Diego for a week. We managed but I was sure happy when she arrived. DH says the car hadn't even stopped when he pulled into the garage before she jumped out to greet her new nephew. I miss her.
|
|
|
Post by mdoc on Aug 18, 2014 18:52:14 GMT
When my oldest was born I was in the hospital for less time than they'd allow now. She was born in 1994 by c-section, and my insurance company only paid for 48 hours. I was sick with a terrible cold (and sneezing/coughing does NOT pair well with an abdominal incision), but out the door I went anyway. She was born Monday; I was discharged early Wednesday morning. Things had changed by the time my younger two were born in 1996 and 1999, but I didn't have a cold for their births and left on the 2nd day even though I could have stayed two more days because I'd had c-sections. I so wish I could have stayed even one more day when my oldest was born - I really was in no condition to go home with an infant.
|
|
|
Post by compwalla on Aug 18, 2014 19:03:22 GMT
Hospitals are paid by DRG coding, has nothing to do with infection rates of the facilities, disrupted sleep etc. It's based on a standard rate of time to treat a particular group of diseases/illness, etc. Unless there are comorbidities or something occurs to prolong a stay, you get X amount of time and if you stay longer the hospital absorbs the cost. So, they want you out in the time specified for pay. Sounds cruel,but it really is how it is. It's not personal. The average length of stay for a given DRG isn't a number pulled out of the air, though. It's based on measuring the outcome for patients with similar DRGs and evaluating whether a longer or shorter stay resulting in either a hospital acquired condition (not present on admission) or in a readmission. There is a sweet spot in the middle between increasing the risk of a hospital acquired infection - which is a real risk, not something people are just scared of that doesn't really happen - and decreasing the risk of a readmission. The more data we have on outcomes, the better they get at hitting the sweet spot.
|
|