Question

Tony, a 91-year-old veteran of World War ll, has lived in a big city all of his life and has used Veteran Administration (VAI) facilities for healthcare that are free under his VA coverage. He also has a small residence in another nearby state where he spends weekends. One weekend, while in this nearby state, Tony fell and cut his arm and hit his head. A neighbor applied a pressure dressing to his bleeding arm and then took him t a nearby emergency room. The ER started an IV and sutured the cut on his arm. The ER also administered an EKG, which detected a heart problem. Tony was then admitted to the hospital. When she returned home, the neighbor who had taken Tony to the hospital noticed that she had blood on her clothing. When the neighbor visited Tony the next day in the hospital, she found that he was on isolation and all visitors had to wear gowns and masks. She asked his nurse why he was on isolation. The nurse asked for, and Tony gave, permission to discuss his situation with the neighbor. The nurse told the neighbor that Tony tested positive for MRSA. Tony, who was discussed in the previous case, returns to a VA hospital in the city for his preventive care exam. He is supplied with samples of medications to use for various medical conditions. He does not take his records from his doctor or emergency room visit in the nearby state to show to his doctor and hospital located there. a. What are the risks of this behavior? b. Could the excellent care he receives at both hospitals actually harm Tony in anyway? c. Under the Affordable Care Act, could this problem of duplication of services be avoided.

Answer 1

a. Yes this behaviour is risky as she may get double dose of same medication and that will have adverse impact on her health.

b. Yes it may harm , as past history of treatment is important for current treatment. So ther may be new prescription of such medicines that may be same or interact with previous ones. This may have deadly consequences.

c. Ni affordable care act doesnt avoid this problem of duplication as this is the loophole of this act.