Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's a question for all the great posters on this board:
I currently see a rheumatologist in a healthcare system. I've had 3 appointments, and I'm increasingly dissatisfied and want to change to a different rheumatologist. There's only one rheumatology department in this healthcare system, so it would be a new provider in the same department.
So, I called the scheduling people and asked what the process was for changing doctors in that department.
Here's what I was told:
1. The patient has to initiate the change by talking with the current provider, either in person or in email, explain why they want to change, and get "permission" to be "released" to another doctor.
2. Then the patient has to contact another doctor in the department to see if he/she will take you as a new patient. If yes, then the patient has to communicate that to the current doctor, who will "release" you.
3. If the potential new doctor says no, then I guess the patient has to keep contacting other doctors to find one who will accept you.
Here's my problem: I don't think patients should be put in a position of being the "bad guy" and having to explain to a doctor why you want to change providers. If you're moving to a different location and need to move your healthcare, that's one thing.
If you don't like the current doctor, or if he/she just doesn't meet your needs, or the doctor is a jerk, then I can't imagine having that conversation with a doctor face-to-face. And if you try to use email, those communications are all part of the medical chart, so that becomes another issue. Any provider can view those emails in the chart.
I don't think patients should have to navigate the system that way. What's to stop the current doctor from communicating with a potential new doctor and saying negative things before you've even been seen? Especially if they're not happy you are switching.
Personally, I think that the department should facilitate a transfer for the patient, based on a request from the patient, like a clinic administrator, for example. And any information communicated about why a patient wants to change providers should not be communicated to either the old or the new doctor. In my situation, that's not possible.
Has anyone tried to change providers in a specialty clinic, like cardiology or rheumatology or neurology, for example? If so, what was the process?
Primary care is different. It's easy to change, and patients don't have to give a reason. But this specialty clinic doesn't make it easy and puts the patient in a bad position, I think.
Here's a question for all the great posters on this board:
I currently see a rheumatologist in a healthcare system. I've had 3 appointments, and I'm increasingly dissatisfied and want to change to a different rheumatologist. There's only one rheumatology department in this healthcare system, so it would be a new provider in the same department.
So, I called the scheduling people and asked what the process was for changing doctors in that department.
Here's what I was told:
1. The patient has to initiate the change by talking with the current provider, either in person or in email, explain why they want to change, and get "permission" to be "released" to another doctor.
2. Then the patient has to contact another doctor in the department to see if he/she will take you as a new patient. If yes, then the patient has to communicate that to the current doctor, who will "release" you.
3. If the potential new doctor says no, then I guess the patient has to keep contacting other doctors to find one who will accept you.
Here's my problem: I don't think patients should be put in a position of being the "bad guy" and having to explain to a doctor why you want to change providers. If you're moving to a different location and need to move your healthcare, that's one thing.
If you don't like the current doctor, or if he/she just doesn't meet your needs, or the doctor is a jerk, then I can't imagine having that conversation with a doctor face-to-face. And if you try to use email, those communications are all part of the medical chart, so that becomes another issue. Any provider can view those emails in the chart.
I don't think patients should have to navigate the system that way. What's to stop the current doctor from communicating with a potential new doctor and saying negative things before you've even been seen? Especially if they're not happy you are switching.
Personally, I think that the department should facilitate a transfer for the patient, based on a request from the patient, like a clinic administrator, for example. And any information communicated about why a patient wants to change providers should not be communicated to either the old or the new doctor. In my situation, that's not possible.
Has anyone tried to change providers in a specialty clinic, like cardiology or rheumatology or neurology, for example? If so, what was the process?
Primary care is different. It's easy to change, and patients don't have to give a reason. But this specialty clinic doesn't make it easy and puts the patient in a bad position, I think.
Remember, YOU are the customer. If you can't explain why a product YOU PURCHASED isn't working for you, you're less likely to get a different product, a credit, or a refund. Don't think if this as being "the bad guy". Think of it as being assertive; responsible for your own care. The service can't be expected to improve or solve some internal service disconnect if you don't tell them what's not working. They are not mind readers. Give them a chance to craft a better fit for your needs. This is supposed to be a partnership, not a confrontation. Don't approach it like that. If all you want is to complain but not fix anything you can do that too, but chances are not much is going to get better. IME, if I can't or won't articulate what the problem is for the person who might have created it, I may not even be able to clarify it for myself. Increases the likelihood that it won't get solved. That being said, if I've had some issue with a specialist I address it with them first. Usually works...the need to switch has usually gone away unless they simply can't provide what seems necessary.
Remember, YOU are the customer. If you can't explain why a product YOU PURCHASED isn't working for you, you're less likely to get a different product, a credit, or a refund. Don't think if this as being "the bad guy". Think of it as being assertive; responsible for your own care. The service can't be expected to improve or solve some internal service disconnect if you don't tell them what's not working. They are not mind readers. Give them a chance to craft a better fit for your needs. This is supposed to be a partnership, not a confrontation. Don't approach it like that. If all you want is to complain but not fix anything you can do that too, but chances are not much is going to get better.
I definitely agree that medicine should be a partnership. Unfortunately, that is not even close to what is happening in this case, with a top-down, dictatorial jerk (the doctor talks, the patient listens and obeys).
I can certainly explain why I want to change doctors: The current dr is a gruff, dismissive a-hole, who doesn't listen or answer questions. But I certainly can't say that in a face-to-face meeting, nor do I want to ever see this person again, quite honestly.
My point is that I don't think patients should be put in a position to have to convince the doctor they currently have that they want to change providers. I'm happy to be tactful (not a good fit, not a good match, etc), but this dr is a jerk. I don't want to see him again, and he's certainly not going to change his personality or style of practicing medicine.
Plus, I doubt any insurance company is paying for an appointment to get a divorce. It takes months to get appointments in this clinic, and I need to make a change to a provider that is a "partnership."
I would prefer to be able to make the change through a department admin process.
I'll be interested to hear from people on this thread how the process worked for them in changing doctors in a specialty clinic.
I changed doctors in my cardiology group. All I did was call and ask for Dr B when I made my next appointment. The staff member noted I'd seen Dr A previously, to which I simply replied, "Yes, I did, and I would like to change to Dr B, please." She asked why, I told her I "didn't appreciate being made to wait over 3 hours past my appointment time to see the doc because traffic held him up at lunch, and his online reviews indicate this is his normal way of operating." She made the appointment with Dr. B. I suspect I was not the first patient to tell her that about Dr A.
Call again, ask for a different doc, and tell the scheduler what you just told us:
I can certainly explain why I want to change doctors: The current dr is a gruff, dismissive a-hole, who doesn't listen or answer questions. But I certainly can't say that in a face-to-face meeting, nor do I want to ever see this person again, quite honestly.
My point is that I don't think patients should be put in a position to have to convince the doctor they currently have that they want to change providers. I'm happy to be tactful (not a good fit, not a good match, etc), but this dr is a jerk. I don't want to see him again, and he's certainly not going to change his personality or style of practicing medicine.
I doubt you will be the first patient in the practice changing docs, although you might be the first honest one
Seriously? How about REMEMBER that they are the PATIENT? What is going on with the healthcare system? I'm sickened to the core that the rich in some money-centered countries don't care enough to pay higher taxes to the government to have poor and middle-class patients enjoy some semblance of dignity!
The health of our country has turned into a used car.
You want the patient to go to Medical School too, in order to be "responsible" and inform themselves then? He should probably go to business school while we are at it, so that he can train himself by the bootstraps on how to be a better "customer" of money-centered healthcare. Better yet, he should ask the hospital to pay him for his efforts as a CONSULTANT given that they are not mind-readers. It's "a partnership" after all, right? So a "partner" is supposed to receive equal compensation. The people responsible for this are the entirety of The People. Starting with the elected officials in the pockets of the wealthy's lobbyists in order to have enough propaganda to win re-election. The buck stops there, including for healthcare. Providing free consultation to the hospital is not going to help that hospital be a rugged individualist "person." (see Citizens United court case defining corporations as persons with equal protections as persons).
A great example of how to take something out of context.
I expect the Drs in that group have a gentleman's agreement not to poach each other's patients. This is to protect the Drs like the one OP is having trouble with. Usually the more 'well liked by their patients' Drs do not agree with the policy 100% but don't want to alienate their partners.
It is unreasonable to ask a patient to explain in person or by email why they want to change Drs. This group is not putting the patient first.
OP, you should be rather insistent with the scheduler that you want to change Drs. I agree with complaining to whoever owns the group. You might even consider complaining to the state board.
I expect the Drs in that group have a gentleman's agreement not to poach each other's patients. This is to protect the Drs like the one OP is having trouble with. Usually the more 'well liked by their patients' Drs do not agree with the policy 100% but don't want to alienate their partners.
It is unreasonable to ask a patient to explain in person or by email why they want to change Drs. This group is not putting the patient first.
OP, you should be rather insistent with the scheduler that you want to change Drs. I agree with complaining to whoever owns the group. You might even consider complaining to the state board.
I agree. Unfortunately, this is a large healthcare system, not a small practice. There is one rheumatology department and all the doctors in that dept (26 of them) obviously know each other.
Everyone (schedulers) I've talked to has told me the same thing: In order to change doctors, I have to email the current doctor and "ask" to be transferred to Dr. X. Then the current doctor has to "release" me and also the current doctor has to let me know if Dr. X is "taking new patients." Terrible system. Busy doctors certainly don't have time to contact their colleagues about taking new patients.
After the coronavirus stuff settles down, I will talk to someone else higher up about this system, which, in my opinion, is not patient-centered at all. It's ludicrous to put a patient in this position.
Thanks for all the good comments.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
