Parkview Regional Medical Center

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/12/15) */ Contact Name and Title: Marie M [redacted] Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX Contact Email: [redacted] @parkview.com The patient's husband contends that his wife presented to Parkview's Emergency Department on July 22, for dizziness and was "misdiagnosed based upon lab work." He explained: "On that date my wife presented to Parkview Emergency for dizziness and racing heart beatHer blood work completed in the ER showed she was in fact fighting an infectionThese elevated readings on her blood work were never addressed at all...It seemed to us her blood work was never readThe medical advice did not address her infection." The patient's husband's allegation that his wife was misdiagnosed based on lab work is vagueEven so, Parkview disagreesBoard-certified physicians, including a professional emergency physician and a Cardiologist, evaluated the patient and concluded there was no misdiagnosis based on lab workSpecifically, the white cell differential is only minimally outside of the range and there was no elevation of the white blood cell count at allThe professional interpretation of the blood work and laboratory results in light of the patient's presenting symptoms and physical examination is that there was no indication of an infection The husband's allegation that the results of the blood work were not reviewed by the physicians is patently falseThe results were reviewed by the physicians, who cared for his wifeThe further allegation that the medical advice provided to the patient did not address an infection is correct because there was no evidence of an infectionAgain, the patient's husband's belief that her main condition was an infection is wrong, misguided and ill-informedOn the issue of infection, neither the patient, nor her husband, have presented Parkview with a written professional opinion that is contrary to that of the Emergency physician or the Cardiologist, who evaluated the patient The patient's husband correctly states that the patient was directed to "drink more water and increase her sodium intake"This was based on the Cardiology consultation, final diagnosis, and treatment recommendations Parkview certainly regrets that it has been unable to resolve the dispute over the alleged misdiagnosis and the related bill for treatmentHowever, this is not due to a lack of effort on Parkview's partFrom mid-August to the present, Parkview has been trying to resolve this matter The patient's husband disputes Parkview's bill for services, saying: Parkview "deceived the patient and him about the charges." Parkview did not deceive the patient about the chargesMoreover, Parkview conducted a thorough and comprehensive revenue integrity audit to look for any errors in the coding and/or billing for the services providedThe audit verified that the charges for the services rendered to the patient were accurately coded and billed out correctly in accordance with the law Parkview has gone to great effort to understand the patient's husband's complaints and to investigate and respond to themThe patient gave her husband permission to contact the Patient Advocates at Parkview to discuss concerns about the billOn 8/17/2015, the husband contacted Parkview and said he is disputing the charges for the ER visit because his wife was misdiagnosed and she was fighting an infection Parkview failed to diagnoseThe Patient Advocates sent this to the Patient Accounting, Quality, Risk Management, Cardiology, and the Emergency Department for review and commentAll of these departments thoroughly and thoughtfully reviewed the care provided and the billingThe consensus that no error occurred in evaluating, treating, or billing the patientThis response was clearly communicated to the patient and her husband in writingDespite all of this, the patient's husband remained dissatisfied so the case was reviewed again by ParkviewIn fact, the medical director of the Emergency Department reviewed this case twice and determined: "this patient had no infectionShe had vitals including a temperature of 98.2, white blood cell countThe only ablab result was a slight elevation above of the relative neutrophils of 81%This is completely non-specific and means nothing." The ED physician offered that this patient's primary care doctor or nurse practitioner can call him to discuss the laboratory analysisTo date, no one has contacted him The patient's husband contends Parkview did not explain the total charges and never told them to expect a bill from another companyParkview followed its practice, which is consistent with the standard practice in the industry with respect to its billing for medical servicesOften hospital charges and professional (physician) charges are billed separately Parkview is very sorry that the patient's husband is of the opinion that the patient was over-billed for the services providedThe services provided were indicated based on the patient's presentation, appropriate, and did not deviate from the standard of careThe billing was correct The patient's husband has asked that Parkview simply accept as full payment the amount that has been remittedParkview does not view this as the proper resolution and declines to accept the partial payment as payment-in-fullTo do so would be unfair to Parkview and to other similarly-situated patients OFFER: The patient's husband has asked that Parkview simply accept as full payment the amount that has been remittedParkview does not view this as the proper resolution and declines to accept the partial payment as payment-in-fullTo do so would be unfair to Parkview and to other similarly-situated patients Parkview is willing to have a billing and coding expert review the revenue integrity audit with the patient and/or her husband to explain it and answer any questions they may have about itParkview is willing to set up a payment plan and accept the balance due over a 12-month term, beginning Jan 1, through Dec 31, Parkview is willing to work with the patient and/or her husband to remove the bill from the collections agency Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 12, 2016/01/25) */ Parkview states: "The only ablab result was a slight elevation above of the relative neutrophils of 81%This is completely non-specific and means nothing"This statement is patently untrue and we have proofParkview is attempting to cover up their poor review of this case and improper handling of a sick patientIn fact, in addition to the above relative neutrophils her lab results also discovered low relative lymphocytes and high absolute neutrophilsHer lab results were in fact never addressed or were simply overlooked by hasty doctorsMy next step will be to contact the state attorney general if there is no remediation of the charges

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2016/04/20) */
Parkview spoke to the patient on several occasions, however Medicare could not be billed until Medicare's system was updated with the retroactive coverage datesOnce the patient's outpatient Medicare coverage was backdated, Parkview filed all
of the claims to MedicareTwo accounts are still pending a Medicare paymentAnother account for an immunization was denied as not a covered benefit under Medicare and the patient owes *** Two other hospital accounts that were paid by Medicare have patient balances of *** and *** for coinsurance amountsOf the accounts retrospectively billed to Medicare, the patient currently owes *** which is the sum of *** as explained aboveThis response addresses only the accounts retrospectively covered by Medicare

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/10/31) */
Contact Name and Title: *** *** Dir PFS
Contact Phone: ***
Contact Email: ***@Parkview.com
Patient's surgery date was 2/16/He signed a consent form stating the nature and that the purpose of the procedure had
been explained to himThe consent form also indicates no guarantees or promises have been made concerning the results obtainedThe After visit summary also tells him to contact the office if any questions/concerns after the procedure
In August the patient phoned the patient advocate at Parkview with the same concern listed in this Revdex.com complaintThe above information was explained to the patient at that timeThe patient was asked why he canceled future appointments where alternative pain relief measures could be discussedThe patient replied he could not afford to see the doctorThe patient is over income for Parkview's Financial Assistance and the patient did not set up a payment plan to resolve the balance and his account was placed with a collection agencyThe patient is encouraged to stay in contact with the collection agency and maintain a payment plan to resolve the balanceThe collection agency will be contacted to remove the account from the credit reporting agency files as long as the patient continues the agreed upon payment plan with the collection agency and ultimately pays the balance through the payment plan
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2016/11/12) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I do not agree with this response, I have every piece of paper that was concerns this procedure and no one ever said to me this procedure could only last weeks...something is wrong here and I am going to find out what...I think the public and insurance company is getting a raw deal hereI have had several calls from different people from this procedure and they all say the same thing over and over...not very happy at allI want to know why they can turn this over to a collection agency and tell me to make payment to them but I can't make payments to the hospital...this whole ordeal has really made me mad..I tried to set up payments but they wanted over *** per month...The amount they turned over to a collection agency was *** to which I have never received a bill..the hospital said they billed me times for that amount? I really find it hard to believe I got billed times and never got them in the mail and why would you turn *** over to a collection agency when the bills I have received are for over *** ??? At this point I want to know what the bottom dollar is to pay this bill off? If I am told nothing is being taken off then I am going to hire and attorney..I have a friend that had this done at same hospital and same doctor and wants to do these injections times a yearAt *** a per injection I'm not sure why you wouldn't just prescribe pain pills? Like I said I don't appreciate being used...I was NOT told what thus would cost or that it could only last weeks..I want to be done with this one way or anotherThank you for your time
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2016/11/17) */
Parkview Health Patient Financial Services phoned the patient and offered to return the account from the collection agency, remove any report from his credit history, and meet him half way in extending his payment plan to a 24-month payoutthe patient stated that he could not pay his account in payments and to go ahead and leave the account at the collection agencythe patient advised he is contacting an attorneyParkview's offer stands should the patient change his mind and want to set up a 24-month payment planHe will need to do so within the next days

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/12/15) */
Contact Name and Title: Marie M [redacted]
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@parkview.com
The patient's husband contends that his wife presented to Parkview's Emergency Department on July 22, 2015 for dizziness and was...

"misdiagnosed based upon lab work." He explained: "On that date my wife presented to Parkview Emergency for dizziness and racing heart beat. Her blood work completed in the ER showed she was in fact fighting an infection. These elevated readings on her blood work were never addressed at all...It seemed to us her blood work was never read. The medical advice did not address her infection."
The patient's husband's allegation that his wife was misdiagnosed based on lab work is vague. Even so, Parkview disagrees. Board-certified physicians, including a professional emergency physician and a Cardiologist, evaluated the patient and concluded there was no misdiagnosis based on lab work. Specifically, the white cell differential is only minimally outside of the normal range and there was no elevation of the white blood cell count at all. The professional interpretation of the blood work and laboratory results in light of the patient's presenting symptoms and physical examination is that there was no indication of an infection.
The husband's allegation that the results of the blood work were not reviewed by the physicians is patently false. The results were reviewed by the physicians, who cared for his wife. The further allegation that the medical advice provided to the patient did not address an infection is correct because there was no evidence of an infection. Again, the patient's husband's belief that her main condition was an infection is wrong, misguided and ill-informed. On the issue of infection, neither the patient, nor her husband, have presented Parkview with a written professional opinion that is contrary to that of the Emergency physician or the Cardiologist, who evaluated the patient.
The patient's husband correctly states that the patient was directed to "drink more water and increase her sodium intake". This was based on the Cardiology consultation, final diagnosis, and treatment recommendations.
Parkview certainly regrets that it has been unable to resolve the dispute over the alleged misdiagnosis and the related bill for treatment. However, this is not due to a lack of effort on Parkview's part. From mid-August to the present, Parkview has been trying to resolve this matter.
The patient's husband disputes Parkview's bill for services, saying: Parkview "deceived the patient and him about the charges." Parkview did not deceive the patient about the charges. Moreover, Parkview conducted a thorough and comprehensive revenue integrity audit to look for any errors in the coding and/or billing for the services provided. The audit verified that the charges for the services rendered to the patient were accurately coded and billed out correctly in accordance with the law.
Parkview has gone to great effort to understand the patient's husband's complaints and to investigate and respond to them. The patient gave her husband permission to contact the Patient Advocates at Parkview to discuss concerns about the bill. On 8/17/2015, the husband contacted Parkview and said he is disputing the charges for the ER visit because his wife was misdiagnosed and she was fighting an infection Parkview failed to diagnose. The Patient Advocates sent this to the Patient Accounting, Quality, Risk Management, Cardiology, and the Emergency Department for review and comment. All of these departments thoroughly and thoughtfully reviewed the care provided and the billing. The consensus that no error occurred in evaluating, treating, or billing the patient. This response was clearly communicated to the patient and her husband in writing. Despite all of this, the patient's husband remained dissatisfied so the case was reviewed again by Parkview. In fact, the medical director of the Emergency Department reviewed this case twice and determined: "this patient had no infection. She had normal vitals including a temperature of 98.2, normal white blood cell count. The only abnormal lab result was a slight elevation above normal of the relative neutrophils of 81%. This is completely non-specific and means nothing." The ED physician offered that this patient's primary care doctor or nurse practitioner can call him to discuss the laboratory analysis. To date, no one has contacted him.
The patient's husband contends Parkview did not explain the total charges and never told them to expect a bill from another company. Parkview followed its normal practice, which is consistent with the standard practice in the industry with respect to its billing for medical services. Often hospital charges and professional (physician) charges are billed separately.
Parkview is very sorry that the patient's husband is of the opinion that the patient was over-billed for the services provided. The services provided were indicated based on the patient's presentation, appropriate, and did not deviate from the standard of care. The billing was correct.
The patient's husband has asked that Parkview simply accept as full payment the amount that has been remitted. Parkview does not view this as the proper resolution and declines to accept the partial payment as payment-in-full. To do so would be unfair to Parkview and to other similarly-situated patients.

OFFER:
The patient's husband has asked that Parkview simply accept as full payment the amount that has been remitted. Parkview does not view this as the proper resolution and declines to accept the partial payment as payment-in-full. To do so would be unfair to Parkview and to other similarly-situated patients.
Parkview is willing to have a billing and coding expert review the revenue integrity audit with the patient and/or her husband to explain it and answer any questions they may have about it. Parkview is willing to set up a payment plan and accept the balance due over a 12-month term, beginning Jan 1, 2016 through Dec 31, 2016. Parkview is willing to work with the patient and/or her husband to remove the bill from the collections agency.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 12, 2016/01/25) */
Parkview states: "The only abnormal lab result was a slight elevation above normal of the relative neutrophils of 81%. This is completely non-specific and means nothing". This statement is patently untrue and we have proof. Parkview is attempting to cover up their poor review of this case and improper handling of a sick patient. In fact, in addition to the above normal relative neutrophils her lab results also discovered low relative lymphocytes and high absolute neutrophils. Her lab results were in fact never addressed or were simply overlooked by hasty doctors. My next step will be to contact the state attorney general if there is no remediation of the charges.

They wait until the last minute to cancel or schedule an appointment for a cancer patient. Then the nurse says she will call back and never does. We do not have a car so we have to go thru Cancer Services for transportation, and they wait to long so Cancer Service's can't be called back, but they had a whole week to get things starightened out. So we had to call his ride to cancel after I called the hospital to find out if his port surgery was cancelled, which it was, but it wasn't rescheduled. The nurse [redacted] at Parkview Noble never called back for the port reshcheduling or for the port. Tired of doing their work for them. Total lack of communication between the doctors, nurses, and patients for the chemotherapy centers.