Date: Fri 17-Sep-1999
Date: Fri 17-Sep-1999
Publication: Bee
Author: STEVEB
Quick Words:
Blumenthal-ambulance-hospital
Full Text:
Attorney General Probes Effects Of Hospital Policies On Ambulance Volunteers
BY STEVE BIGHAM
State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal has joined the ranks of those who
are questioning the practices of Danbury Hospital and their effect on the
local volunteer ambulance corps.
In a recent letter to First Selectman Herb Rosenthal, Mr Blumenthal outlined a
number of issues which "implicate numerous laws and regulations." The attorney
general's office had been contacted by US Congressman Jim Maloney (5th
District) after several area towns filed complaints.
"Maybe it was just coincidence, but it appeared that the not-for-profit side
of Danbury Hospital was helping the profit side," Mr Rosenthal explained to
his fellow selectmen Monday night. The for-profit side Business Systems, Inc
(BSI) is a subsidiary of Danbury Hospital which manages Danbury Ambulance.
Mr Blumenthal has assigned Special Counsel Richard Keough to investigate the
following issues:
Danbury Hospital's practices of restocking ambulances;
Danbury Hospital's protocol that seemingly results in the designation of a
higher percentage of ambulance responses as needing life support assistance;
Danbury Hospital's recognition of EMT training only if such is performed by
BSI;
The increasing use of paramedic ambulance response rather than paramedic
intercepts; and
The exclusive use of Danbury Ambulance by Danbury Hospital for non-emergency
transports from the hospital.
The hospital's practice of not restocking ambulances appears to be of biggest
concern to the Newtown Volunteer Ambulance Corps. This policy is costing the
corps $20,000 a year.
Hospital president Frank J. Kelly addressed that issue in a September 3 letter
to Mr Rosenthal. As explanation for the hospital's "no restock" policy, Mr
Kelly pointed to an anti-kickback law which prohibits restocking. However, Mr
Kelly said, the Health Care Financing Administration is currently rewriting
regulations which will permit ambulance restocking.
"Once the regulations are adopted, we will have the opportunity to work with
local ambulance companies to develop procedures that comply with the new
regulations," he said.
Mr Rosenthal was not impressed. He wasted little time in responding, pointing
out that the law was designed to stop one hospital from providing perks to
entice an ambulance to bring patients there rather than to another hospital.
However in this case, Danbury Hospital is the only hospital serving the area.
The first selectman said he will be pleased with the change. But he added that
the other five hospitals in the state's Northwest Region have already been
restocking their volunteer ambulance services as long as those organizations
do not change patients for transport.
"It is unfortunate that Danbury Hospital has chosen to interpret the
anti-kickback law so literally which has worked to the financial benefit of
the hospital and to the detriment of the volunteer ambulance services," Mr
Rosenthal said in the letter.
The first selectman encouraged Mr Kelly to contact his colleagues at other
regional hospitals to get their reason, "so that you don't have to wait until
the regulations are adopted to make the changes they have already enacted."
A spokesperson for the attorney general's office said investigators are
reviewing the allegations made by area volunteer ambulance associations. Mr
Keough is reviewing a number of laws to determine if there were any violations
to anti-trust laws and/or public health laws.
Last month, Newtown signed an agreement with Danbury Ambulance that ensures
the for-profit ambulance service will not attempt to transport Newtown
patients. It will provide paramedic service only.
The Newtown Volunteer Ambulance Corps is resolved to ward off any further
threats from the for-profit service, which is now managed by Danbury Hospital.
Private ambulance services charge as much as $450 per patient transport.
Newtown's volunteer service charges nothing.