14 ms·

Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

298 points by lyk 9y ago

doorty 9y ago
They (uber/lyft) work well for my dog emergencies too.
- lstyls 9y ago
  Drivers don't have issues with an uninvited dog passenger? As a dog owner, I find this surprising. But if drivers are OK with it it would be a great option for me because I don't own a car.
  - smelendez 9y ago
    It depends on the city, culturally, and it's a good idea to call and ask first. Obviously if it's a service dog they're required to transport it, but from knowing people with service dogs, it's still worth calling because some drivers are allergic and would rather you call another
    - amelius 9y ago
      > if it's a service dog they're required to transport it But Uber is not a cab service; instead, they are trying to evade all the rules.
  - cm2012 9y ago
    Most drivers are okay if it seems like you have your pet neat. I take my cats in carriers all the time, but would never take my parents super sheddy dog.
  - WhyNotHugo 9y ago
    I've taken my cats (in their carriers) to the ER on Uber several times. Generally, they don't have any issues and are quite empathic to the situation.
cardiffspaceman 9y ago
We can view this as either a positive for how Uber works or a negative for how taxi cabs work. If the pervasive means of transportation other than ambulances are unresponsive or expensive compared to ambulances, then obviously ambulances are the choice. One might also drive oneself, get a ride from a friend or family member, or hope that a city bus will be fast enough. An Uber ride could be faster than a ride from friend or family and safer than driving oneself.
- CydeWeys 9y ago
  I took a taxi to an urgent care clinic when I broke my ankle in a bike accident. Would've taken an Uber or Lyft if taxis hadn't been around, but there were a lot of them. Whatever was fastest. I really wasn't worried about saving a few bucks on a ride at that point.
an4rchy 9y ago
I've been wondering about this for a while but, is there a reason why Uber or an alternative cannot/should not get into the Ambulance space, if it were able to get qualified staff. I feel like Ambulances/Hospitals charge way too much and using the app/tech at a basic level to connect the ambulances with patients addresses may be a good start for everyone and also the increase in supply may reduce costs.
- switch007 9y ago
  Are paramedics/ambulances so unregulated in the US that it's /not/ a bat-shit crazy idea to suggest Uber Ambulances?
  - TylerE 9y ago
    Not really. There are plenty of private ambulance services in the US. They generally deal with things like transporting a medically frail person to see a doctor in a different city, things like that. Non emergency, mostly. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/01/31/style/private-ambulances-when-to-use-them.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/1987/01/31/style/private-ambulances-w... (yes, over 30 years old, but most of it still holds true)
    - switch007 9y ago
      Thanks for the link!
    - newfoundglory 9y ago
      I didn't realize there were public ambulance services in the US. When I was hit by a car I was definitely taken to hospital by a private ambulance as an emergency patient.
  - Spooky23 9y ago
    Nah, there’s certification and usually contracts with municipalities for response to emergencies. It’s a real mix though... paid fire dapartments, volunteers, and private operators all respond to emergencies.
pixelbill 9y ago
I'm curious, this article spins the whole "lower rates of ambulance usage" as a positive thing, but is there enough evidence to say that? From the article: _______ With demand for ambulances decreased by available Uber drivers, emergency personnel have been able reach critical patients faster while also applying necessary treatment on the way to the hospital, according to a new economic study from the University of Kansas: "Given that even a reduction of a few minutes can drastically improve survival rates for serious conditions, this could be associated with a substantial welfare improvement." The study investigated ambulance rates in 766 U.S. cities from 43 different states. Taking into account the timelines of when Uber entered each city, the researchers found that the app reduced per capita ambulance usage rates by around 7 percent. _______ Okay they claim the study says "emergency personnel have been able reach critical patients faster" but decreased usage does not necessarily equal faster response time. It would have been much more solid if they actually looked at the ambulance response time, not just how many are being used. (My skeptical side leads me to think this is because that data-set didn't match their narrative.) There is also the question of: Is this actually a good thing? Are those 7% less people using ambulances all not having serious health issues? Especially when something is wrong, you are often not a good judge of your own health. How many people having chest pain thought it wasn't too bad so they called an Uber instead of an ambulance and died on the way to the hospital? Might not have turned out that way if they just called an ambulance in the first place.. Need more data to decide if this is an Uber propaganda piece.
- djsumdog 9y ago
  I agree. 7% is a really low number, and people shouldn't be afraid to call an ambulance just to save money. That's fucked up. Especially with comments talking about strokes and heart attacks. In most western countries, this isn't even an issue. I honestly question of the numbers are even statically significant, but even if they are, this is seriously fucked up and not something Americans should be proud of at all!
- jaclaz 9y ago
  >Need more data to decide if this is an Uber propaganda piece. Well, they could ask Uber for all the rides they made to the ER and see if - roughly - the numbers match with the claimed 7% reduction of ambulance calls. I mean, a lot of people may have - coincidentally in the same period Uber came to the cities - become aware of the high cost of ambulance, or lost their insurance or whatever other reason and used taxis or some other means. After all the study takes into account what happened over very roughly 3 years 2012-2015, how many people read (say): http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/23/business/la-fi-healthcare-watch-20130825 http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/23/business/la-fi-healt... http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/health/think-the-er-was-expensive-look-at-the-ambulance-bill.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/health/think-the-er-was-ex... If there was a "penetration rate" (which is not the same thing as "establishing the service") and a direct correlation with roughly the same number of UberX rides to the ER and of less ambulance calls then it would IMHO sound much more credible.
bmelton 9y ago
If you don't get bogged down in details of the service, I see this as generally net good. For many, ambulance rides are prohibitively expensive, and while I certainly wouldn't be cost-conscious taking an ambulance in the event of a seizure or heart attack, for something like a broken arm, or non-life-threatening ailment, an Uber/Lyft/Cab is a good alternative to trying to drive myself. Beyond that, I'd like to see statistics on whether people ride-sharing to emergency rooms / urgent care facilities was freeing up ambulances or causing them to sit idle. I suspect it's the former, which would mean ambulances could be more available for more people with more serious conditions, but I could be wrong.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  NYFD has about 220 ALS units (advanced / requiring a paramedic) and 550 BLS (basic transport, no drugs, etc) units per day. Reducing BLS calls via uber wouldn’t affect availability of ALS units for serious things, but would probably save money.
  - brokensegue 9y ago
    well people deciding between an ambulance or an uber aren't really qualified to make that decision so it wouldn't surprise me if a bunch of people who needs an ALS unit decide to take an uber.
- jessriedel 9y ago
  The number of ambulances will adjust to the demand.
  - matthew349hall 9y ago
    Not really. This works in private markets but in part-government systems such as ambulances there's a few more influences on supply.
- donatj 9y ago
  Six years ago I had something similar to a stoke. I had a relative drive me from work to the ER in outer suburbs because: a) I would literally rather die than pay for an ambulance. I put my money where my mouth was on that. b) I knew from previous experience their ER was far cheaper, cleaner and quicker than the one in the cities. Maybe I am just particularly frugal but I had the presence of mind to consider costs while I could not feel one side of my face. Another time, I needed surgery and called around to get quotes. The place I ended up was something like a quarter the place my doctor wanted to send me.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Spooky23 9y ago
I’d be more interested to see the reduction in medicab or medivan usage. My father had the misfortune of having a stroke, and transporting him via van is outrageous — you’re talking >$250 for a 15 mile drive, in what amounts to a cargo van with zero service beyond driving. It’s one of those weird markets where the pricing is driven by the Medicaid reimbursement, which is a price floor.
- chiefalchemist 9y ago
  Same situation for me, and I've seen the same with regards to price. That said, I also suspect the med transport niche is heavily regulated (a la taxi service). Special training for drivers, insurance, etc. I don't think that covers the full $250; just saying they're not identical to a Uber.
  - kelnos 9y ago
    Right. If the Uber driver fails to get you to the hospital in time to save your life for any reason, they have no liability or consequences whatsoever, because they're not intended to be a life-saving or emergency service. If the ambulance driver screws up in some way, they're in for a world of trouble and legal liability.
- dajohnson89 9y ago
  it's perverse that I find $250 to be a reasonable price, compared to other medical expenses.
  - aquadrop 9y ago
    That's probably if you're actually insured. If not, it will be in thousands.
- bsder 9y ago
  Last time I talked to someone who ran one of these and got out of it, the price is driven primarily by liability insurance. Uber and Lyft can get away with this because they self-insure and amortize over a much larger customer base.
jrlocke 9y ago
I've personally found this to work great, the only exception being the moment of surprise and confusion when I asked the driver to pull around to the emergency entrance.
chiefalchemist 9y ago
Good stat but there's nothing about outcomes. Uber might save money for transportation but how does the lack of a proper ambulance effect outcomes?
- xor1 9y ago
  I imagine most of the cases involving people opting for an Uber instead of an ambulance aren't in obvious risk of dying if they don't make it to the hospital in time. The first things that come to mind are broken bones, lacerations, and severed digits. Then again, there are plenty of things that can be fatal without being readily apparent, especially if the only person making that judgment call is the patient.
  - chiefalchemist 9y ago
    I don't disagree. But let's see the data and not assume. One or two extreme cases could make any savings moot.
m333t 9y ago
Would be nice to have a service like Uber where you have a virtual doctor's visit by phone in the car on the way to the pharmacy or to the hospital if it turns out to be more serious.
- Johnny555 9y ago
  What are you going to do if it turns more serious during the ride? The Uber driver (probably) has no medical training and certainly has no advanced medical equipment, the best he can do is pull over and hope that a real ambulance can meet you at his car before you die. If you have a condition that is so serious that you feel you have to keep in contact with a doctor while you're transported to the hospital in case it gets worse, call an ambulance since they can actually treat you in-route.
joshvm 9y ago
Coming from a country where ambulance usage is free for citizens, it would be interesting to see the stats in Uber cities. The only reason not to call an ambulance here is if you feel it would be unethical (e.g. if you broke your arm and your partner could drive you). EDIT: That is, I imagine you might be able to see whether Uber provides a better alternative than the local cabs. This still holds in US cities though, why is Uber specifically good? Why don't people consider calling their local cab company, which will still be much cheaper than a $250 ride.
- jMyles 9y ago
  > The only reason not to call an ambulance here is if you feel it would be unethical I dunno, maybe you just want to avoid the psychological feeling of urgency and gravity that comes with an ambulance. I think there's something to be said for staying calm and keeping self-control and dignity when facing an emergency situation. If you're bleeding profusely or are in-and-out of consciousness or have a deadly virus, obviously that's different. But what about a broken bone? Or a laceration or burn for which you've already successfully applied first aid? Might you not prefer to stay out of an ambulance in those situations, even if it's free?
  - ComputerGuru 9y ago
    There’s also the question of control. No matter how badly injured, if I’m driving myself or taking a cab, I am still “the boss.” But as soon as EMTs and doctors become involved, that control is lost. In an increasingly authoritarian country/world, where we are expected to give up all rights upon first interaction with persons in a position of power or authority, be it the policeman that graduated yesterday but has the full might of “the boys in blue,” the TSA agent at the check in line, the EMT responding to the call, or the nurse checking you in, it is easy to understand why some people have an aversion to willfully surrendering themselves and their free will so long as an alternative is present. I prefer to not cede what little control I have until I have to. If I want the driver to take the highway and not the local roads, it’s my call. If I want to text while I’m being driven through traffic, it’s my call. If I change my mind and want to go back home to die, well, it’s my call.
will4274 9y ago
A relevant personal anecdote - I hit my head earlier this year and gave myself a concussion, but did not realize it at the time. The next day, I began experiencing severe headaches, sensitivity to noise, sensitivity to light, etc. and decided to go to a hospital. I called an Uber. I'm not sure what I would have done without Uber. I guess I could call a cab, but I don't know that I would have wanted my ride to the hospital to be 30 minutes late, to refuse to turn the music down, and to tell me the credit card reader is broken when I get to my destination and then insist on taking me to an ATM. So I might well have called an ambulance.
- mysterypie 9y ago
  > my ride to the hospital to be 30 minutes late, to refuse to turn the music down, and to tell me the credit card reader is broken As much as I'd like to stick it to taxis because of their decades of price gouging due to being granted a monopoly, I have not had many bad experiences riding a taxi. If I had to put a number on it, I'd say that less than 5% of my taxi rides were in any way unpleasant other than for the cost. What city or country are you in if I might ask? Are taxi experiences really that bad for most people?
  - jowiar 9y ago
    Taxis in cities with decent taxi systems, in a neighborhood with decent taxi coverage, hailed by waving your hand on the side of the road are fine, and getting better by way of competition. I have no qualms with taxis in, ie NYC or DC. Taxi dispatchers, though? Especially in smaller cities? I lost count of the number of times I had a cab no-show when I lived in Pittsburgh.
  - will4274 9y ago
    Taxis are good in NYC. In Binghamton NY, they all tell you the credit card readers are broken at all times of day and insist on driving you to an ATM so they can get paid in cash. In Washington DC, if they think you're drunk, they overcharge you / don't start the meter and the dispatchers always tell you 15 minutes, but then the cabbies just grab other people and you end up needing to call the dispatcher repeatedly to actually get a cab and it usually takes closer to 45 minutes or an hour. And in Ithaca NY, they tell you the credit card reader doesn't work until you say you don't have any cash, and then it's suddenly working.
s_esser 9y ago
Correlation != causation
- djsumdog 9y ago
  Yea, the percentage stated is super low. It might be true, but the data isn't enough to reflect the statement.
- bckygldstn 9y ago
  The title of the NPR article would be more accurate as "Cities See a Reduction in Ambulance Usage After Uber is Introduced". The paper looks at 700 different cities, each with a different Uber market entry time over a two year period. The researchers also control for some seasonality effects. Perhaps more covariates could have been considered, but this seems like a pretty decent design to measure a before/after causal effect.
throwaway0255 9y ago
I injured myself and needed to go to the ER. The injury wasn't life threatening, but I definitely needed to go to the hospital immediately. I called an Uber. I don't have the time or expertise to do the months of legalese and calculus it would take me to understand my insurance policy, so I have no idea how much an ambulance ride would have cost me. $0? $400? $15000? None of those numbers would surprise me. As best I can tell, insurance companies throw a dart to decide whether you're covered or not, and then the healthcare provider makes up some insane number if you aren't. The Uber got me to the hospital faster than an ambulance would have, for less than $10, and I knew it would cost less than $10. The injury, though extremely gruesome and painful, only warranted an x-ray, some tylenol, and an ace bandage. I'm insured. They sent me a bill for over $900. For taking a picture, and giving me tylenol and an ace bandage. I view insurance as a tax my employers pay to the American healthcare system to be compliant. When I have my end-of-life event, whatever that is, I fully expect a choice between death, and living a little longer in bankruptcy. I'll probably get treated outside the US or choose death. The system works if your net worth is somewhere above $5 million. For everyone else it's just the mechanism that sends everything you earned back to rich people right before you die. Or maybe I'm wrong! I hope I'm wrong. The stack of papers is 4 inches high so I'll never know, but I sure hope so.
- nvahalik 9y ago
  The system works fairly well if you are poor too. I know several people who have walked into and out of the hospital without paying a dime. It really seems like the middle class gets the raw end of the deal.
  - taxicabjesus 9y ago
    > It really seems like the middle class gets the raw end of the deal. My hairdresser figured she has to spend $5,000 before she can get any benefit from "health insurance". She & her husband decided it'd be better to pay the penalties, spend that first $5000 on herself, and "hope" that she won't need more. She's from Cuba, originally - left in 1987, iirc.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
taxicabjesus 9y ago
Various insurance companies had contracts with the taxi company I drove for. Part of our usual fares were taking people to and from emergency rooms. If a person with Medicaid had a problem they'd call their insurance company, whose representative decided whether to send an ambulance or a taxi. The hospitals also had contracts to send their patients home. One pre-obamacare passenger comes to mind: she didn't have a problem that wasn't related to being poor/homeless/childhood abuse, but the E.R. couldn't address her actual problems, and gave her a prescription for "something". She waved the prescription and said, "I can't afford these pills..." The hospital sent her to her sister's apartment. I called twice to check up. She was doing okay the first time. The second time the passenger's sister said she was at the State's psychiatric hospital. A non-insurance passenger with a non-life-threatening injury asked to go to an emergency room. I suggested going to the full-service emergency room at the heart hospital. They got in & out in a fraction of the time that people usually spent at the big hospitals. I knew of that emergency room because the Fire Department had a contract with the taxi company too. They sent people who didn't need an ambulance via taxi to the nearest emergency room. That guy was homeless, iirc.
BrainInAJar 9y ago
Notably, in the US. this speaks more to a failure of the healthcare system than it does to the success of ridesharing
Slippery_John 9y ago
Well yeah. I had a kidney stone earlier this year. Pain so bad I couldn't move or think. Went to the hospital in an ambulance and ended up paying nearly $3k for the ride. First round they thought it was muscle spasms, so when I inevitably had to go back again I got an uber. The only reason I wouldn't take that option again is if I was bleeding / puking / doing something that would make a mess in the car.
ajasmin 9y ago
How is Uber any different than taking a taxi to the hospital?
- Malician 9y ago
  If Uber says 5 minutes, it might be 7, or even possibly 15 if things go very, very wrong. Heck, if it's gonna be 15 you know this ahead of time because you can see the driver making wrong turns. If you call a taxi service, and they say "15 minutes," it could be 30, 45, or 60. Maybe they're mussing with the truth, maybe they're outright lying. You don't know, and without the map showing the driver, you have no way of knowing.
  - djsumdog 9y ago
    A lot of modern taxi services have apps (often written by just a few big shops and contracted/branded out, but still). So you can start to get some of the same assurances from Taxis that you could get from Uber. Also even before Uber/apps, I never had a problem with calling a Taxi and it not showing up within a few min, and I've lived a lot of places.
    - kelnos 9y ago
      I guess you never tried to get a taxi in SF, then. Pre-Uber, attempting to hail one could leave you standing in the street for several tens of minutes, and calling a dispatcher would get you the universal estimate of 20 minutes, which in reality would be 40 minutes or more, assuming they actually showed up, which was a tossup.
    - Zarel 9y ago
      I've called a taxi three times in my life. The first time was in 2012 because Microsoft was paying for it. It was from downtown Bellevue (so not an obscure place). I called them, they estimated 15 minutes, and it took them 40 minutes to show up. I'd never called a taxi before so I didn't realize this was normal; I called them back a few times to ask what was wrong, and they just said "soon!" The second time was in 2015 in a country that didn't have Uber. They had an app. The app didn't work. They also didn't answer the phone. I tried multiple times, including an hour later after eating lunch. I gave up and spent 50 minutes walking home in ridiculous heat. The third time was in 2016 because it was in a small town in the US that didn't have Uber. They did have an app. Their "app" displayed a phone number and told me to call it. That was the entire app. I called it, they estimated 30 minutes and showed up in 45 minutes, and they charged me $40 for a ten minute ride. Small town so I can understand the wait, but the price was definitely because they knew I had no other choice. Meanwhile, I get annoyed when Ubers take longer than 5 minutes to show up because they take wrong turns. I think it's definitely a matter of luck and location. Some places have horrible taxi services, some places have okay taxi services. Some places only have okay taxi services now because of competition from Uber. Ubers are still nearly always a huge margin better.
averagewall 9y ago
It may be an overall improvement in efficiency, but it's not going to help patients long term. Whoever pays for the ambulances is going to eventually reduce their funding because they're being under used and revert them to the same state they were in before. If that wasn't the case, then they would have already been paying for more ambulances before Uber came along.
- Robotbeat 9y ago
  This is simplistic and probably wrong. Part of the reason ambulances are expensive is not because of the intrinsic /cost/ of the service but because the consumers have no choice but to choose the ambulance. They are, in effect, a monopoly and therefore can charge monopoly rents. And Uber (or whatever) is helping to break that monopoly. (It doesn't have to be that way. Other countries have managed to keep ambulance services affordable.)
StreamBright 9y ago
Article should have "in the US" qualifier.
k__ 9y ago
Medical stories from the US always sound like from third world countries to me...
- saas_co_de 9y ago
  Yeah, most people don't tell the stories about how they go to luxuriously built hospitals that make most corporate offices and hotels seem cheap by comparison, with parking lots full of BMW's, Mercedes, and other 6-figure foreign cars, and are treated by teams of highly paid people using millions of dollars of the best equipment in the world ... As long as you have money the US is great.
  - qaq 9y ago
    "As long as you have money the US is great" even if you have money you will still have to go to the local hospital for emergency and will have to wait for specialist appointment some stupid amount of time unless you actively spend time and money donating to the hospital some serious $ so you have direct numbers of people in charge etc.
    - saas_co_de 9y ago
      It depends on where you live. The US tends to be highly segregated by income/wealth. In the high income places they have ERs advertising to get more business because they are underutilized.
      - qaq 9y ago
        I live in a third county by per capita income in US and #1 and #2 are right next to me.
  - scott_karana 9y ago
    "Best equipment in the world"? This is capitalism. They're going to use the cheapest "good enough" equipment they can get away with. And considering the domain experience a patient would need to tell a new MRI from an eight year old one... I'm sure they get away with lots. I guarantee the hospital administration isn't going to pay the upcharges for the fanciest new MRI if they can spend it on themselves.
jdietrich 9y ago
Here in the UK, there has been a major campaign to try and reduce the usage of ambulances and emergency departments. Many of our ambulances literally have "this is not a taxi" written on them. https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5c/ff/1e/5cff1eac4bef3b52f76d3ca92b041bec.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5c/ff/1e/5cff1eac4bef3b52f76d... Because it's free to use, a lot of people call ambulances when they really don't need them. Women in the early stages of an uncomplicated labour. Young people with minor injuries. Elderly people who want a repeat prescription. Discouraging these people from abusing the service without putting off people who are genuinely in need of an ambulance is a complex and delicate task. The US healthcare system is clearly an unmitigated disaster, but our single-payer utopia has a different set of problems.
- orcdork 9y ago
  Your example is the result of years of government failure to provide adequate funding and support to the health system, not some kind of fantastical moocher, using ambulances for no reason.
  - DanBC 9y ago
    Not sure why you got downvoted, what you say is true. People sat similar things as GP about A&E - "the problem is all the people who use it who shouldn't". No. Those people are easily triaged and sent away. The problems with A&E are all the people who need a hospital bed who spend hours on a trolley in a corridor.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  > Women in the early stages of an uncomplicated labour. That's taking a bit of a shortcut there. You don't know if a labor is uncomplicated until it is done and it can go from 'uncomplicated' to 'life threatening' in the space of a heartbeat.
  - jdietrich 9y ago
    London Ambulance Service policy states that ambulances should not to be dispatched to women in the early stages of labour unless there are known risk factors. It's a massive waste of resources to send two trained personnel and a fully equipped ambulance to act as a taxi, just in case something goes wrong en route. http://www.londonambulance.nhs.uk/talking_with_us/freedom_of_information/classes_of_information/idoc.ashx?docid=086b56da-f121-4234-8841-29c0879fb288&version=-1 http://www.londonambulance.nhs.uk/talking_with_us/freedom_of... Childbirth is not a medical emergency.
assafmo 9y ago
Can't you pay directly for private insurance in the US? I pay directly to the insurance company. It costs me about 145 usd/month and includes health insurance (with urgent care), long term care insurance, life insurance (about 500k usd) and some more. I could have done it through my employer, but when I leave for another place I'll have to renegotiate the price with the insurance company, and also this option has less good of coverage IMO. It is cheaper by 70% tough.
- hak8or 9y ago
  What's the name of the insurance company? Oscar? Thay seems incredibly cheap.
vincnetas 9y ago
I'm happy that in Lithuania (northern Europe) you can call ambulance even if you have fever and it's free (paid by you with taxes). Of course it's not perfect, medical personal don't earn much, and yes, it could take longer than Uber (except might be rush hours when ambulances can skip the congestions).
gaius 9y ago
Here in the UK ambulances are paid for by the NHS, to which Uber steadfastly evades contributing to. Now that their drivers have been legally classified as employees, there’s a shed load of back NI they owe us.
t3rmi 9y ago
I'm currently a student in the Bay Area. One of the first thing that my seniors told me here was if you are ever injured or in an accident do not call 911 unless its life threatening as the ambulance bill can bankrupt you. We do have insurance but the system is too complicated and the consequences are the too scary if we don't get reimbursed.
- froindt 9y ago
  Are you from the Bay Area? Is there anything in particular that would cause it to be extra expensive? During undergrad in the Midwest, I heard a freshman who was way too drunk fall off his lofted bed around 4 in the morning during the last couple days of the year. I heard his roommates discussing whether or not to call the ambulance because last time this guy got super wasted and hit his head drunk, the ambulance ride was a couple thousand dollars. It was so messed up to hear them talking. He could have a brain bleed going on and they were discussing how handle the situation. Ultimately they did call 911 and he was fine the next morning.
Improvotter 9y ago
Never ever have I thought this would be a side effect of not having any proper health care. I've never had to take an ambulance, but it's a second nature where I live in Europe to just call the equivalent of 911 and they'll send out the best unit depending on the injury. It can be a plain ambulance or a faster car with doctors that definitely is very expensive if you weren't covered. What a shame.
jacquesm 9y ago
Cities with Taxis have lower rates of ambulance usage too. In fact, any kind of public transportation will result in lower ambulance usage. Because when there are alternatives some %age of ambulance rides will be replaced by some %age of public transportation rides.
trts 9y ago
Had a bad bicycle accident about five years ago. No taxi would stop for me as it probably looked like I'd been in a drunken brawl. Uber or Lyft would have been nice, as I could have probably texted the driver not to be alarmed but that I needed a lift to the ER (at that point I still had not gotten a smartphone). I ended up walking 2.5 miles to the nearest hospital.
saas_co_de 9y ago
Does nobody else wonder how an un-peer-reviewed paper from Kalamazoo College is being reported by a tech blogger from NPR? Why would anyone take this seriously?
nmca 9y ago
Healthcare in the US sounds nightmarish. I'm a UK citizen and broke my leg badly in France; ambulance etc. Whole thing was <75 GBP. That was for the cost of crutches and medicine in France, X-ray+ER visit was free. Then after I got my train back to the UK I had complex reconstructive surgery for free on the NHS.
heisenbit 9y ago
> Researchers often cite costly transportation as a significant barrier to receiving quality healthcare. A study by Samina T. Syed and Lisa K. Sharp, doctors at the Kalamazoo College, suggests that cost-efficient access to a vehicle is consistently associated with increased access to health care. Uber is using venture capital to subsidize rides. Drivers are often providing the services by going underpaid and putting up their own capital without getting the appropriate rent. This is not a sustainable model. If there is a real need that is currently not met it has to be provided through other means in the long run.
formerchamp 9y ago
Good, former EMT and Paramedic for busy metropolitan city here. Your exorbitant costs are subsidizing the homeless, system abusers, and illegals who can't be billed. 90% of the calls we were dispatched to were not acute emergencies. And 90% of those calls were people of the lower socioeconomic demographic systematically abusing medicaid.
arximboldi 9y ago
> Many potential emergency room patients are too sick to drive themselves to a hospital. But an ambulance can cost hundreds or thousands of dollars without insurance. This is where a popular ride-sharing app can step in, while also freeing up the ambulances for those who need them most. The rich?

298 points by lyk 9y ago

doorty 9y ago

They (uber/lyft) work well for my dog emergencies too.

lstyls 9y ago
Drivers don't have issues with an uninvited dog passenger? As a dog owner, I find this surprising. But if drivers are OK with it it would be a great option for me because I don't own a car.
- smelendez 9y ago
  It depends on the city, culturally, and it's a good idea to call and ask first. Obviously if it's a service dog they're required to transport it, but from knowing people with service dogs, it's still worth calling because some drivers are allergic and would rather you call another
  - amelius 9y ago
    > if it's a service dog they're required to transport it But Uber is not a cab service; instead, they are trying to evade all the rules.
- cm2012 9y ago
  Most drivers are okay if it seems like you have your pet neat. I take my cats in carriers all the time, but would never take my parents super sheddy dog.
- WhyNotHugo 9y ago
  I've taken my cats (in their carriers) to the ER on Uber several times. Generally, they don't have any issues and are quite empathic to the situation.

cardiffspaceman 9y ago

We can view this as either a positive for how Uber works or a negative for how taxi cabs work. If the pervasive means of transportation other than ambulances are unresponsive or expensive compared to ambulances, then obviously ambulances are the choice. One might also drive oneself, get a ride from a friend or family member, or hope that a city bus will be fast enough. An Uber ride could be faster than a ride from friend or family and safer than driving oneself.

CydeWeys 9y ago
I took a taxi to an urgent care clinic when I broke my ankle in a bike accident. Would've taken an Uber or Lyft if taxis hadn't been around, but there were a lot of them. Whatever was fastest. I really wasn't worried about saving a few bucks on a ride at that point.

an4rchy 9y ago

I've been wondering about this for a while but, is there a reason why Uber or an alternative cannot/should not get into the Ambulance space, if it were able to get qualified staff. I feel like Ambulances/Hospitals charge way too much and using the app/tech at a basic level to connect the ambulances with patients addresses may be a good start for everyone and also the increase in supply may reduce costs.

switch007 9y ago
Are paramedics/ambulances so unregulated in the US that it's /not/ a bat-shit crazy idea to suggest Uber Ambulances?
- TylerE 9y ago
  Not really. There are plenty of private ambulance services in the US. They generally deal with things like transporting a medically frail person to see a doctor in a different city, things like that. Non emergency, mostly. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/01/31/style/private-ambulances-when-to-use-them.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/1987/01/31/style/private-ambulances-w... (yes, over 30 years old, but most of it still holds true)
  - switch007 9y ago
    Thanks for the link!
  - newfoundglory 9y ago
    I didn't realize there were public ambulance services in the US. When I was hit by a car I was definitely taken to hospital by a private ambulance as an emergency patient.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  Nah, there’s certification and usually contracts with municipalities for response to emergencies. It’s a real mix though... paid fire dapartments, volunteers, and private operators all respond to emergencies.

pixelbill 9y ago

I'm curious, this article spins the whole "lower rates of ambulance usage" as a positive thing, but is there enough evidence to say that? From the article: _______ With demand for ambulances decreased by available Uber drivers, emergency personnel have been able reach critical patients faster while also applying necessary treatment on the way to the hospital, according to a new economic study from the University of Kansas: "Given that even a reduction of a few minutes can drastically improve survival rates for serious conditions, this could be associated with a substantial welfare improvement." The study investigated ambulance rates in 766 U.S. cities from 43 different states. Taking into account the timelines of when Uber entered each city, the researchers found that the app reduced per capita ambulance usage rates by around 7 percent. _______ Okay they claim the study says "emergency personnel have been able reach critical patients faster" but decreased usage does not necessarily equal faster response time. It would have been much more solid if they actually looked at the ambulance response time, not just how many are being used. (My skeptical side leads me to think this is because that data-set didn't match their narrative.) There is also the question of: Is this actually a good thing? Are those 7% less people using ambulances all not having serious health issues? Especially when something is wrong, you are often not a good judge of your own health. How many people having chest pain thought it wasn't too bad so they called an Uber instead of an ambulance and died on the way to the hospital? Might not have turned out that way if they just called an ambulance in the first place.. Need more data to decide if this is an Uber propaganda piece.

djsumdog 9y ago
I agree. 7% is a really low number, and people shouldn't be afraid to call an ambulance just to save money. That's fucked up. Especially with comments talking about strokes and heart attacks. In most western countries, this isn't even an issue. I honestly question of the numbers are even statically significant, but even if they are, this is seriously fucked up and not something Americans should be proud of at all!
jaclaz 9y ago
>Need more data to decide if this is an Uber propaganda piece. Well, they could ask Uber for all the rides they made to the ER and see if - roughly - the numbers match with the claimed 7% reduction of ambulance calls. I mean, a lot of people may have - coincidentally in the same period Uber came to the cities - become aware of the high cost of ambulance, or lost their insurance or whatever other reason and used taxis or some other means. After all the study takes into account what happened over very roughly 3 years 2012-2015, how many people read (say): http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/23/business/la-fi-healthcare-watch-20130825 http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/23/business/la-fi-healt... http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/health/think-the-er-was-expensive-look-at-the-ambulance-bill.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/health/think-the-er-was-ex... If there was a "penetration rate" (which is not the same thing as "establishing the service") and a direct correlation with roughly the same number of UberX rides to the ER and of less ambulance calls then it would IMHO sound much more credible.

bmelton 9y ago

If you don't get bogged down in details of the service, I see this as generally net good. For many, ambulance rides are prohibitively expensive, and while I certainly wouldn't be cost-conscious taking an ambulance in the event of a seizure or heart attack, for something like a broken arm, or non-life-threatening ailment, an Uber/Lyft/Cab is a good alternative to trying to drive myself. Beyond that, I'd like to see statistics on whether people ride-sharing to emergency rooms / urgent care facilities was freeing up ambulances or causing them to sit idle. I suspect it's the former, which would mean ambulances could be more available for more people with more serious conditions, but I could be wrong.

Spooky23 9y ago
NYFD has about 220 ALS units (advanced / requiring a paramedic) and 550 BLS (basic transport, no drugs, etc) units per day. Reducing BLS calls via uber wouldn’t affect availability of ALS units for serious things, but would probably save money.
- brokensegue 9y ago
  well people deciding between an ambulance or an uber aren't really qualified to make that decision so it wouldn't surprise me if a bunch of people who needs an ALS unit decide to take an uber.
jessriedel 9y ago
The number of ambulances will adjust to the demand.
- matthew349hall 9y ago
  Not really. This works in private markets but in part-government systems such as ambulances there's a few more influences on supply.
donatj 9y ago
Six years ago I had something similar to a stoke. I had a relative drive me from work to the ER in outer suburbs because: a) I would literally rather die than pay for an ambulance. I put my money where my mouth was on that. b) I knew from previous experience their ER was far cheaper, cleaner and quicker than the one in the cities. Maybe I am just particularly frugal but I had the presence of mind to consider costs while I could not feel one side of my face. Another time, I needed surgery and called around to get quotes. The place I ended up was something like a quarter the place my doctor wanted to send me.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

Spooky23 9y ago

I’d be more interested to see the reduction in medicab or medivan usage. My father had the misfortune of having a stroke, and transporting him via van is outrageous — you’re talking >$250 for a 15 mile drive, in what amounts to a cargo van with zero service beyond driving. It’s one of those weird markets where the pricing is driven by the Medicaid reimbursement, which is a price floor.

chiefalchemist 9y ago
Same situation for me, and I've seen the same with regards to price. That said, I also suspect the med transport niche is heavily regulated (a la taxi service). Special training for drivers, insurance, etc. I don't think that covers the full $250; just saying they're not identical to a Uber.
- kelnos 9y ago
  Right. If the Uber driver fails to get you to the hospital in time to save your life for any reason, they have no liability or consequences whatsoever, because they're not intended to be a life-saving or emergency service. If the ambulance driver screws up in some way, they're in for a world of trouble and legal liability.
dajohnson89 9y ago
it's perverse that I find $250 to be a reasonable price, compared to other medical expenses.
- aquadrop 9y ago
  That's probably if you're actually insured. If not, it will be in thousands.
bsder 9y ago
Last time I talked to someone who ran one of these and got out of it, the price is driven primarily by liability insurance. Uber and Lyft can get away with this because they self-insure and amortize over a much larger customer base.

jrlocke 9y ago

I've personally found this to work great, the only exception being the moment of surprise and confusion when I asked the driver to pull around to the emergency entrance.

chiefalchemist 9y ago

Good stat but there's nothing about outcomes. Uber might save money for transportation but how does the lack of a proper ambulance effect outcomes?

xor1 9y ago
I imagine most of the cases involving people opting for an Uber instead of an ambulance aren't in obvious risk of dying if they don't make it to the hospital in time. The first things that come to mind are broken bones, lacerations, and severed digits. Then again, there are plenty of things that can be fatal without being readily apparent, especially if the only person making that judgment call is the patient.
- chiefalchemist 9y ago
  I don't disagree. But let's see the data and not assume. One or two extreme cases could make any savings moot.

m333t 9y ago

Would be nice to have a service like Uber where you have a virtual doctor's visit by phone in the car on the way to the pharmacy or to the hospital if it turns out to be more serious.

Johnny555 9y ago
What are you going to do if it turns more serious during the ride? The Uber driver (probably) has no medical training and certainly has no advanced medical equipment, the best he can do is pull over and hope that a real ambulance can meet you at his car before you die. If you have a condition that is so serious that you feel you have to keep in contact with a doctor while you're transported to the hospital in case it gets worse, call an ambulance since they can actually treat you in-route.

joshvm 9y ago

Coming from a country where ambulance usage is free for citizens, it would be interesting to see the stats in Uber cities. The only reason not to call an ambulance here is if you feel it would be unethical (e.g. if you broke your arm and your partner could drive you). EDIT: That is, I imagine you might be able to see whether Uber provides a better alternative than the local cabs. This still holds in US cities though, why is Uber specifically good? Why don't people consider calling their local cab company, which will still be much cheaper than a $250 ride.

jMyles 9y ago
> The only reason not to call an ambulance here is if you feel it would be unethical I dunno, maybe you just want to avoid the psychological feeling of urgency and gravity that comes with an ambulance. I think there's something to be said for staying calm and keeping self-control and dignity when facing an emergency situation. If you're bleeding profusely or are in-and-out of consciousness or have a deadly virus, obviously that's different. But what about a broken bone? Or a laceration or burn for which you've already successfully applied first aid? Might you not prefer to stay out of an ambulance in those situations, even if it's free?
- ComputerGuru 9y ago
  There’s also the question of control. No matter how badly injured, if I’m driving myself or taking a cab, I am still “the boss.” But as soon as EMTs and doctors become involved, that control is lost. In an increasingly authoritarian country/world, where we are expected to give up all rights upon first interaction with persons in a position of power or authority, be it the policeman that graduated yesterday but has the full might of “the boys in blue,” the TSA agent at the check in line, the EMT responding to the call, or the nurse checking you in, it is easy to understand why some people have an aversion to willfully surrendering themselves and their free will so long as an alternative is present. I prefer to not cede what little control I have until I have to. If I want the driver to take the highway and not the local roads, it’s my call. If I want to text while I’m being driven through traffic, it’s my call. If I change my mind and want to go back home to die, well, it’s my call.

will4274 9y ago

A relevant personal anecdote - I hit my head earlier this year and gave myself a concussion, but did not realize it at the time. The next day, I began experiencing severe headaches, sensitivity to noise, sensitivity to light, etc. and decided to go to a hospital. I called an Uber. I'm not sure what I would have done without Uber. I guess I could call a cab, but I don't know that I would have wanted my ride to the hospital to be 30 minutes late, to refuse to turn the music down, and to tell me the credit card reader is broken when I get to my destination and then insist on taking me to an ATM. So I might well have called an ambulance.

mysterypie 9y ago
> my ride to the hospital to be 30 minutes late, to refuse to turn the music down, and to tell me the credit card reader is broken As much as I'd like to stick it to taxis because of their decades of price gouging due to being granted a monopoly, I have not had many bad experiences riding a taxi. If I had to put a number on it, I'd say that less than 5% of my taxi rides were in any way unpleasant other than for the cost. What city or country are you in if I might ask? Are taxi experiences really that bad for most people?
- jowiar 9y ago
  Taxis in cities with decent taxi systems, in a neighborhood with decent taxi coverage, hailed by waving your hand on the side of the road are fine, and getting better by way of competition. I have no qualms with taxis in, ie NYC or DC. Taxi dispatchers, though? Especially in smaller cities? I lost count of the number of times I had a cab no-show when I lived in Pittsburgh.
- will4274 9y ago
  Taxis are good in NYC. In Binghamton NY, they all tell you the credit card readers are broken at all times of day and insist on driving you to an ATM so they can get paid in cash. In Washington DC, if they think you're drunk, they overcharge you / don't start the meter and the dispatchers always tell you 15 minutes, but then the cabbies just grab other people and you end up needing to call the dispatcher repeatedly to actually get a cab and it usually takes closer to 45 minutes or an hour. And in Ithaca NY, they tell you the credit card reader doesn't work until you say you don't have any cash, and then it's suddenly working.

s_esser 9y ago

Correlation != causation

djsumdog 9y ago
Yea, the percentage stated is super low. It might be true, but the data isn't enough to reflect the statement.
bckygldstn 9y ago
The title of the NPR article would be more accurate as "Cities See a Reduction in Ambulance Usage After Uber is Introduced". The paper looks at 700 different cities, each with a different Uber market entry time over a two year period. The researchers also control for some seasonality effects. Perhaps more covariates could have been considered, but this seems like a pretty decent design to measure a before/after causal effect.

throwaway0255 9y ago

I injured myself and needed to go to the ER. The injury wasn't life threatening, but I definitely needed to go to the hospital immediately. I called an Uber. I don't have the time or expertise to do the months of legalese and calculus it would take me to understand my insurance policy, so I have no idea how much an ambulance ride would have cost me. $0? $400? $15000? None of those numbers would surprise me. As best I can tell, insurance companies throw a dart to decide whether you're covered or not, and then the healthcare provider makes up some insane number if you aren't. The Uber got me to the hospital faster than an ambulance would have, for less than $10, and I knew it would cost less than $10. The injury, though extremely gruesome and painful, only warranted an x-ray, some tylenol, and an ace bandage. I'm insured. They sent me a bill for over $900. For taking a picture, and giving me tylenol and an ace bandage. I view insurance as a tax my employers pay to the American healthcare system to be compliant. When I have my end-of-life event, whatever that is, I fully expect a choice between death, and living a little longer in bankruptcy. I'll probably get treated outside the US or choose death. The system works if your net worth is somewhere above $5 million. For everyone else it's just the mechanism that sends everything you earned back to rich people right before you die. Or maybe I'm wrong! I hope I'm wrong. The stack of papers is 4 inches high so I'll never know, but I sure hope so.

nvahalik 9y ago
The system works fairly well if you are poor too. I know several people who have walked into and out of the hospital without paying a dime. It really seems like the middle class gets the raw end of the deal.
- taxicabjesus 9y ago
  > It really seems like the middle class gets the raw end of the deal. My hairdresser figured she has to spend $5,000 before she can get any benefit from "health insurance". She & her husband decided it'd be better to pay the penalties, spend that first $5000 on herself, and "hope" that she won't need more. She's from Cuba, originally - left in 1987, iirc.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

taxicabjesus 9y ago

Various insurance companies had contracts with the taxi company I drove for. Part of our usual fares were taking people to and from emergency rooms. If a person with Medicaid had a problem they'd call their insurance company, whose representative decided whether to send an ambulance or a taxi. The hospitals also had contracts to send their patients home. One pre-obamacare passenger comes to mind: she didn't have a problem that wasn't related to being poor/homeless/childhood abuse, but the E.R. couldn't address her actual problems, and gave her a prescription for "something". She waved the prescription and said, "I can't afford these pills..." The hospital sent her to her sister's apartment. I called twice to check up. She was doing okay the first time. The second time the passenger's sister said she was at the State's psychiatric hospital. A non-insurance passenger with a non-life-threatening injury asked to go to an emergency room. I suggested going to the full-service emergency room at the heart hospital. They got in & out in a fraction of the time that people usually spent at the big hospitals. I knew of that emergency room because the Fire Department had a contract with the taxi company too. They sent people who didn't need an ambulance via taxi to the nearest emergency room. That guy was homeless, iirc.

BrainInAJar 9y ago

Notably, in the US. this speaks more to a failure of the healthcare system than it does to the success of ridesharing

Slippery_John 9y ago

Well yeah. I had a kidney stone earlier this year. Pain so bad I couldn't move or think. Went to the hospital in an ambulance and ended up paying nearly $3k for the ride. First round they thought it was muscle spasms, so when I inevitably had to go back again I got an uber. The only reason I wouldn't take that option again is if I was bleeding / puking / doing something that would make a mess in the car.

ajasmin 9y ago

How is Uber any different than taking a taxi to the hospital?

Malician 9y ago
If Uber says 5 minutes, it might be 7, or even possibly 15 if things go very, very wrong. Heck, if it's gonna be 15 you know this ahead of time because you can see the driver making wrong turns. If you call a taxi service, and they say "15 minutes," it could be 30, 45, or 60. Maybe they're mussing with the truth, maybe they're outright lying. You don't know, and without the map showing the driver, you have no way of knowing.
- djsumdog 9y ago
  A lot of modern taxi services have apps (often written by just a few big shops and contracted/branded out, but still). So you can start to get some of the same assurances from Taxis that you could get from Uber. Also even before Uber/apps, I never had a problem with calling a Taxi and it not showing up within a few min, and I've lived a lot of places.
  - kelnos 9y ago
    I guess you never tried to get a taxi in SF, then. Pre-Uber, attempting to hail one could leave you standing in the street for several tens of minutes, and calling a dispatcher would get you the universal estimate of 20 minutes, which in reality would be 40 minutes or more, assuming they actually showed up, which was a tossup.
  - Zarel 9y ago
    I've called a taxi three times in my life. The first time was in 2012 because Microsoft was paying for it. It was from downtown Bellevue (so not an obscure place). I called them, they estimated 15 minutes, and it took them 40 minutes to show up. I'd never called a taxi before so I didn't realize this was normal; I called them back a few times to ask what was wrong, and they just said "soon!" The second time was in 2015 in a country that didn't have Uber. They had an app. The app didn't work. They also didn't answer the phone. I tried multiple times, including an hour later after eating lunch. I gave up and spent 50 minutes walking home in ridiculous heat. The third time was in 2016 because it was in a small town in the US that didn't have Uber. They did have an app. Their "app" displayed a phone number and told me to call it. That was the entire app. I called it, they estimated 30 minutes and showed up in 45 minutes, and they charged me $40 for a ten minute ride. Small town so I can understand the wait, but the price was definitely because they knew I had no other choice. Meanwhile, I get annoyed when Ubers take longer than 5 minutes to show up because they take wrong turns. I think it's definitely a matter of luck and location. Some places have horrible taxi services, some places have okay taxi services. Some places only have okay taxi services now because of competition from Uber. Ubers are still nearly always a huge margin better.

averagewall 9y ago

It may be an overall improvement in efficiency, but it's not going to help patients long term. Whoever pays for the ambulances is going to eventually reduce their funding because they're being under used and revert them to the same state they were in before. If that wasn't the case, then they would have already been paying for more ambulances before Uber came along.

Robotbeat 9y ago
This is simplistic and probably wrong. Part of the reason ambulances are expensive is not because of the intrinsic /cost/ of the service but because the consumers have no choice but to choose the ambulance. They are, in effect, a monopoly and therefore can charge monopoly rents. And Uber (or whatever) is helping to break that monopoly. (It doesn't have to be that way. Other countries have managed to keep ambulance services affordable.)

StreamBright 9y ago

Article should have "in the US" qualifier.

k__ 9y ago

Medical stories from the US always sound like from third world countries to me...

saas_co_de 9y ago
Yeah, most people don't tell the stories about how they go to luxuriously built hospitals that make most corporate offices and hotels seem cheap by comparison, with parking lots full of BMW's, Mercedes, and other 6-figure foreign cars, and are treated by teams of highly paid people using millions of dollars of the best equipment in the world ... As long as you have money the US is great.
- qaq 9y ago
  "As long as you have money the US is great" even if you have money you will still have to go to the local hospital for emergency and will have to wait for specialist appointment some stupid amount of time unless you actively spend time and money donating to the hospital some serious $ so you have direct numbers of people in charge etc.
  - saas_co_de 9y ago
    It depends on where you live. The US tends to be highly segregated by income/wealth. In the high income places they have ERs advertising to get more business because they are underutilized.
    - qaq 9y ago
      I live in a third county by per capita income in US and #1 and #2 are right next to me.
- scott_karana 9y ago
  "Best equipment in the world"? This is capitalism. They're going to use the cheapest "good enough" equipment they can get away with. And considering the domain experience a patient would need to tell a new MRI from an eight year old one... I'm sure they get away with lots. I guarantee the hospital administration isn't going to pay the upcharges for the fanciest new MRI if they can spend it on themselves.

jdietrich 9y ago

Here in the UK, there has been a major campaign to try and reduce the usage of ambulances and emergency departments. Many of our ambulances literally have "this is not a taxi" written on them. https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5c/ff/1e/5cff1eac4bef3b52f76d3ca92b041bec.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5c/ff/1e/5cff1eac4bef3b52f76d... Because it's free to use, a lot of people call ambulances when they really don't need them. Women in the early stages of an uncomplicated labour. Young people with minor injuries. Elderly people who want a repeat prescription. Discouraging these people from abusing the service without putting off people who are genuinely in need of an ambulance is a complex and delicate task. The US healthcare system is clearly an unmitigated disaster, but our single-payer utopia has a different set of problems.

orcdork 9y ago
Your example is the result of years of government failure to provide adequate funding and support to the health system, not some kind of fantastical moocher, using ambulances for no reason.
- DanBC 9y ago
  Not sure why you got downvoted, what you say is true. People sat similar things as GP about A&E - "the problem is all the people who use it who shouldn't". No. Those people are easily triaged and sent away. The problems with A&E are all the people who need a hospital bed who spend hours on a trolley in a corridor.
jacquesm 9y ago
> Women in the early stages of an uncomplicated labour. That's taking a bit of a shortcut there. You don't know if a labor is uncomplicated until it is done and it can go from 'uncomplicated' to 'life threatening' in the space of a heartbeat.
- jdietrich 9y ago
  London Ambulance Service policy states that ambulances should not to be dispatched to women in the early stages of labour unless there are known risk factors. It's a massive waste of resources to send two trained personnel and a fully equipped ambulance to act as a taxi, just in case something goes wrong en route. http://www.londonambulance.nhs.uk/talking_with_us/freedom_of_information/classes_of_information/idoc.ashx?docid=086b56da-f121-4234-8841-29c0879fb288&version=-1 http://www.londonambulance.nhs.uk/talking_with_us/freedom_of... Childbirth is not a medical emergency.

assafmo 9y ago

Can't you pay directly for private insurance in the US? I pay directly to the insurance company. It costs me about 145 usd/month and includes health insurance (with urgent care), long term care insurance, life insurance (about 500k usd) and some more. I could have done it through my employer, but when I leave for another place I'll have to renegotiate the price with the insurance company, and also this option has less good of coverage IMO. It is cheaper by 70% tough.

hak8or 9y ago
What's the name of the insurance company? Oscar? Thay seems incredibly cheap.

vincnetas 9y ago

I'm happy that in Lithuania (northern Europe) you can call ambulance even if you have fever and it's free (paid by you with taxes). Of course it's not perfect, medical personal don't earn much, and yes, it could take longer than Uber (except might be rush hours when ambulances can skip the congestions).

gaius 9y ago

Here in the UK ambulances are paid for by the NHS, to which Uber steadfastly evades contributing to. Now that their drivers have been legally classified as employees, there’s a shed load of back NI they owe us.

t3rmi 9y ago

I'm currently a student in the Bay Area. One of the first thing that my seniors told me here was if you are ever injured or in an accident do not call 911 unless its life threatening as the ambulance bill can bankrupt you. We do have insurance but the system is too complicated and the consequences are the too scary if we don't get reimbursed.

froindt 9y ago
Are you from the Bay Area? Is there anything in particular that would cause it to be extra expensive? During undergrad in the Midwest, I heard a freshman who was way too drunk fall off his lofted bed around 4 in the morning during the last couple days of the year. I heard his roommates discussing whether or not to call the ambulance because last time this guy got super wasted and hit his head drunk, the ambulance ride was a couple thousand dollars. It was so messed up to hear them talking. He could have a brain bleed going on and they were discussing how handle the situation. Ultimately they did call 911 and he was fine the next morning.

Improvotter 9y ago

Never ever have I thought this would be a side effect of not having any proper health care. I've never had to take an ambulance, but it's a second nature where I live in Europe to just call the equivalent of 911 and they'll send out the best unit depending on the injury. It can be a plain ambulance or a faster car with doctors that definitely is very expensive if you weren't covered. What a shame.

jacquesm 9y ago

Cities with Taxis have lower rates of ambulance usage too. In fact, any kind of public transportation will result in lower ambulance usage. Because when there are alternatives some %age of ambulance rides will be replaced by some %age of public transportation rides.

trts 9y ago

Had a bad bicycle accident about five years ago. No taxi would stop for me as it probably looked like I'd been in a drunken brawl. Uber or Lyft would have been nice, as I could have probably texted the driver not to be alarmed but that I needed a lift to the ER (at that point I still had not gotten a smartphone). I ended up walking 2.5 miles to the nearest hospital.

saas_co_de 9y ago

Does nobody else wonder how an un-peer-reviewed paper from Kalamazoo College is being reported by a tech blogger from NPR? Why would anyone take this seriously?

nmca 9y ago

Healthcare in the US sounds nightmarish. I'm a UK citizen and broke my leg badly in France; ambulance etc. Whole thing was <75 GBP. That was for the cost of crutches and medicine in France, X-ray+ER visit was free. Then after I got my train back to the UK I had complex reconstructive surgery for free on the NHS.

heisenbit 9y ago

> Researchers often cite costly transportation as a significant barrier to receiving quality healthcare. A study by Samina T. Syed and Lisa K. Sharp, doctors at the Kalamazoo College, suggests that cost-efficient access to a vehicle is consistently associated with increased access to health care. Uber is using venture capital to subsidize rides. Drivers are often providing the services by going underpaid and putting up their own capital without getting the appropriate rent. This is not a sustainable model. If there is a real need that is currently not met it has to be provided through other means in the long run.

formerchamp 9y ago

Good, former EMT and Paramedic for busy metropolitan city here. Your exorbitant costs are subsidizing the homeless, system abusers, and illegals who can't be billed. 90% of the calls we were dispatched to were not acute emergencies. And 90% of those calls were people of the lower socioeconomic demographic systematically abusing medicaid.

arximboldi 9y ago

> Many potential emergency room patients are too sick to drive themselves to a hospital. But an ambulance can cost hundreds or thousands of dollars without insurance. This is where a popular ride-sharing app can step in, while also freeing up the ambulances for those who need them most. The rich?