Home Health Closure
Dear Editor: I was very, very sorry to read that SEARHC is planning to close its Home Health office. My husband, Tony Guevin, was the beneficiary of home health services from 2017 until his death in 2019. It is only through the unique skills and services of Home Health that we were able to remain in Sitka and that Tony was able to stay at home for the last two years of his life.
I would like to address a few misconceptions about Home Health revealed in Dr. Bruhl’s comments in the Sentinel yesterday:
It is not only where home health services are provided, but the nature of home health services that are unique. Through their regular visits, Home Health nurses develop a deep understanding that allows them to monitor, interpret, and respond to subtle changes in a patient’s health status, and recommend changes in medication, medical care, and therapies as needed. No other health care provider has the same depth of understanding of their patients, and I have never encountered comparable coordination of services in any other health care setting.
In addition to unique knowledge of their patients, home health nurses have unique medical expertise above and beyond that of doctors and other health care professionals, for example in wound care and palliative care.
Home health is cost-effective, which benefits not only home health patients, but the public at large. In fact, home health is so effective at preventing hospitalizations, that it is covered by Medicare Part A, the inpatient component of Medicare. And unlike other medical services, we never had to deal with bills from Home Health.
I don’t know the specifics of the “tremendous regulatory burden” or “particular kinds of billing” that Dr. Bruhl is referring to, but they obviously do not prevent other communities from providing critical home health services. Perhaps SEARHC needs to seek additional training?
Dr. Bruhl notes that SEARHC will “still be able to support people at end of life in the hospital, or even in the long-term care facility if we need to.” But hospitals and long-term care are neither as cost-effective or as humane as remaining at home with loved ones, under the kind and competent care of Home Health. I am forever grateful to Home Health for allowing Tony to remain at home during his last two years – truly wonderful years despite his fragile health.
I appeal to SEARHC to reconsider its decision.
Cindy Litman, Sitka
