Recent comments in /f/WorcesterMA

bemest t1_isoq7v2 wrote

I been to both over the years. They are both very good. You should focus on finding a good primary that’s in your insurance network. If you have a really serious issue, you’ll be referred to Boston and then you’ve got access to some of the best in the world.

2

gnamyl t1_iso5slf wrote

My personal experience at St V’s has been good. I recommend them. I went there in the first place because that is Reliant’s local area large hospital for anything advanced and that’s where you get sent fir most specialists (my cardiologist, ENT, etc)

As a caregiver I have been involved in a lot of trips to Umass and my opinion (again not personal experience) is that it is not any better than St V’s in a general sense and the ER is definitely worse.
I have some very specific memories of ER experiences at umass belmont that have left me with a very bad taste. Pain management should be top on the list of priorities and I remember when finally some pain meds were given after a long wait and the patient finally had some relief and I was ready to smack someone i was so angry at that point. Enhhh healthcare sucks and I can’t say either is better hands down, unlike some people in this thread who give umass the clear victory. 🤷🏼‍♂️

3

MarketMan123 OP t1_isnucx4 wrote

I didn’t realize st. Vincent was for profit. I guess with a name like their’s I just assumed it was at least non-profit and prob Catholic.

Explains why the lobby looks so good, but the rooms could use a fresh coat of paint and there seems to be some stinginess on use of equipment like 24/7 vital monitors.

(Not saying non-profit hospitals aren’t money cows also, but for profit ones are certainly worse)

4

nitwitsavant t1_isnpwtv wrote

Depends on what you need really. Each hospital has stuff they excel at. Major trauma? UMass by the lake. having a baby? UMass by the police station. Having specialist care? st. Vs. general ER? Probably St. V unless you can wait for a day in the waiting room if you wouldn’t be a priority case.

3

888Rich t1_ismkffy wrote

St V's has a beautiful atrium. UMass has metal detectors. St V's maybe looks a little nicer, but I've had no problems with the quality of care at either hospital (except for the availability of CPAPs if you have to stay overnight, and they both suck there). UMass seems to treat their nurses better, though.

4

MMScooter t1_ismigof wrote

St Vs has recently slashed their ability to do many cardiac procedures. They route you out. They got rid of their dialysis unit and staff and just have on call RNs that come in. They cut the imaging department in half and have everyone doing double duty. They literally can’t hire or retain a licensed social worker so they have 3 that are on a contract from a temp agency. They keep having issues with the medical record system in. The ER and route you out. All of this plus the conditions of the nursing strike, settlement, and continual mistreatment. No thank you. Yes UMass is bigger, messier, more chaotic. But they actually have the tools and staff to care for you during your stay and post d/c.

3