By Stacie Sasso

An opinion piece in The Nevada Independent recently erroneously reported the results of a draft review of the Clark County trauma system conducted by the Southern Nevada Health District and released last month. This needs assessment is an important step in determining the current and future trauma care needs for Southern Nevada residents.

The piece implies first that the American College of Surgeons recently conducted a small part of an assessment of the Clark County trauma system and second that it found new trauma centers are needed. Neither claim is accurate. The draft analysis instead raised a host of concerns and is currently still under intense review by the Health District's Regional Trauma Advisory Board (RTAB).

At no point does the analysis, or any other objective measurement, suggest trauma patients in Clark County are not getting the urgent trauma care they need. It is a disservice to the local community of expert doctors, nurses and emergency medical personnel who have proven their value to imply they have been deficient.

The American College of Surgeons tool that the opinion piece referenced is recognized as an important but incomplete method in determining the need for new trauma centers. Additionally, using the American College of Surgeons data criteria of population size and transport times, the Health District analysis found that the appropriate number of trauma centers for our area is three (see p. 146 of the analysis). Three trauma centers are currently in operation in Southern Nevada and serving the needs of our community well.

Decision makers need to remember the potential negative impact of hasty and unnecessary conversion of local emergency rooms to trauma centers. The RTAB was created to ensure a comprehensive trauma system approach in the wake of one hospital in 2004 deciding to open a trauma Level II center on top of an existing trauma Level I center where no need or shortage existed. The process at hand today needs to be about patient needs, not about generating additional revenue. All those who worry about how to pay costly medical bills should pay close attention to this process.

Generally speaking, those advocating for trauma center expansion at this point in Southern Nevada are big, out of state hospital chains profiting off Nevadan patients. The coalition I represent is not afraid to stand up for working families who are being squeezed and crippled by huge medical bills. As we know, once a hospital has a trauma designation, it can charge tens of thousands of dollars in activation fees for the same care seen in an existing emergency room. This is about profit – not about people.

Every Nevadan owes a thank you to the Legislature for recently approving AB317. This bill ensures our state has stronger processes within both the state and local agencies involved to ensure Nevada has a comprehensive system for identifying any trauma shortage area, rather than manufactured need that triggers escalated health-care costs for the entire community. It will also ensure this effort is fully funded and staffed appropriately, putting our community first. AB317 adds the resources needed to complete a comprehensive needs assessment, since neither RTAB or the Southern Nevada Health District were able to fund or complete the needs assessment which was recognized as critical to the protection of a comprehensive trauma system.  

The opinion piece referenced here is a stark reminder of why Nevada desperately needed AB317 – we must ensure we are making solid decisions based on real data, not misinformation and opinion.

Stacie Sasso is executive director of the Health Services Coalition, which includes major casinos, unions and local governments.