ER Inspector ESSENTIA HEALTH ST MARY'S MEDICAL CENTERESSENTIA HEALTH ST MARY'S MEDICAL CENTER

ER Inspector

Find and Evaluate Every Emergency Room Near You

Updated September 19, 2019

This database was last updated in September 2019. It should only be used as a historical snapshot.Researchers can find more recent data on timely and effective care in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ hospitals datasets and guidance about hospital regulations.

If you are having a heart attack or life-threatening emergency, call 911.

ER Inspector » Minnesota » ESSENTIA HEALTH ST MARY'S MEDICAL CENTER

Don’t see your ER? Find out why it might be missing.

ESSENTIA HEALTH ST MARY'S MEDICAL CENTER

407 east third street, duluth, Minn. 55805

(218) 786-4000

73% of Patients Would "Definitely Recommend" this Hospital
(Minn. Avg: 77%)

3 violations related to ER care since 2015

Hospital Type

Acute Care Hospitals

Hospital Owner

Voluntary non-profit - Private

ER Volume

High (40K - 60K patients a year)

See this hospital's CMS profile page or inspection reports.

Patient Pathways Through This ER

After a patient arrives at the emergency room, they are typically seen by a doctor or medical practitioner and then either sent home or admitted to the hospital and taken to a room. A small percentage of patients leave without being seen. The chart below shows on average how long each of these pathways take. Lower numbers are better, and all times refer to the average length of time people waited.

Arrives at ER
3% of patients leave without being seen
4hrs 34min Admitted to hospital
6hrs 33min Taken to room
2hrs 54min Sent home

All wait times are average.

Detailed Quality Measures

Here is a more in depth look at each quality measure, compared to state and national averages for hospitals with high ER volumes. Experts caution that very small differences between hospitals for a given measure are unlikely to correspond to noticeable differences in the real world.

Measure
Average for this Hospital
How this Hospital Compares

(to other hospitals with similar
ER volumes, when available)

Discharged Patients
Time Until Sent Home

Average time patients spent in the emergency room before being sent home (if not admitted).

2hrs 54min
National Avg.
2hrs 42min
Minn. Avg.
2hrs 51min
This Hospital
2hrs 54min
Impatient Patients
Left Without
Being Seen

Percentage of patients who left the emergency room without being seen by a doctor or medical practitioner.

3%
Avg. U.S. Hospital
2%
Avg. Minn. Hospital
1%
This Hospital
3%
Admitted Patients
Time Before Admission

Average time patients spent in the emergency room before being admitted to the hospital.

4hrs 34min

Data submitted were based on a sample of cases/patients.

National Avg.
5hrs 4min
Minn. Avg.
4hrs 20min
This Hospital
4hrs 34min
Admitted Patients
Transfer Time

Among patients admitted, additional time they spent waiting before being taken to their room (sometimes referred to as "boarding time.")

1hr 59min

Data submitted were based on a sample of cases/patients.

National Avg.
2hrs 2min
Minn. Avg.
1hr 52min
This Hospital
1hr 59min
Special Patients
CT Scan

Percentage of patients who arrived with stroke symptoms and did not receive brain scan results within 45 mins.

No Data Available

The number of cases/patients is too few to report.

National Avg.
27%
Minn. Avg.
29%
This Hospital
No Data Available

Violations Related to ER Care

Problems found in emergency rooms at this hospital since 2015, as identified during the investigation of a complaint. About This Data →

Violation
Full Text
COMPLIANCE WITH 489.24

Nov 15, 2016

Based on review of twenty-one emergency department records, patient #1's record from hospital #2, review of the hospital's bylaws, and review of the policies and procedures for patients who present to the emergency department, it was determined that in one (patient #1) of twenty-one patients who presented to hospital #1 requesting emergency services, the hospital failed to ensure compliance with 489.24.

See More ↓

Based on review of twenty-one emergency department records, patient #1's record from hospital #2, review of the hospital's bylaws, and review of the policies and procedures for patients who present to the emergency department, it was determined that in one (patient #1) of twenty-one patients who presented to hospital #1 requesting emergency services, the hospital failed to ensure compliance with 489.24. Patient #1's ED record from hospital #2 and interviews indicated patient #1 had a sudden onset of right back pain and right abdominal pain with nausea and vomiting that started the morning of 11/4/16. Person (K) brought patient #1 to hospital #1 for care during the afternoon of 11/4/16. Patient #1 was not checked in and was not triaged at hospital #1's ED, and as a result, patient #1 did not receive a medical screening examination. Interviews indicated an ED staff person from hospital #1 told patient #1 that there were twelve people ahead of him and waiting to be seen and that the ED was very busy. Interviews revealed that the ED staff person told patient #1 that he did not look sicker than any of the peoople who were waiting and advised patient #1 to leave and go to hospital #2's ED for care. This resulted in an immediate jeopardy to the patient's health and safety. The deficient practice is cited at 42 CFR 489.24, A2406.

See Less ↑
EMERGENCY ROOM LOG

Nov 15, 2016

Based on review of patient #1's ED record from hospital #2, the 11/4/16 ED log from hospital #1 and interviews, hospital #1 failed to include patient #1's name on the ED's central log when patient #1 came to the ED seeking care for an emergency medical condition and was refused treatment in one of twenty-one patients reviewed (patient #1).

See More ↓

Based on review of patient #1's ED record from hospital #2, the 11/4/16 ED log from hospital #1 and interviews, hospital #1 failed to include patient #1's name on the ED's central log when patient #1 came to the ED seeking care for an emergency medical condition and was refused treatment in one of twenty-one patients reviewed (patient #1). Findings include: Review of hospital #1's 11/4/16 ED log did not reveal that patient #1's name was entered on the log when patient #1 visited the ED. Patient #1 was interviewed by phone on 11/15/16, and he stated he was having horrible back pain, abdominal pain and vomiting, and person (K) brought him to hospital #1 for care. A female ED staff person was sitting at the ED admitting desk when he requested care. The staff person told patient #1 that there were twelve people ahead of him waiting to be seen and that the ED was very busy. The ED staff person told patient #1 that he did not look sicker than any of the people who were waiting and advised him to leave and go to hospital #2 for care. Patient #1 said he was not checked in and did not receive a medical screening examination while he was at hospital #1. Patient #1 said he noticed two people waiting to be seen in hospital #1 ' s ED waiting room. Person (K) took patient #1 to hospital #2 for care, and patient #1 stated he received very good care at hospital #2. Nursing assistant (F) was interviewed in person on 11/15/16 and stated she was working in hospital #1's ED/triage area and was sitting at the admitting desk on the afternoon of 11/4/16. She denied the allegation pertaining to patient #1's visit to the ED and stated she would never turn anyone away who requests care at hospital #1's ED. She stated patients do have the option to go to hospital #2's ED for care.

See Less ↑
MEDICAL SCREENING EXAM

Nov 15, 2016

Based on review of patient #1's ED record from hospital #2 and interviews, hospital #1 failed to ensure that each patient who presented to the emergency department received a medical screening examination, to determine whether or not an emergency medical condition existed, in one of twenty-one patients reviewed (patient #1).

See More ↓

Based on review of patient #1's ED record from hospital #2 and interviews, hospital #1 failed to ensure that each patient who presented to the emergency department received a medical screening examination, to determine whether or not an emergency medical condition existed, in one of twenty-one patients reviewed (patient #1). Findings include: Review of patient #1's 11/4/16 ED record from hospital #2 indicated patient #1 arrived at the ED via car and was accompanied by significant other (K). The record indicated patient #1 stated he had a sudden onset of right back pain and right abdominal pain with nausea and vomiting on the morning of 11/4/16. The patient had a CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis that confirmed the patient had a kidney stone. The patient was having severe pain during the ED visit and was provided narcotic IV pain medication to control the pain. The patient was provided prescriptions for pain and was discharged to home and self care at 4:41 p.m. on 11/4/16. Patient #1 was interviewed by phone on 11/15/16, and he stated he was having horrible back pain, abdominal pain and vomiting, and person (K) brought him to hospital #1 for care. A female ED staff person was sitting at the ED admitting desk when he requested care. The staff person told patient #1 that there were twelve people ahead of him waiting to be seen and that the ED was very busy. The ED staff person told patient #1 that he did not look sicker than any of the people who were waiting and advised him to leave and go to hospital #2 for care. Patient #1 said he was not checked in and did not receive a medical screening examination while he was at hospital #1. Patient #1 said he noticed two people waiting to be seen in hospital #1' s ED. Person (K) took patient #1 to hospital #2 for care, and patient #1 stated he received very good care at hospital #2. Person (K) was interviewed by phone on 11/15/16 and stated she drove patient #1 to hospital #1 on 11/4/16. Patient #1 vomited seven times on the way to the hospital and was in extreme pain and could hardly stand up. An ED staff person who was sitting at the desk at hospital #1 told them the ED was busy and advised them to go to hospital #2 for care. Patient #1 went to the bathroom at hospital #1, and they were at hospital #1 for approximately fifteen minutes. They went to hospital #2 and received immediate care. Patient #1 and person (K) told ED staff at hospital #2 that they were refused care at hospital #1 prior to their arrival at hospital #2. Nurse (I) was interviewed by phone on 11/14/16 and stated patient #1 was having severe pain when he arrived at hospital #2. She stated she triaged patient #1 when he arrived and provided him with IV pain medication. Patient #1 told nurse (I) that he was refused care at hospital #1 prior to coming to hospital #2. Nurse (J) was interviewed by phone on 11/14/16 and stated patient #1 complained of severe pain when he arrived at hospital #2. Patient #1 was provided pain medication immediately. Patient #1 told nurse (J) that he was refused care at hospital #1 and was told by an ED staff person that he did not look sicker than the other people who were waiting to be seen. Patient #1 said hospital #1 advised patient #1 to go to hospital 2 for care because hospital #1's ED was busy, and it would be a two hour wait. Physician (L) was interviewed by phone on 11/16/16 and stated he provided care to patient #1 in hospital #2's ED on 11/4/16. Patient #1 was having severe pain and his condition warranted immediate care which patient #1 received at hospital #2. Patient #1 was given narcotic IV pain medication. Patient #1 told physician (L) that he went to hospital #1's ED before coming to hospital #2. Patient #1 said an ED staff person from hospital #1 advised him to go to hospital #2's ED because hospital #1's ED was very busy. The ED staff person told patient #1 that there were twelve people ahead of him, and it would be a long wait before he was seen. The ED staff person told patient #1 that he did not look sicker than the other people who were waiting to be seen and that he would not be seen before the other people. Nursing assistant (F) was interviewed in person on 11/15/16 and stated she was working in hospital #1's ED/triage area and was sitting at the admitting desk on the afternoon of 11/4/16. She denied the allegation pertaining to patient #1's visit to the ED and stated she would never turn anyone away who requests care at hospital #1's ED. She stated patients do have the option to go to hospital #2's ED for care. The hospital ' s EMTALA policy, dated December 2006, and revised in July 2012, states "when an individual requests an examination or treatment for a medical condition, the hospital will, through a qualified medical professional as defined through the hospital rules and regulations, provide an appropriate medical screening examination to determine whether or not the individual has an emergency medical condition. "

See Less ↑
Notes

“Average time” refers to the median wait time (the midpoint of all patients' wait times). References to “doctor or medical practitioner” indicate a doctor, nurse practitioner or physician's assistant. CMS reports the CT scan quality measure as the percentage of patients who received a scan within 45 minutes. We have reversed that measure so that all measures follow a “lower is better” pattern.

Additional design and development by Mike Tigas and Sisi Wei.

Sources

All data comes from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Detailed quality measures at the hospital, state and national level were last updated September 2019. Most data was collected between October 2017 and October 2018. Data on ER-related violations is from January 2015 to June 2019.

Additional Info

How We've Updated ER Inspector | Download ProPublica's Emergency Room Planning Toolkit | About This Data

Don’t See Your ER?

In some cases we aren’t able to identify the exact location of a hospital, so it doesn’t appear on our mapped search results. However, it may still be in our database – try looking for it in the list of hospitals on each state's page.

In other cases, the hospital is missing from our database because it doesn't have an emergency department.

In other cases, the hospital is missing from the federal government’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) data. There are a couple of reasons why a hospital isn’t included in CMS data: it may not participate in Medicare, or it may share a certification number with another hospital (common across large hospital systems).

If you notice a hospital missing from our database, please first check if you can find it on CMS' website, and that it is listed as having an ER. If so, please email us with the hospital name and address.