ER Inspector GERALD CHAMPION REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTERGERALD CHAMPION REGIONAL 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 » New Mexico » GERALD CHAMPION REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER

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

GERALD CHAMPION REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER

2669 north scenic drive, alamogordo, N.M. 88310

(575) 439-6100

59% of Patients Would "Definitely Recommend" this Hospital
(N.M. Avg: 68%)

4 violations related to ER care since 2015

Hospital Type

Acute Care Hospitals

Hospital Owner

Voluntary non-profit - Private

ER Volume

Medium (20K - 40K 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
1% of patients leave without being seen
4hrs 56min Admitted to hospital
6hrs 32min Taken to room
2hrs 36min 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 medium 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 36min
National Avg.
2hrs 23min
N.M. Avg.
2hrs 36min
This Hospital
2hrs 36min
Impatient Patients
Left Without
Being Seen

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

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

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

4hrs 56min

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

National Avg.
4hrs 21min
N.M. Avg.
4hrs 56min
This Hospital
4hrs 56min
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 36min

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

National Avg.
1hr 33min
N.M. Avg.
1hr 36min
This Hospital
1hr 36min
Special Patients
CT Scan

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

6%
National Avg.
27%
N.M. Avg.
31%
This Hospital
6%

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
EMERGENCY SERVICES POLICIES

Jan 15, 2019

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to establish, evaluate, and update policies and procedures for emergency services for triaging (the evaluation and classification of patients for the purposes of treatment) and screening patients.

See More ↓

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to establish, evaluate, and update policies and procedures for emergency services for triaging (the evaluation and classification of patients for the purposes of treatment) and screening patients. This failure has the potential to cause harm to patients by not establishing a process to triage and screen patients that enter the emergency room at the facility. The findings are: A. Record review the facility's policies and procedures the facility does not have a policy or a procedure on triaging patient that enter the emergency room of the facility. The facility uses the Admission of Patients to the ED policy as the policy to triage patients. The Admission of Patients to the ED policy only states that the triage nurse is to use the Emergenccy Severity Index (ESI - five-level emergency department triage algorithm that provides clinically relevant stratification of patients into five groups from 1 (most urgent) to 5 (least urgent) on the basis of acuity and resource needs) scale. B. On 1/2/19 at 3:00 pm during an interview with the Charge Nurse in the emergency room (S#10) that triaged patient P#1 on 12/24/18 she confirmed that there is not a written policy or procedure on triaging patients when patients come into the emergency room . C. On 1/2/19 at 3:00 pm during an interview with S#10 (triaged P#1) it was confirmed that on 12/24/18 on the P#1's initial visit, during the triage process P#1 and his father was not asked about P#1's vaccination history or past medical history. S#10 stated that this is done by the nurse that assumes care of the patient. D. On 1/3/19 at 3:00 pm during an interview with S#14 that assumed care of P#1 after triage it was confirmed that she did not ask P#1's father about vaccination history or status and past medical history. S#14 stated that questions about vaccination history and status are done during triage and that the providers are the ones that ask about past medical history of the patient during their initial exam. E. On 1/3/19 at 10:00 am during an interview with S#2 (the provider for P#1) confirmed that he does not recall if he asked the father of P#1 about vaccination history or status and past medical history of P#1 during his initial exam of P#1.

See Less ↑
QUALIFIED EMERGENCY SERVICES PERSONNEL

Jan 15, 2019

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure there were adequate nursing personnel trained and qualified in emergency care to meet the needs anticipated by the facility for 1 (P#1) of 20 (P#1 through P#20) patients .

See More ↓

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure there were adequate nursing personnel trained and qualified in emergency care to meet the needs anticipated by the facility for 1 (P#1) of 20 (P#1 through P#20) patients . This deficient practice has the potential to affect the care, treatment and outcome who presents to the Emergency Department (ED) for treatment. The findings are: A. On 1/2/19 at 2:13 pm during interview S#10 confirmed Border Patrol Agent did all translation for P#1 during his treatment. B. On 1/2/19 at 2:22 pm during interview S#10 confirmed there weren't any policies for translation services. C. On 1/3/19 at 9:17 am during interview S#2 confirmed never gone through certification process for translation and stated "I've never seen a written policy that I am aware of at this point." D. On 1/3/19 at 12:00 pm during interview S#8 confirmed there is a number to call on the hospital's web page. S#8 also stated that the ED staff on call spoke Spanish and didn't see the need to call translation services. S#8 also confirmed that S#8 does not document what language a patient speaks on the medical record. E. On 01/03/19 at 3:01 pm during interview S#14 confirmed that he/she did not know of translation services. S#14 further stated "I don't recall if the discharge instructions were in English or Spanish, there is no way for me to change it." S#14 could not confirm if the father of the patient understood the information provided to him. F. On 01/13/19 at 3:15 pm during interview S#15 stated "the two people who speak Spanish were in the room during the code (patient was not breathing on his own and did not have a pulse) S#15 confirmed "I know a translation policy exists, I know where to find it, a binder somewhere at the desk, but don't recall being given a policy." G. On 01/11/19 at 11:50 am during interview, S#17 stated that S#17 completed the interpreter services education module the other day, knows where and how to access but has not used the interpreter services before. H. Record review of "Patient Rights" Policy, May 29, 2018, states that "The Patient Handbook and Patient Rights flyer will inform the patient of the following patient rights: COMMUNICATION - Each Patient has the right to access to people outside the hospital by means of visitors and by verbal and written communication. When the patient does not speak or understand the predominant language of the community, communication will be made through an interpreter". J. Record review of "Hospital Certification/Consent Form, April, 2018 for P#1 for both ED visits by P#1 on 12/24/18 were in English, not in Spanish (native language spoken by P#1 and P#1's father). The hospital has a "Hospital Certification/Consent Form" in Spanish readily available.

See Less ↑
POSTING OF SIGNS

Jan 15, 2019

Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to conspicuously post in the treatment area, a sign in Spanish specifying the EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act) rights of individuals under Section 1867 of the Social Security Act (SSA) in the emergency department (ED).

See More ↓

Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to conspicuously post in the treatment area, a sign in Spanish specifying the EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act) rights of individuals under Section 1867 of the Social Security Act (SSA) in the emergency department (ED). This deficient practice has the potential to have any person who presents to the ED from fully knowing and understanding the EMTALA rights under the SSA and to know if the hospital participates in the Medicaid program, if their primary language is one other than English. The findings are: A. On 01/02/19 at 1:45 pm during tour of the ED, Patient Rights signs posted near the Triage/ER Intake Window in the ED waiting room was in three languages: English, German and Spanish. Patient Rights signs posted in treatment areas, hallways and other patient-accessible areas within the ED were in English and German only. B. Record review of "Patient Rights" Policy, May 29, 2018, states that "The Patient Handbook and Patient Rights flyer will inform the patient of the following patient rights: COMMUNICATION - Each Patient has the right to access to people outside the hospital by means of visitors and by verbal and written communication. When the patient does not speak or understand the predominant language of the community, communication will be made through an interpreter". C. Record Review of "EMTALA" Policy, April 24, 2018, states that "7. Signage: (facility name) will conspicuously post signs in English, Spanish and German specifying: The rights of patients under EMTALA with respect to screening and stabilization for emergency medical conditions and patients in active labor; and That (facility name) participates in the Medicaid program". D. On 01/03/2019 at 3:30 pm, S#6 confirmed there was a Spanish EMTALA sign missing from the treatment area.

See Less ↑
STABILIZING TREATMENT

Jan 15, 2019

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide stabilizing treatment and/or follow up care to prevent relapse or worsening of the medical condition upon discharge from the ER (emergency room - a department of a hospital that provides immediate treatment for acute illnesses and trauma).

See More ↓

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide stabilizing treatment and/or follow up care to prevent relapse or worsening of the medical condition upon discharge from the ER (emergency room - a department of a hospital that provides immediate treatment for acute illnesses and trauma). This failed practice has the likelihood to cause harm to patients that are discharged from the ER. Findings: A. Record review of P #1's chart revealed, P #1 was brought to the ER on 12/24/18 at about 10:25am, developed a fever of 103 degrees Fahrenheit (a scale of temperature in standard conditions) at about 1:00 pm. S #14 (P #1's primary nurse) notified S #2 (the provider caring for P# 1). S #2 ordered acetaminophen (used to reduce fever). S #14 administered the acetaminophen to P #1 at 1:20 pm. S #14 documented that P #1's fever came down to 100 degrees Fahrenheit at 1:50 pm. S #2 did not reassess P #1 for signs and/or symptoms that could cause P#1 to relapse after discharge. P #1 was discharge at 2:00 pm with a prescription for a antibiotic (a medicine that inhibits the growth of or destroys microorganisms). P #1's medical record revealed that P#1 was positive for Influenza B (a highly conttagious viral infection of the respiratory passages) before discharge and was not given a prescription for an antiviral medication (a medication that kills a virus or suppresses its ability to replicate). B. On 1/3/19, at 9:17 am, during an interview with S # 2 it was confirmed that S # 2 did not reassess P #1 after his initial assessment of P #1. S#2 stated that the examination performed was "non-focal, everything looked okay, non-toxic, he was talking and sitting, and it sounded to me like an upper respiratory problem. I ordered a flu culture and those test results for the flu were positive. I was notified by the nurse upon discharge that he had a fever spike, so Tylenol was given. " S#2 informed the surveyors that P#1 was discharged with an antibiotic (amoxicillin). S#2 stated no antiviral medication was given or prescribed for P#1. C. Record review of P #1's chart, the discharge instructions for P #1's was printed in English. P #1 and his father only communicate in Spanish. D. On 1/3//19 at 3:00 pm, S# 14 confirmed that she did not recall if she gave P #1 and his father the printed discharge instructions in Spanish.

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.