ER Inspector HUNTINGTON HOSPITALHUNTINGTON HOSPITAL

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 York » HUNTINGTON HOSPITAL

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

HUNTINGTON HOSPITAL

270 park avenue, huntington, N.Y. 11743

(631) 351-2000

70% of Patients Would "Definitely Recommend" this Hospital
(N.Y. Avg: 66%)

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
0% of patients leave without being seen
8hrs 14min Admitted to hospital
14hrs 30min Taken to room
2hrs 43min 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 43min
National Avg.
2hrs 42min
N.Y. Avg.
3hrs 4min
This Hospital
2hrs 43min
Impatient Patients
Left Without
Being Seen

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

0%
Avg. U.S. Hospital
2%
Avg. N.Y. Hospital
2%
This Hospital
0%
Admitted Patients
Time Before Admission

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

8hrs 14min

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

National Avg.
5hrs 4min
N.Y. Avg.
6hrs 31min
This Hospital
8hrs 14min
Admitted Patients
Transfer Time

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

6hrs 16min

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

National Avg.
2hrs 2min
N.Y. Avg.
3hrs
This Hospital
6hrs 16min
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%
N.Y. Avg.
26%
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
EMERGENCY SERVICES

Apr 10, 2015

. Based on record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to meet the Condition of Participation for Emergency Services.

See More ↓

. Based on record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to meet the Condition of Participation for Emergency Services. This was determined by the facility's failure to provide care to patients in the Emergency Department (ED) in accordance with acceptable standards of practice. This was evidenced in one (1) of seven (7) ED Patient Record reviews (Patient #8). Findings: The facility failed to establish a written Policy and Procedure for Mortality Reviews for patients who expired in the ED. (See Tag A1104) The facility failed to ensure that the Triage Policy included a mechanism to escalate a change in the patient's condition after the initial triage in one (1) of five (5) patients who expired in the Emergency Department (ED) (Patient #8). (See Tag A1104) The facility failed to ensure that there was a timely Medical Evaluation for ED patients after Triage (Patient #8). (See Tag A1112) The facility's failure to provide care in accordance with acceptable standards of practice caused a delay in diagnostic testing and medical intervention for a patient who expired in the ED. .

See Less ↑
EMERGENCY SERVICES POLICIES

Apr 10, 2015

. Based on record review, document review and interview, the facility failed to: a) establish a written Policy and Procedure for Mortality Reviews for patients who expired in the Emergency Department (ED), and b) ensure that the Triage Policy included a mechanism to escalate a change in the patient's condition after the Initial Triage in one (1) of five (5) patients who expired in the Emergency Department (ED) (Patient #8). Findings: a) Review of the Medical Record for Patient #8 on 04/09/15 documents that the patient (MDS) dated [DATE] at 5:17PM with a complaint of shortness of breath.

See More ↓

. Based on record review, document review and interview, the facility failed to: a) establish a written Policy and Procedure for Mortality Reviews for patients who expired in the Emergency Department (ED), and b) ensure that the Triage Policy included a mechanism to escalate a change in the patient's condition after the Initial Triage in one (1) of five (5) patients who expired in the Emergency Department (ED) (Patient #8). Findings: a) Review of the Medical Record for Patient #8 on 04/09/15 documents that the patient (MDS) dated [DATE] at 5:17PM with a complaint of shortness of breath. The Initial Triage was documented at 5:33PM. The patient was Triaged as a Level 2 - Very Urgent. Review of the Medical Record revealed a three (3) hour delay in a medical screen by the Physician. The Medical Record documented that the patient expired at 11:30 PM on 05/19/14. An Initial Mortality Review by a Physician on 06/30/14 determined that the standard of care was met. A Secondary Review in September 2014 by the facility's "Patient Safety Program", a Team of specially trained RN's, determined the case warranted a second look due to the delay in medical screen and sent the case to the Mortality Review Committee for further review. A review of the Mortality Review Committee Meeting Minutes revealed that the case was placed on the Agenda for October 2014. The case was not reviewed during the October Meeting and was moved to the November Meeting, which was subsequently canceled. According to the Meeting Minutes, the case was again placed on the December 2014 Agenda, but was not reviewed during that Meeting. The case was then moved each month to the next Committee Meeting but was not reviewed until March 2015, six (6) months after being sent to the Mortality Review Committee and ten (10) months after the patient's expiration. Interview on the morning of 04/09/15 with Staff #1 revealed that the case was not reviewed "Because the ED Doctor was unavailable for review". The Mortality Review Committee identified an "Opportunity for Improvement", however, there was no documented evidence of a plan for corrective action. Review of the facility's Medical Staff Bylaws revealed in Subsection 13 titled "The Perinatal Morbidity and Mortality Committee" that the facility had a procedure for Obstetrics and Gynecological Mortality Reviews, but the Bylaws lacked evidence of a Policy and Procedure for other Departmental Mortality Reviews. In an interview in the afternoon of 04/09/15, when asked to review the facility written Policy and Procedure for Mortality Reviews, Staff #3 replied "There isn't one". This was confirmed with Staff #4 at the time of interview. b) Patient #8 was sent by her Cardiologist to the Emergency Department on 05/19/14 at 5:17 PM to rule out a Pulmonary Emboli versus a Deep Vein Thrombosis. Review of the Medical Record on 4/09/15 revealed that the patient was Triaged by the RN in the ED on 05/19/14 at 5:33 PM as a Level 2 - Very Urgent. A Nursing Note at 6:00PM documents the patient with "Respiratory distress. Tachypneic (rapid breathing). Labored respiration noted. Normal respiratory effort." and "Tachycardic (rapid heart rate). Hypertensive (elevated blood pressure)." The patient was placed on three (3) liters of oxygen. The patient was not evaluated by a Physician until 8:12PM. The record lacked documented evidence that the Nurse notified the Physician at the time of Triage, of the patient's initial condition and when the patient's condition required oxygen. The record also lacked documented evidence that the Nurse followed up with the Physician regarding a lack of medical assessment for three (3) hours for a patient Triaged as a Level 2. This finding was confirmed on 04/09/15 in the morning with Staff Members #1 and #2 at the time of record review. Staff #1 stated the patient should have been seen by the ED Physician within one-half (1/2) hour to one (1) hour. The Policy and Procedure, "Triage and Chart Flow" dated 02/13 lacks a procedure to ensure that the Nurses notify the Physican of patients requiring timely evaluation. .

See Less ↑
QUALIFIED EMERGENCY SERVICES PERSONNEL

Apr 10, 2015

. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that there was a timely Medical Evaluation for Emergency Department (ED) patients after Triage in one (1) out of seven (7) ED Medical Records reviewed (Patient #8). Findings: Patient #8 revealed the patient was sent by her Cardiologist to the Emergency Department (ED) on 05/19/14 at 5:17PM to rule out a Pulmonary Emboli versus a Deep Vein Thrombosis. Review of the Medical Record on 04/09/15 revealed that the patient was Triaged by the RN in the ED on 05/19/14 at 5:33PM as a Level 2 - Very Urgent.

See More ↓

. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that there was a timely Medical Evaluation for Emergency Department (ED) patients after Triage in one (1) out of seven (7) ED Medical Records reviewed (Patient #8). Findings: Patient #8 revealed the patient was sent by her Cardiologist to the Emergency Department (ED) on 05/19/14 at 5:17PM to rule out a Pulmonary Emboli versus a Deep Vein Thrombosis. Review of the Medical Record on 04/09/15 revealed that the patient was Triaged by the RN in the ED on 05/19/14 at 5:33PM as a Level 2 - Very Urgent. A Nursing Note at 6:00PM documents the patient with "Respiratory distress. Tachypneic. Labored respiration noted. Normal respiratory effort." and "Tachycardic. Hypertensive." The patient was placed on three (3) liters of oxygen. The patient was not evaluated by a Physician until 8:12PM. The Medical Record lacked documented evidence that the patient received a Medical Evaluation for three (3) hours after Triage, resulting in a delay in diagnostic testing and medical intervention. This finding was confirmed on 04/09/15 in the morning with Staff Members #1 and #2 at the time of record review.

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.