PIERRE, SD – South Dakota health officials are warning that rural parts of the state won’t be immune from coronavirus activity. That raises questions about whether rural hospitals, which already have challenges, can withstand any surge in cases.
Rural areas didn’t initially see a lot of COVID-19 cases when they first began to surface in the U.S. But that has changed, and rural hospitals in South Dakota might see more demand than they’re used to.
A recent analysis shows the coronavirus has now been confirmed in most all rural counties in America. Tim Rave with the South Dakota Association of Healthcare Organizations says that will likely create added stress for small hospitals that typically don’t have a lot of staff on hand due to low patient volumes.
“You know, it’s always a challenge to get staffing in these remote, rural areas in the state,” he observes.
Health officials have estimated that up to 70 percent of South Dakotans could contract the virus. And whatever challenges exist for providers, he feels confident that all health-care facilities in South Dakota will be able to adequately treat patients.
State leaders have been criticized for not providing information about how the state’s case models are being compiled. Rave says protective gear for health-care workers is still a challenge, but other capacity needs should be met.
“As far as ventilators and beds, I feel comfortable that we will be able to take care of any patient need across the state,” he says.
However, health-care analysts say many rural patients will likely need to be transported to larger hospitals in urban areas. And some of the larger cities have their own challenges. That includes Sioux Falls, which has seen over a thousand positive cases among workers at the Smithfield Foods processing plant.
