How to Reach Your Doctor — 5 Proven Strategies to Skip the Phone Tag
Lost in the healthcare phone maze? These 5 strategies are your exit route.
In 2025, booking space travel on Blue Origin can feel simpler than reaching your cardiologist. In my work running a healthcare advisory firm, one of the biggest frustrations for patients that we see is the endless game of 'press 1 for this, 2 for that' — only to end up on hold, transferred or hung up on. I consider this high-stakes phone tag that begs for a communication strategy. By mastering a few simple tactics, you can reach your doctor faster and turn hours on hold into minutes of meaningful dialogue. Otherwise, patients routinely waste time hunting down numbers, get bounced between departments, and risk delays in care, fragmented records and even serious medical errors and sometimes do not get what they need even if they do reach their provider.
Even when calls go through, the next hurdle is often the wait: The average time to schedule a doctor's appointment in the U.S. now stretches to 31 days. For specialists like cardiologists, delays can double. When compounded by phone tag, these gaps risk worsening conditions — making strategic communication a literal lifeline.
Consider one emergency department I was involved with that logged 10,000 unanswered calls in a single month. Or picture a Friday discharge with seven medications to fill — only to find out the pharmacy is out of stock on one critical medication. The pharmacy clicks 'therapeutic substitution,' but the doctor's office has already closed for the weekend. The patient is left calling, portal-messaging and circling back to the pharmacy, each loop costing precious time and potentially leading to treatment delays.
Electronic medical records and patient apps like MyChart were supposed to bridge the communication gap. Yet many patients find portals just another barrier to getting the timely assistance and advice that they need. Even when messages get delivered, asynchronous systems lack the dynamic back-and-forth that could provide a solution to your time-sensitive needs. There are no set standards for when your provider will even check for your message or respond to you or call you if needed. Due to these limitations, it is important that you know the best strategies to reach out for a real-time call. In healthcare, nothing beats a live conversation with your provider which allows for ironing out details, flagging concerns and ensuring everyone's on the same page.
Healthcare professionals feel the squeeze too. While doctors often exchange direct numbers with trusted colleagues, fielding patient calls through receptionists and multiple voicemail boxes eats into clinic hours and slows down critical decision-making. This is why you must embrace the strategies below to reach your medical provider:
Every answered call is a step closer to timely, safe care. By mastering these tactics — and by holding our healthcare systems accountable for real-time responsiveness, you can become a winner in the high stakes game of healthcare phone tag and reach your doctor faster for the care you need.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNET
16 minutes ago
- CNET
Is the '137 Club' the Best Way to Cook Steak? Reddit Says Yes, So I Tried It
If there's one thing I use my sous vide immersion circulator for most, it's steak -- and I'm always looking for new ways to level up my skills. Often, this means trying new cooking strategies I find on the r/sousvide Reddit community. One curious phenomenon has commenters proclaiming that 137 degrees Fahrenheit is the best temperature for cooking steak sous vide. The cooking hack allegedly yields the best flavor and texture. Ribeye is the most common cut in many discussions, but I've seen recommendations on cheaper cuts of beef like chuck steak and New York strip. A Reddit search reveals over 125 threads on the aptly named "137 Club." So I dug deeper to look at the science behind this cooking trend and, of course, tried it for myself. The science of cooking the perfect steak I seasoned every steak identically with salt, granulated garlic powder and cracked black pepper. John Carlsen/CNET Ahead of my test, I hit the books. My first instinct was to consult Modernist Cuisine by Nathan Myhrvold, Chris Young and Maxine Bilet, which is one of the most comprehensive resources on the science of cooking. With a list price that usually tops $500, over 2,400 pages across six volumes and no digital version, this is easier said than done. Fortunately, I found a copy of the more compact Modernist Cuisine at Home in Brigham Young University's collection near my home. ("More compact" is a relative term since it's also huge.) Thankfully, Modernist Cuisine at Home has an entire section about cooking steak, including the sous vide method. Vacuum sealing the steaks overnight allowed the seasoning to work as a marinade. John Carlsen/CNET The book groups cuts of steak into two categories: tender (filet, tenderloin, New York strip, ribeye, T-bone and so on) and tough cuts (chuck, skirt, hanger, flat iron, flank and so on). Tender cuts typically cook at lower temperatures, with the authors and their lab generally preferring a medium rare doneness around 133 F in most cases. In contrast, the recommendations for tough cuts hover around 144 F to 149 F, which the book implies is a more traditional roast-like result: think tender and flaky rather than extra juicy. Douglas Baldwin's masterclass A Practical Guide to Sous Vide Cooking, cites multiple scientific papers that suggest the best tenderness results with beef lie somewhere between 120 F and 150 F, with specific mention of 131 F to 140 F for cheaper, tougher cuts of beef. This appears to be the sweet spot for converting tough collagen into smooth, flavorful gelatin. Additionally, Modernist Cuisine at Home suggests that ribeye, a tender cut of meat, turns out best after three hours at 133 F. There are small differences between the resources, but both seem to validate the 137 Club as a catchall method for steak. The steaks barely fit in the container I use for my sous vide bath, but I made it work with some strategic spacers and weights. John Carlsen/CNET While I wasn't able to track down the founding member of the 137 Club, I know that the term started gaining steam in April 2020, at least on Reddit. If I had to guess why 137 F became the magic number, it probably comes down to preference for the first person who tried it -- they might have liked it more medium than medium rare. After all, 137 degrees falls in the aforementioned temperature range, with a margin of error in case the temperature of the sous vide bath fluctuates during cooking. In this case, the temperature could vary by 3 degrees either way without affecting the results too heavily. My research ends here, but I doubt I'll be the last person wondering where it all came from. The experiment We all tried three samples with a simple survey asking about the texture, flavor and anything else that stood out. John Carlsen/CNET Now that we know that there's some science behind the 137 Club, it's time to test. I originally intended to test it with ribeye, which frequently comes up in 137 Club threads. It has a great balance of fatty tissue that supposedly renders better at a higher temperature. Instead, I found tender 1-inch T-bones on sale, which will work just fine. The main purpose was to see if there were any noticeable differences in the cooking. There were five taste testers: myself and four others who I'll refer to as Annette, Lauren, Hank and Nora. None of us had tasted the 137 F method before. Steak A: Grilled This was also the fastest cook because it required practically no additional prep beyond seasoning. John Carlsen/CNET I grilled Steak A in the traditional style, using a timer and a meat thermometer to reach an internal temperature of 131 F. (I aimed for 129 F, but grills are fickle things.) It took about 7 minutes. All of us agreed the traditional grilled steak was the least tender of the three steaks. As expected, the inside of the steak wasn't as consistent as with the sous vide steaks. However, it was juicy and the outside seared perfectly because I didn't have to worry as much about ruining the sous vide steaks. Nora even said it was her favorite: "Most flavor, I can taste each seasoning." Steak B: Sous vide at 129 F for 60 minutes I learned to sous vide steak at 129 F, so it was a good comparison point. John Carlsen/CNET I cooked Steak B with my normal sous vide method of 129 F for 60 minutes. (Note: I usually do 120 minutes, but shortened it due to time constraints.) Crucially, this steak lies outside the temperature range mentioned earlier. Since the experiment was at a family member's house, I chose to sear the sous vide steaks on the grill, which isn't as precise or powerful as my trusty blowtorch. Also, searing multiple T-bones with my small blowtorch would've taken an eternity. Likewise, I could've done a better job by not searing all three sous vide steaks at the same time. I bought four steaks in total, so there were two Steak Bs, with the thinner one turning out slightly more medium after searing. John Carlsen/CNET As a result, Steak B's crust was uneven and the flavor wasn't as pronounced as the grilled steak. The fat also didn't render as well as the other steaks. Everyone liked how soft this steak was, with one tester saying it fell apart in her mouth. Still, Steak B was the favorite option of three tasters: Annette, Lauren and me. However, it was the lowest-ranked steak for the other two respondents. Hank said it was "a little too different for my liking but still enjoyable." Meanwhile, Nora simply liked it but wrote "would not order again." I'll try not to take it personally. Steak C: Sous vide at 137 F for 60 minutes (also known as the 137 Club) In my case, I feel like it was a toss-up between Steak B (middle) and Steak C (left). John Carlsen/CNET I cooked Steak C at 137 F for an hour before keeping it warm in the 129 F bath with Steak B for another hour. Yes, the extra time affected the final result on Steak C, but seeing that many 137 Club threads suggest cooking for at least 120 minutes, I was fine adding a little more time. The sear turned out a little better than with Steak B. We all noticed that it wasn't as moist as the other sous vide steak, but it was extremely juicy. However, Steak C was flakier, more tender and seemed to have a deeper flavor because the fat had more time to render out and interact with the meat. Juiciness was the deciding factor for the tasters who preferred the other sous vide steak. But Steak C certainly had fans and was very good, with Hank saying it was "the best of the three in my opinion." What's the verdict on the 137 Club? Despite juggling cooking times and completing three steak methods simultaneously, it's always so rewarding to share good food with family. John Carlsen/CNET I learned two things from this experiment. First, sous vide steaks cooked at 137 F are just as delicious as other methods. It also seems to render fat more effectively than lower sous vide temperatures with a slightly higher level of doneness. It's ideal when you have a few hours to let the water bath work its magic. This helps balance out some of the confirmation bias of the many positive sentiments on Reddit. Secondly, whether anyone likes the final result ultimately reflects their personal preferences and that's fine. While medium rare is very popular for a lot of people, there are individuals -- my wife included -- who prefer medium-well and well-done steaks. (In case you're wondering, she says well-done sous vide steaks are delicious and much more forgiving than on the grill.) A final bonus lesson is something I've experienced many times -- it's a blast to experiment when you find something interesting that's within your skills. Trying one thing doesn't mean giving up a treasured cooking method or a favorite meal, but it can open up your possibilities and help you find new ways to make great food.
Medscape
17 minutes ago
- Medscape
ADHD, Obesity Link May Depend on Where You Live
The well-documented link between attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and obesity in both children and adults has typically been attributed to individual traits and behaviors, with limited attention paid to environmental and social factors. However, a new study challenged this perspective, proposing that ADHD may contribute to obesity by reducing physical activity — a connection shaped by the urban environment in which a person lives. 'Our research reveals a surprising urban advantage: As cities grow, both obesity and ADHD rates decrease proportionally,' first author Tian Gan, a PhD student at the Center for Urban Science and Progress, NYU Tandon School of Engineering in Brooklyn, New York, said in a news release. Larger cities may offer 'protective factors against these interconnected health challenges,' Gan added, citing access to better mental health care, education, and opportunities for recreation and physical activity. The study was published online in PLOS Complex Systems . Urban Impact While impulsivity — a core ADHD trait — has long been suspected to contribute to weight gain through poor food choices and reduced physical activity, this new study highlighted how an individual's urban environment can either amplify or dampen those risks. Researchers analyzed public health data from 915 cities in the United States using 'urban scaling' methods, which describe how features of cities change with population size. They observed that both obesity and ADHD prevalence decrease 'sublinearly' with population — meaning that as cities grow, the per capita prevalence of these conditions declines. At the same time, access to mental health care and higher education rises 'superlinearly,' growing faster than the population. In other words, larger cities seem to offer not just more services, but disproportionately more support for conditions linked to impulsivity, the authors theorized. But city size alone doesn't tell the whole story. Using advanced causal discovery methods, the researchers mapped a network of interrelated variables. ADHD prevalence was linked to higher physical inactivity, which in turn increased obesity. Access to mental health care helped reduce inactivity and indirectly lowered obesity risk. Higher prevalence of college education correlated with better mental health access and more physical activity. This causal map revealed a dynamic system in which impulsivity, health behaviors, and urban infrastructure interact — suggesting that city environments can either reinforce or weaken these effects. The link between ADHD and obesity was stronger in cities with fewer opportunities for physical activity or greater food insecurity and weaker in cities with better access to mental health care and higher education levels, they explained. To validate their findings, the researchers examined individual-level data from the National Survey of Children's Health, which included 19,333 US children. This analysis confirmed the city-level data: Children with more severe ADHD were more likely to be obese, especially when physical activity and household education were low. Taken together, the findings reinforce evidence that ADHD contributes to obesity and point to the urban environment as a potentially modifiable target for intervention, the authors said. 'These findings underscore the importance of city-level interventions in mitigating the impact of impulsivity disorders on the obesity epidemic,' Maurizio Porfiri, PhD, who heads the Center for Urban Science and Progress at NYU Tandon School of Engineering, added in the news release.
Digital Trends
23 minutes ago
- Digital Trends
This deal gets you $45 earbuds that 'redefine' the genre
Just three weeks ago we reviewed the Soundcore Liberty 5, which we called 'excellent daily driver earbuds.' The meaning was pretty clear — the buds sell for $130, which is considerably lower than their Apple competition and sits them right in the middle of the best earbuds. They're quality buds and have Soundcore's best ANC to date. That's great stuff, but this hot deal puts an all-time low price on a difference set of Soundcore's earbuds — a more budget-minded set. The Soundcore Space A40 retail for somewhere between about $65 and $80 depending on where you look, but now you can get them for just $45. Amazon Prime members can get the blue color and any Walmart shopper can get the black color with free shipping while this deal lasts. Is it enough to completely eclipse the Liberty 5 release? For a certain type of shopper, yes. If you're that type of shopper, please tap the appropriate button below. Why you should buy the Soundcore Space A40 The Soundcore Space A40 have been on our radar for quite some time now, and we liked them even when they released with a $100 MSRP. Our Soundcore Space A40 review says that the small earbuds 'redefine what you can expect from budget wireless earbuds.' The reason they are described this way is due to a features list that transcends what we typically expect from sub-$100 earbuds. They have 'real deal' ANC, a battery life of 50 hours when you include the case (and have ANC off), are 'very comfortable,' and have the full slew of companion app features that you'd expect from superior earbuds, among other things. These are fully featured earbuds now being sold for just $45. Even if you've got something great yourself already, they make a fine gift for someone who isn't tuned into premium buds (yet). Getting the Soundcore Space A40 for just $45 instead of the usual $65-$80 we usually see them at is an amazing deal and great opportunity. But if you're still want to play the field a bit, be sure to check out our list of the best budget headphones and earbuds. There, you'll see the Soundcore Space A40, but also offerings like the JLab JBuds Mini, which are slightly cheaper at $40. However, that's their normal price. If you want quality earbuds at an incredible price, the Soundcore Space A40 at $45 are the headphones deal to beat.
