My husband had a screening colonoscopy last Friday. His nurse in the recovery is the only one I had issues with. I, not my husband.
All went well, but let me tell you he is not an ePatient Dave. He did not read his instructions about when to quit eating and the prep. I did. I then reminded him along the way: “Only clear liquids today.” “You must take the Ducolax at 3 pm. Do you want me to text you a reminder?”
Sometimes the instructions we give patients are clear, but not always read.
The staff at the front desk were very kind and organized. Calls had been made the day before and I had insured the insurance information they had was correct. I did not tell anyone I was a doctor. I’m not sure if my husband did later or not.
When I was called back by the nurse, she mispronounced my name calling me Rhonda (which I forgave easily). She did not introduce herself to me.
As we entered the recovery area, she did not take me to my husband and assure me he was okay. She took me to the desk and abruptly said, “You need to sign this.” Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Suture for a Living*
Quiz: What does the term “meaningful use” mean?
A. Using something in a way that gives life purpose and leads to carefree days of glee.
B. It depends on your definition of the word “term.”
C. It’s not mean. It’s really nice.
D. A large number of rules created by the government to assess a practice’s use of electronic medical records (EMRs) so that they can spur adoption, give criteria for incentive rewards, and have physicians in a place where care can be measured.
E. Job security for those making money off of health IT.
The answer, of course, is D and E. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Musings of a Distractible Mind*
Medscape has a physician portal and they asked the question: “Where would you like to practice medicine?” The responses from physicians were varied with lots of complaining and joking like “Dubai”, but this reply from a family medicine doctor got my attention. I think he speaks for many physicians.
- I would like to work in a fantasy world.
- One where I didn’t have to worry about someones economic status. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at EverythingHealth*
This past December (2008), there was a report in Healthcare IT (Information Technology) News that got me thinking, of all things, about medical situations in outdoor wilderness environments. The substance of the report was that researchers at Vanderbilt University (I worked there in the late ’80s as Chief of the Division of Emergency Medicine) “found that physicians who receive training in a technology-rich environment, but go on to work in a less modern facility feel they can’t provide safe, efficient care.”
The study related to information technology, but is probably applicable to many other modes of technology. As it was reported, the Vanderbilt study included more than 300 medical training graduates. Of those who “were working in an environment with less IT,” some 80 percent reported “feeling less able…to work efficiently, to share and communicate information, and to work effectively within the local system.” The lead investigator Kevin Johnson, MD explained that “going from being a medical student where somebody is always watching after you to a role where you could potentially make a mistake that could actually harm a patient is already hard enough.” But “when you get there and realize that the systems they have are less functional and less pervasive…there is an entirely new set of challenges.”
To all medical students, residency graduates, or anyone else who moves from a highly supervised environment to one where you are on your own, welcome to the club. The whole point of learning how to be self-sufficient is to be able to go it alone when the need arises. What is most striking about wilderness medicine is the notion that one moves to a setting that is austere and resources (people, technology, supplies, communication, etc.) are frequently limited. This can be very unsettling for experienced practitioners, and is even more so for neophytes.
We live in an age of technological imperative. Doctors train in hospitals with large, complex intensive care units. The emergency department is equipped with all the latest gadgets, and specialists are on call 24 by 7 to help out when a difficult or puzzling situation arises. That is not the case in the wilderness, on the battlefield, or out at sea. Expectations change from perfection to doing enough to get the patient to a higher level of care, or just to make it through the hour, let alone the next day.
Think about it. Take your favorite medical instrument(s) and think about how you would practice if you didn’t have access to it. Could you diagnose heart failure without a stethoscope and pulse oximeter? High altitude cerebral edema without a CT scan? Septic shock without a blood pressure monitor, central venous catheter, arterial blood gas measurements, and a battery of laboratory tests? I think the answer is “yes” if you were properly trained.
Technology is good. In fact, it is great. Patients are better off for the ability of health care professionals to apply all manner of diagnostic and interventional devices and techniques. However, I believe that at the same time we are all taught how to do things in the city, we should learn how we must sometimes do them in the country.
image courtesy of cdneverest2008.com
This post, Physicians Should Learn How To Practice Medicine With And Without Technology, was originally published on
Healthine.com by Paul Auerbach, M.D..