Thursday, May 29, 2014

Bedside Teaching


Share

From my History of Medicine perspective, bedside teaching came to medical education as a major advance in teaching technique. It's what I experienced in medical school some 50 years ago and it was priceless.
In one form or another teaching at the bedside probably existed clear back to the Asclepian schools of medicine. Certainly preceptor-training took place at the bedside, but the breakthrough came with the university system of medical education wherein highly distinguished professors examined patients and taught small groups of students at the bedside.
Formal bedside teaching as we came to know it, grew to a fine art in Edinburgh with Hodgkin, Addison and Bright and later among the Irish professors: Cheyne, Corrigan, Stokes, Adams and Graves in Dublin around 1818.
Today, teaching rounds tends to be in the hall or in a conference room far removed from the patient. Confidentiality inhibits discussion in a two bed room and professors themselves no longer have the skill in dealing directly with the patient or teaching in front of the patient.
It behooves the student to force the issue, however. Get the patient's permission and then drag the professor reluctantly to the bedside. Introduce your instructor; show him or her the pathology. Tell the story and insist on comment and opinion. It should be easy to chide the professor or teaching fellow away from the conference room and once in the hall say, let's look in on this case; my patient is expecting you.
Once learned this habit of bedside teaching will serve the physician in dealing with consultants and or referring physicians -- providing a continuity of information and care at the patient's bedside.

 

Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Hypertension


Share Open CME claims 1:3 people in the US have HT but only 29% of them are aware of it. This sad state of affairs has nothing to do with guidelines, best evidence or medical education reform, it relates entirely to diagnosis. If you can't diagnosis it, you certainly can't treat it.

Taking a. BP is nor hard, but it requires a certain descipline: multiple readings, sitting and standing, documentation of body position and all readings. As long as BPs are done by machine or aid, we can count on gross errors. The machine is usually inaccurate. The aid is looking only for a normal reading. I had one aid ask me if that sounded right. If the doctor is not interested in finding elevated BP readings, he won't find them, but he will indeed if only he or she will take the time to do the pulse and BP. What better way to establish raport, intimacy and trust - not to mention build a quality practice.

Thursday, May 1, 2014

Best-Evidence


Share |

Best Evidence: The best evidence rule is a common law rule of evidence which can be traced back at least as far as the 18th century. In Omychund v Barker (1745) 1 Atk, 21, 49; Cliché, fashion, obsession, fad, trend, vogue, in thing, rage, frame, form, mold, mode, taste, device

Is evidence based medicine a fad, a current trend, a passing rage, or does it hold some breakthrough framework or mold that will results in better patient care? The word evidence-based has indeed become a cliché. If one were to view medical vogues as one would view a stock on the equities market, one would look at the word with a high degree of suspicion. By the time a company lands on the cover of Time Magazine, it’s stock loses its appeal, and it is time to get out. Evidence-based, has become the watch word for every medical or surgical endeavor. Medicine definitely embraces trends, which normally flourish for a few years until someone else comes along and disproves the thesis. There is nothing to disprove about evidence-based medicine; its name alone implies a changing proof. The problem with keeping pace with medical science, however, and distributing a convincing proof to the far flung reaches of clinical medicine presents an impossible challenge, at least in the way we deliver medical information today. The links below lead to a variety of evidence-based references both for treatment and for diagnosis. The last one, notably a $66 paperback has a publication date of 2009.

The problem is not the evidence; it is a problem of access, timeliness and adequacy, not to mention relevance. Medicine is a fast evolving science. A clinician, despite all claims to the contrary, is a scientist who must pyramid clinical knowledge in order to access the Information needed for her individual patient. Evidence-based medicine is a pyramid of carefully filtered information which comes to a peak somewhere far away only to be published and discriminated at a price in a branching fashion to the intended clinician. By the time the information makes it to the clinician, it is no longer timely and it is based on a question that most closely resembles the question the clinician is asking for just one individual patient. Furthermore, the evidence is based on a statistical population far removed geographically, and besides the patient is a statistic of N1 who may fall anywhere in or outside of the evidence-based parameters. The patient, furthermore, possesses a unique molecular-biological profile that is most relevant to his or her condition. The accumulation of evidence-based information has no way to relate to this patient as an individual. There is no way that standardized care, guidelines or algorithms can keep pace with bio-molecular medicine. The complexity is far too vast and the growth in knowledge is far too fast.

So, let’s get beyond the fad of evidence-based and get on with the problem of delivering current medical knowledge to the clinician regarding the individual patient. The challenge is great. We must make that information easily accessible, free and unlimited to the clinician. The patient information too must be as complete as possible, and as inexpensive as possible. There is no way to do this in an industrial free market framework. Medical Information should replace best-evidence. The information should be free to all physicians and their patients, emanate from the universities and medical schools, and linked to the individual patient’s clinical and molecular profile.