BMJ 1994;308:734-735 (19 March)

Editorials

Suspected myocardial infarction and the GP

Two papers in this week's journal amply demonstrate the failure of many general practitioners to follow the recommendations of the British Heart Foundation's working group on managing patients with myocardial infarction. Why do doctors and other health workers repeatedly fail to carry out what is widely understood to be best practice even when the scientific evidence is solid and guidelines have been established?1 Is it that doctors value their clinical freedom too much or that you cannot teach old dogs new tricks? Impassioned defences of clinical freedom, however, often mask dangerous and inefficient practice. Management based on findings from epidemiological studies and clinical trials is surely the best way forward.2

In the first of two studies examining recent practice Michael Moher, general practitioner, and Neil Johnson, a research fellow from the Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford, review general practitioners' management of patients with suspected myocardial infarction against the recommendations made by the . . . [Full text of this article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Train relatives to intervene
Christopher A J McLaughlan
BMJ 1994 308: 1160. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Shetty, B K K (1994). Aspirin and suspected myocardial infarction. BMJ 308: 1713-1714 [Full text]  
  • McLaughlan, C. A J (1994). Train relatives to intervene. BMJ 308: 1160-1160 [Full text]  
  • Brewster, D. (1994). Lack of knowledge is not the problem. BMJ 308: 1160-1160 [Full text]  
Access jobs at BMJ Careers
Whats new online at Student BMJ