Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
More openness
on risks and on individual surgeons'
performance
Papers
pp 1697, 1701, 1705
Education and debate
pp 1734, 1736, 1740
Personal view
p 1756
Medicine and the media
p 1757
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Cardiac surgery has changed within living memory
from desperate attempts to achieve miracles for a few to the present
situation where there is high expectation of a good result for tens of
thousands of patients each year. It is easy to recall the surgeons who
performed the first heart operations, who used cardiopulmonary bypass
while it was still in its infancy, or who started transplantation
all
undertaken with a high initial mortality. They worked on doggedly, in
the face of doubt, scepticism, and often widely publicised criticism.
They are now remembered with respect as having had "the courage to
fail." Many others, equally determined, did fail and are not
remembered.1
Some of that determination, in the face of possible failure, is
necessary in every surgeon. But the congenital heart surgery undertaken
in Bristol in the past 10 years
the subject of the General Medical
Council's most recent, and arguably most important,
UK medical students have published unreleased government plans to restrict failed asylum seekers' access to medical care