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.
BMJ 2005;331 (20 August), doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7514.0-f
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
When a label confuses doctors and impairs communication with patients, it is time to change the label. So say Richard Lehman and colleagues this week in their editorial on heart failure (p 415). They argue that, for doctors, the term "heart failure" covers a confusingly wide spectrum of illness and is something we have difficulty defining, while for patients it can sound like "the end of hope"something they try to forget or allow to dominate their lives. Either way the result is likely to be damaging psychologically and reduce adherence to treatment. As an alternative name, Lehman et al suggest cardiac impairment.
The editorial also usefully reminds us that the best basis for definingwhy not start now?cardiac impairment, is B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP). This one-off blood test is a better prognostic marker than even systolic ejection fraction. It may also, the authors suggest, prove useful for detecting people
Fiona Godlee, editor
(fgodlee@bmj.com)
Read all Rapid Responses
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+