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 2006;333:691 (30 September), doi:10.1136/bmj.38950.395868.68
R Sivakumar, specialist registrar, general medicine1, S Pavulari, senior house officer, general medicine1, S Ellis, consultant physician and rheumatologist1
1 Lister Hospital, Stevenage, Hertfordshire SG1 4AB
Correspondence to: R Sivakumar sivasiva51@hotmail.com
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Four weeks ago we presented the case of a 19 year old student who presented with a spiking fever (2 September, p 484). Her condition deteriorated and she required intensive care. As she had no confirmed diagnosis her parents requested a second opinion (9 September, p 541). The parents were informed that her underlying disease had triggered a systemic inflammatory response affecting various organs with an uncertain prognosis. Although it is generally acknowledged that patients do not have an automatic right to a further opinion, doctors should always respect a patient's and relatives' wishes for a second opinion unless there are justifiable reasons for refusalfor example, if it may be harmful to the patient. Such requests should be handled sensitively and patients should be made to feel comfortable.
Our working diagnosis was of adult onset Still's disease. She was started on intravenous hydrocortisone, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, and
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+