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.
The staff in the accident and emergency department had
asked for a medical opinion on the first patient of the evening.
Recently arrived from west Africa, the unfortunate young man was
struggling to describe his numerous symptoms to his family in French,
who were then translating his problems into English. I knew that this was not going to be straightforward.
Raised voices and increasingly frustrated gestures between the patient
and his bewildered uncle and mother indicated that there were other
issues at stake besides his fever, lethargy, and joint pains. After
exhaustive questioning, I thought that a recent onset of dysuria was,
perhaps, relevant in the aetiology of his problems. Although he
emphatically denied any recent sexual contact, I wondered if this was
more to do with the presence of his family members. Unfortunately, as
it was late in the evening, there were no other translators available.
Sitting in front of the results computer later in the evening, I typed
in my enigmatic patient's name and duly noted the normality of the
tests that I had requested. As I pondered the differential diagnoses, I
scrolled idly back through the results file, looking for any previous
investigations. And there it was. Two days ago a urethral swab was sent
from the genitourinary medicine department taken from my patient. I
clicked on the relevant line to view the result I returned to the cubicle and asked the patient's mother to wait
outside. Through his uncle I asked the patient why he had been to the
clinic two days before. He started to get angry, insisting that he had
been nowhere near the clinic and that he could not have a sexually
transmitted disease. He and his uncle exchanged words, and his uncle
then asked if we could speak alone.
Out in the corridor the uncle explained that it was actually
he who had attended the clinic earlier in the week and that
he was currently taking antibiotics for gonorrhoea. He and the patient shared the same, albeit unusual, name and it was actually his result
that I had seen and mistakenly ascribed to his nephew.
Having diagnostic information available without a patient's consent
carries with it a degree of responsibility to check the accuracy and
relevance of the information. Something I shall endeavour to do in future.
London
culture had grown
Neisseria gonorrhoeae.
We welcome articles of up to 600 words on topics such as A memorable patient, A paper that changed my practice, My most unfortunate mistake, or any other piece conveying instruction, pathos, or humour. If possible the article should be supplied on a disk. Permission is needed from the patient or a relative if an identifiable patient is referred to. We also welcome contributions for "Endpieces," consisting of quotations of up to 80 words (but most are considerably shorter) from any source, ancient or modern, which have appealed to the reader.
Read all Rapid Responses