Making a difference: now it's your turn
BMJ 2007; 334 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39216.420625.DE (Published 17 May 2007) Cite this as: BMJ 2007;334:1055All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
It has to be public health. To significantly improve health care
means preventing or minimising the risk of ill health in the first place.
Derek Wanless thinks so, the evidence would suggest so and a significant
number of 'rapid responders' say so. Evidence shows that the benefits of
exercise, weight control, a healthy diet, responsible alcohol consumption
and not smoking have a beneficial affect on just about every organ system
in the body, by maintaining and even improving physiological organ
function and reducing the risks of pathological changes. It is quite
simple really!
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
An improvement of the home based palliative care might be due to an
interaction of different factors like: a) stopping the pain with a correct
drugs association; b) having a domiciliary nurse; c) having a domiciliary
basic doctor to coordinate the different involved specialists (oncologist,
anaesthetist, etc.).
The “last days” of a patient, independently from the cause determining the
disease, have to reach a good quality of life, because every man must live
every day remaining suffering as little as possible.
In a terminal patient this aim can be reach only if different factors
interact with each other.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
Evidence for efficacy of specific treatment for many chronic medical,
non-life-threatening conditions is provided by randomized trials. However,
it is largely ignored that only a subset of patients respond well to such
'evidence-based' therapy, and some patients may even be harmed by it.
Therefore treatment of these chronic diseases should be guided by evidence
obtained from the very patient that is consulting you in your office, not
from a group result obtained elsewhere in patients that may differ from
your patient. A method to achieve this is to treat your patients according
to rigourous scientific rules: comparison with placebo, randomisation,
double blinding, outcome measures that are both relevant to the patient's
life and scientifically sound. These so called n of 1 trials, as proposed
by Guyatt and Sackett(1), should be a standard facility in hospitals and
GP's offices. They are applicable not only to frequent conditions for
which many trials have been performed, but also to rare diseases for which
little therapeutic evidence exists.
(1) NEJM 1986; 314:889
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
Making a Difference?
Then bury “Think Dirty”
And see the light in her eyes.
When fractures and bruises are found
Think Infantile Scurvy and Rickets
When Retinal Haemorrhages confront you
Think Vitamin K is deficient
And when the Bell Tolls
“HE will not ask your Race or Creed
All HE will demand of thee
“What hast thou done on Earth.” Anon.
Michael Innis
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
Continuity of care is valued highly by both patients and doctors [1].
Switching family doctors is uncommon in the UK [2].Continuity of care is
much more than good communication skills, it is the place where patient
and doctor develop trust, a sense of ongoing responsibility, built on
shared experiences and longevity of care [1, 3]. It is the recognition
that illness is more extensive than disease, and the role of the doctor,
is the relief of suffering [4] It is associated with improved compliance,
fewer mistakes, and better health outcomes [1]. Amidst the current health
reforms in England, it is vital that the opportunity for, and benefits, of
continuity of care are preserved.
References:
1. Marshall, M. and T. Wilson, Competition in general practice. BMJ,
2005. 331(7526): p. 1196-1199.
2. Edwards, N., Using markets to reform health care. BMJ, 2005.
331(7530): p. 1464-1466.
3. Mainous, A.G., III, M.A. Goodwin, and K.C. Stange, Patient-
Physician Shared Experiences and Value Patients Place on Continuity of
Care. Ann Fam Med, 2004. 2(5): p. 452-454.
4. Heath, I. and K. Sweeney, Medical generalists: connecting the map
and the territory. BMJ, 2005. 331(7530): p. 1462-1464.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
One of the areas of care that should be chosen is antenatal care. We
can't get nearer to the beginning of life and the opportunity should be
seized. It is a time of engagement with our care system and, for many
women, a time of enhanced motivation to improve their own health.
Although receiving antenatal care is beneficial, the most useful
specific components are not known and the organization and delivery of the
care should be improved. The potential is vast and it should be one of the
topics chosen to make a difference.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
Diabetes education is key to the effective control and prevention of
complications. As any other medical strategy aimed at preventing diseases
or complications, diabetes education costs money and the ROI will only be
visible after a few years. There are three major external obstacles to the
success of diabetes education: physicians, health plan administrators and
government health officials. Most physicians suffer from a syndrome called
"Pedestal Effect" that make them feel like the kings of the universe and
for whom to deal with an educated patient is a threat to their divinity
because the well informed patient "tries to interfere" in medical
decisions. Most health plan administrators, mainly in developing
countries, are unable to think preventive medicine as a means to reduce
costs of complications because they are only driven by immediate profits.
Government health officials usually suffer from two major
deficiencies: profound ignorance in terms of investing in prevention and
the regrettable position of many government heath care institutions that
do not consider health investments as a top priority. Although the target
of all the needed educational strategies the patient is nothing else that
a victim of ignorance of decision makers.
Augusto Pimazoni, MD
Medical Consultant for Health Education Projects,
Sao Paulo, Brazil
Competing interests:
Medical Marketing Consultant for the Health Care Industry
Competing interests: No competing interests
In our constant desire to improve the NHS we are in danger of losing
the qualities that make it special. In primary care we have the luxury of
knowing a patient's full medical history right from birth. Yes, in other
countries the consultation times are longer but they need to be because
the family doctor does not have this information. In some places where
patients doctor hop the doctor may never have met the patient before.
More of a triage/A&E service than primary care as we know it in the UK.
In such places there is less sense of someone being 'your' patient, of
being responsible for what happens to them once they leave the room. Yes,
we have problems with communication with other parts of the service,
letters don't arrive, results go astray. But on the whole it works very
well (and did so before we were computerised). We should identify what is
right with the NHS and fight to keep those qualities or they will
disappear.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
All health providers and also health consumers should understand the
great clinical benefits of biopsychosocial model. Almost all diseases that
afflict humans are explained differentially by biological, psychological
and social factors which affect reciprocally several aspects of a disease.
At consultation, health providers should give a thought to these
dimensions in particular psychosocial and health consumers should also
offer all information related to it. Health providers should understand
the patient as a whole and this simple intervention will certainly make
tremendous biological, psychological, social and economic differences in
healthcare.
Declaration of interest: none
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
Honesty is the best health policy
No patient's access to healthcare should be at the expense of
another, yet that is the inevitable consequence of claiming to offer a
universal service, which is 'cash limited'. The urgent need is for an
infusion of transparency and honesty into politicians, and other NHS
'controllers'. The BMJ should strive to make those who lie, dodge or
obfuscate accountable, by 'naming and shaming'. This would improve NHS
staff morale, patient experience and safety.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests