site stats
Welcome, register | help | log in

Doctors' Jobs

Featured in:

When someone comes to my exam room with a problem, there are three tasks that I am performing for them:

  1. Ruling out bad things
  2. Making the patient's symptoms better
  3. Making a diagnosis

Often people feel that our main job is to make a diagnosis, but it is usually the first on the list (ruling out bad things) that motivates patients to come in.  When the mother comes in with the fussy child, she wants to know if the child has an ear infection.  When the person comes in with severe headaches, they want to make sure it is not a brain tumor or aneurism.  When the person has leg swelling, they want to make sure it is not a blood clot.  As a physician, I always make sure I know what the patient is worried about and address that issue directly.  If I can't rule things out by history (what the person tells me) or exam (what I observe), I order tests to rule them out.

I had a gentleman in the office this morning with upper respiratory symptoms that had gone into his chest.  This progressed and now he was getting short of breath while he was exerting himself.  Now, if this were a 15 year old female, I would have left it there.  The problem was that this was a 45 year old man with high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and a family history of heart disease.  He reported the pain as a "pressure" in his chest and was getting sweaty with it as well as short of breath.  Even though I felt reasonably sure this was not his heart, the fact that on physical exam and history I could not exclude the possibility of heart disease compelled me to order a stress test.  If I felt the likelihood of heart disease was high, I would have sent him directly to the hospital.  Still, it is my first job to rule out bad things, so I did not leave this one be.

I then turned to the second job, making him feel better, and treated what I thought his problem was.  This step is very important for patients to feel that they are being listened to.  They want to know that you have heard that they are sick and are doing something about it.  A lot of times they will just get better on their own, but their expectation is that a medication is necessary.  I honestly think it is important to address the issue somehow, even to give a prescription cough/cold medication. 

This highlights to me the importance of the therapeutic relationship patients need to have with their physicians.  If they have that trust that we are looking after their best interests and they feel we listen to them, we can help them the most.  Without that relationship, there is little that can be done for them.  The main thing patients are asking for when they come to our office is reassurance.  They want to feel confident that if there is something wrong we will find it.  I tell my patients that my job is to worry enough that they don't feel they need to worry.  The worst feeling for a patient is to not trust the doctor and feel they have to do the work themselves.  This does not exclude patients' involvement in their care - it encourages it.  I want to know what they know and what they are feeling.  I want to address their anxieties and answer their questions. 

Once I have done tasks 1 and 2, the third task - making the diagnosis - is not nearly as important.  Who cares what it was as long as we ruled out bad stuff and made the patient feel better?  People don't realize how much of what we do is a "best guess" at a diagnosis, rather than making one.  I will tell my patients "I think you have X" because they need to walk away with something to hold on to.  But the fact remains that actually making the diagnosis is a luxury that often is not achieved.

Trackbacks (0)

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://trusted.md/trackback/8026

Comments (8)

Submitted by Steve Beller PhD on Thu, 03/16/2006 - 9:57am.

Yes, the therapeutic relationship enables patients to trust their providers, which, among other things, means they are more likely to comply with the plan of care, hence more likely to have better outcomes.

And if all the real bad things are ruled out, then a formal diagnosis doesn’t seem as important (except maybe for insurance, research, etc.) since reassurance is the prescription.

I have a question, however, about situations when a diagnosis is important. What do you think about the use of “diagnostic aids,” i.e., computerized tools, such as Problem-Knowledge Couplers, which help clinicians evaluate symptoms, medical history, physical findings, test results, etc. and then return a list of diagnoses and links to related literature for consideration?  

I ask because it is argued that the unaided human mind is unable to consider all the details and facts that required for consistently accurate diagnoses and treatment determinations. They say it is not humanly possible for a clinician to keep up with all the medical literature that could affect diagnostic and prescriptive decisions. For example, in 2004 the Medline medical database had 3,672 articles about adult coronary heart-disease studies. To read all the articles in this one clinical area alone would take 115 eight-hour days at 15 minutes per article. And that’s only one disease; how can clinicians retain information on some 12,000 known diseases in their heads? 

Steve
http://stevebeller.blogspot.com

 

Submitted by Peg (not verified) on Thu, 03/16/2006 - 10:26am.

Dr. L - you clearly provide the patients another need they have when they come to us - to be heard. You listened to the gentleman and addressed his (and your) worst fear.

Steve- I agree with you that no doctor knows everything and that the "unaided human mind" may not be adequate in all situations.  The way I (a generalist) cope with that is that I ask my specialist colleagues, who are likely to keep up in their particular specialty.  I'd rather consult with another human mind than a computer program.  But maybe I'm old fashioned.

Peg

Submitted by Dr. Rob Lamberts on Thu, 03/16/2006 - 11:10am.

Peg - I am sure you realize and agree that we don't do this defensively (to avoid being sued) but instread to fulfil the Hipocratic oath of first, do no harm.  My covenenant with my patient is that I will look out for what is best for them. 

Steve - Yes, I think diagnostic aids have their role - specifically in ruling out bad diagnoses (or ruling them in).  Again, when the task is to rule out bad things, there will be necessarily times where the bad things are ruled-in.  It is important to do so accurately and efficiently (I was actually first planning on writing about the place of certain cardiac screening tests, but got distracted by this whole issue of why we do what we do).  Again, the 400+ things we need to be doing regularly on our patients and the complex presentations they come with requires we have whatever tools we can at our disposal.  I love having Up To Date available in the exam room to look up various things.  I do so numerous times a day.  Having smarter tools embedded into my own computer system is even better.  My mind needs as much aid as it can get!

Rob

Augusta, GA

For other writings, check out

http://robsoddblog.blogspot.com/

Submitted by Steve Beller PhD on Thu, 03/16/2006 - 3:41pm.

Rob, Peg ... Sounds like we have the same mind-set.

But having spoken to Larry Weed several times -- he's the facinating 82 yr old physician who created the Problem Knowledge Couplers from his initial efforts in 1969 www.pkc.com -- it seems that we're in the minority. Larry's experiences closely reflect mine: There has been widespread resistance to decision-support tools that assist providers in making diagnostic and treatment decisions.

Or maybe times are changing and folks are more open to it?

Steve
http://stevebeller.blogspot.com

Submitted by Dr. Rob Lamberts on Thu, 03/16/2006 - 4:05pm.

Yes, we are in the minority, but times are changing.  The same thing can be said for adoption of EHR altogether - there seems to be a major move among our local physicians toward adoption of technology.  If it is due to better systems, people getting used to the idea of EHR, or a younger generation of doctors taking over, it does seem to be real.   I think EHR is the big impediment, not decision support.  If you accept you need the help of computers, it is not a big step for those computers to start improving the quality of your care.  The problem is that most doctors think their quality is good.  See my most recent blog for my opinion of that!

Rob

Augusta, GA

For other writings, check out

http://robsoddblog.blogspot.com/

Submitted by hippocrates on Thu, 03/16/2006 - 5:24pm.

Excellent post. Excellent comments.

What I would add here is that unfortunately docs with the right understanding of their jobs are in minority, and are treated unfairly by our financing and liability system.

BUT the future belongs to them.

Why? Because people want quality and personal care. Finding it is not easy these days but with the power of Internet we can get organized and make an impact.

Call to Action:

Please identify like-minded colleagues and invite them to join HealthVoices. As we band together and educate the public our influence will grow to start real change!

Submitted by Steve Beller PhD on Fri, 03/17/2006 - 8:01am.

Hey, Rob ... I couldn't have said it better myself!

 Dmitriy - I concur. HealthVoices is well-suited by its very nature as a hub to push meaningful change. I will help spread the word and assist in any way I can.

Steve Beller, Ph.D.
http://stevebeller.blogspot.com

#8: Good
Submitted by Fogia (not verified) on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 3:24am.

This post is fantastic. Wow…thank´s.

Post new comment

[?]
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Captcha Image: you will need to recognize the text in it.
[?]
Please type in the letters/numbers that are shown in the image above.

User login