The biopsychosocial model of disease existed in my notes... an excuse to get out the colouring crayons and draw a diagram, but ultimately another collection of facts that needed to be digested then regurgitated in the summer exams, something to be fitted in around learning about the important stuff - the science. But the biopsychosocial model has come alive for me recently, now I realise what an impact the later two components, psychological and social, can have on patients. As a former medical student and now full time patient, the model really means something to me now. In the 1977 paper in Science, George Engel introduced the biopsychosocial model: "The dominant model of disease today is biomedical, and it leaves no room within it's framework for the social, psychological and behavioural dimensions of illness. A biopsychosocial model is proposed that provides a blueprint for research, a framework for teaching and a design for action in the real world of health care." Following some conversations on Twitter recently and from my own experience at medical school and now as a patient, I wanted to explore my thoughts on this model. Twitter, in the wonderful way it does, recently introduced me to the Disabled Medic blog, which among many other great posts, has also explored the biopsychosocial model, and I would recommend a read. The biopsychosocial model shows the influence that emotions and social circumstances have on physical health, which is important. But while conversations about the model focus on the way it can be used by healthcare professionals (very important!), it needs emphasising that the model can provide a framework for patients to look at/after themselves. The model highlights the psychological and social causes of disease, but more optimistically, it can show that there are a range of treatments for disease, from the medical to the social and psychological. A diagnosis of a long-term health conditions is often simultaneous with loss of control. There are limitations to the success of medications, treatments and surgeries. And in receiving these, we are relatively passive as patients, no matter how engaged we are. The biopsychosocial model looks at our biological, psychological and social needs, and how these factors influence our overall health. Establishing that these factors affect our health is only the first step. As patients, when psychological and social factors are brought in to the equation, it becomes clear that we ourselves have some power to help ourselves. By framing our health in this more holistic way, as patients we are not as powerless as suggested by the medical model. Through self-management we can make positive changes to our own psychological and social situations, which can in turn benefit our physical biological health. To return to the traditional ground of the model - healthcare professionals.... One strength of the model is that it places psychology side beside its (generally considered) more superior counter-part, biology. I hope that by seeing the biopsychosocial model in action, physicians can appreciate the detrimental psychological impact of a diagnosis, and the assumption of "it is all in the mind" can fall by the way side. By integrating all three elements, the model shows that neither is independent of the others, so it can't be all in the mind, because other factors, biological or social, will be involved to some degree. For me personally, the biopsychosocial model makes me look at what a 'life' is. One of the attractions of medicine is saving lives. Without getting too deeply into philosophy or ethics, I just want to explore for a second what saving a life really means for me, as a patient. I still believe that A&E staff heroically save lives. But I have come to realise that a life is more than a swiggly line on a heart rate monitor. My counsellor has been just as heroic in saving my life, through addressing my emotions. My life is now something I can live, rather than endure. With saving lives being a key (and honourable) motivation among medical staff, it is important that we can allow them to save lives as often as possible, and in many different ways. It may not always be through emergency treatment in resuscitation, but if we embrace the biopsychosical model, they can save lives in many more ways. When there is a limit to the effectiveness of the biological approaches to an ill person, and they can't be returned to the land of the healthy, medical science becomes unstuck. Within the biopsychosocial model, the issue of doctors not being able to do anything is slightly less. As I mentioned in my post about making the transition from medical student to patient, I went to medical school because I wanted to make people better. But I was only being taught one way to make people better - drugs and surgery. If we really embraces the biopsychosocial model, doctors could make a difference, even if their standard tools of drugs aren't available because they could turn to psychological and social support. This isn't to say that all clinicians have to be counsellors or social workers - far from it. But an awareness and appreciation of their contribution to the management of a patient is important, as well as an understanding of the basic principles and skills such as motivational interviewing. In 2013, I don't think I can talk about social in this context without mentioning social media. It was not was Engel originally meant in 1977, but social media has become a vital social tool for patients to manage their health. Ignoring anxieties and postural problems associated with sitting at a screen seeing everyone else's photo-shopped lives, it is undeniable that social media is a big and good resource that can empower patients to take responsibility and manage their own health. To see the best examples in action, take a look at Michael Seres and his blog, Being a Patient Isn't Easy to see a whole new meaning to the social in biopsychosocial! I am still very grateful for the biological expertise of my medical team. Don't get me wrong - it's a good place to start and I wouldn't be here writing this post today if it wasn't for the biological support. But with chronic illness, when you are past the dramatic relapses, the biological isn't enough.... The biology has allowed me to live, but its the psychological and social support I have received that has allowed me to live. Anya de Iongh @anyadei www.thepatientpatient2011.blogspot.co.uk
Anya de Iongh
over 8 years ago
Just seen this Q and can't work out the answer... 76 year old man, comes with abdominal distension pain and hydronephrosis. Increase urea and creatinine on investigation. What is the diagnosis? Anyone?
over 8 years ago
This month’s case is by Barbara J. Mroz, M.D. and Robin R. Preston, Ph.D., author of Lippincott’s Illustrated Reviews: .Physiology (ISBN: 9781451175677). For more information, or to purchase your copy, visit: http://tiny.cc/PrestonLIR, with 15% off using the discount code: MEDUCATION. The case below is followed by a choice of diagnostic tests. Select the one lettered selection that would be most helpful in diagnosing the patient’s condition. The Case A 54-year-old male 2 pack-per-day smoker presents to your office complaining of cough and shortness of breath (SOB). He reports chronic mild dyspnea on exertion with a daily cough productive of clear mucus. During the past week, his cough has increased in frequency and is now productive of frothy pink-tinged sputum; his dyspnea is worse and he is now short of breath sometimes even at rest. He has had difficulty breathing when lying flat in bed and has spent the past two nights sleeping upright in a recliner. On physical examination, he is a moderately obese male with a blood pressure of 180/80 mm Hg, pulse of 98, and respiratory rate of 22. His temperature is 98.6°F. He becomes winded from climbing onto the exam table. Auscultation of the lungs reveals bilateral wheezing and crackles in the lower posterior lung fields. There is pitting edema in the lower extremities extending up to the knees. Question Which if the following tests would be most helpful in confirming the correct diagnosis? A. Spirometry B. Arterial blood gas C. Complete blood count D. B-type natriuretic peptide blood test E. Electrocardiogram Answer? The correct answer is B-type natriuretic peptide blood test. Uncomfortable breathing, or feeling short of breath, is a common medical complaint with multiple causes. When approaching a patient with dyspnea, it is helpful to remember that normal breathing requires both a respiratory system that facilitates gas exchange between blood and the atmosphere, and a cardiovascular system that transports O2 and CO¬2 between the lungs and tissues. Dysfunction in either system may cause dyspnea, and wheezing (or bronchospasm) may be present in both cardiac and pulmonary disease. In this patient, the presence of lower extremity edema and orthopnea (discomfort when lying flat) are both suggestive of congestive heart failure (CHF). Elevated blood pressure (systolic of 180) and a cough productive of frothy pink sputum may also be associated symptoms. While wheezing could also be caused by COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) in the setting of chronic tobacco use, the additional exam findings of lung crackles and edema plus systolic hypertension are all more consistent with CHF. What does the B-type natriuretic peptide blood test tell us? When the left ventricle (LV) fails to maintain cardiac output (CO) at levels required for adequate tissue perfusion, pathways are activated to increase renal fluid retention. A rising plasma volume increases LV preload and sustains CO via the Frank-Starling mechanism. Volume loading also stimulates cardiomyocytes to release atrial- (ANP) and B-type (BNP) natriuretic peptides. BNP has a longer half-life than ANP and provides a convenient marker for volume loading. Plasma BNP levels are measured using immunoassay; levels >100 pg/mL are suggestive of overload resulting in heart failure. How does heart failure cause dyspnea? Increasing venous pressure increases mean capillary hydrostatic pressure and promotes fluid filtration from the vasculature. Excess filtration from pulmonary capillaries causes fluid accumulation within the alveoli (pulmonary edema) and interferes with normal gas exchange, resulting in SOB. Physical signs and symptoms caused by high volume loading include: (1) Lung crackles, caused by fluid within alveoli (2) Orthopnea. Reclining increases pulmonary capillary hydrostatic pressure through gravitational effects, worsening dyspnea when lying flat. (3) Pitting dependent edema caused by filtration from systemic capillaries, an effect also influenced by position (causing edema in the lower legs as in our ambulatory patient or in dependent areas like the sacrum in a bedridden patient). What would an electrocardiogram show? Heart failure can result in LV hypertrophy and manifest as a left axis deviation on an electrocardiogram (ECG), but some patients in failure show a normal ECG. An ECG is not a useful diagnostic tool for dyspnea or CHF per se. Wouldn’t spirometry be more suitable for diagnosing the cause of dyspnea in a smoker? Simple spirometry will readily identify the presence of airflow limitation (obstruction) as a cause of dyspnea. It's a valuable test to perform in any smoker and can establish a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) if abnormal. While this wheezing patient is an active smoker who could have airflow obstruction, the additional exam findings above point more to a diagnosis of CHF. What would an arterial blood gas show? An arterial blood gas measures arterial pH, PaCO¬2, and PaO2. While both CHF and COPD could cause derangements in the values measured, these abnormalities would not necessarily be diagnostic (e.g., a low PaO2 could be seen in both conditions, as could an elevated PaCO¬2). Would a complete blood count provide useful information? A complete blood count could prove useful if anemia is a suspected cause of dyspnea. Test result BNP was elevated (842 pg/mL), consistent with CHF. Diuretic treatment was initiated to help reduce volume overload and an afterload reducing agent was started to lower blood pressure and improve systolic function.
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
over 8 years ago
This month’s case is by David R Bell PhD, co-author of Medical Physiology: Principles for Clinical Medicine, 3e (ISBN: 9781451110395) For more information, or to purchase your copy, visit: http://tiny.cc/Rhoades4e, with 15% off using the discount code: MEDUCATION. The case below is followed by a quiz question, allowing you a choice of diagnoses. Select the one letter section that best describes the patient’s condition. The Case A 28-year old woman has an unremarkable pregnancy through her first 28 weeks of gestation, with normal weight gain and no serious complications. She has no previous history of diabetes, hypertension of other systemic disease before or during her current pregnancy. During her 30-week checkup, her blood pressure measures 128/85, and she complains about feeling slightly more “bloated” than usual with swelling in her legs that seems to get more uncomfortable as the day goes on. Her obsterician recommends that she get more bed rest, stay off her feet as much as possible and return for evaluation in one week. At the one-week follow-up, the patient presents with noticable”puffiness” in her face, and a blood pressure of 145/95. She complains she has been developing headaches, sporadic blurred vision, right-sided discomfort and some shortness of breath. She has gained more than 10 lb (4.5kg) in the past week. A urinalysis on the patient revelas no glucose but a 3+ reading for protein. Her obstetrician decides to admit her immediately to a local tertiary care hospital for further evaluation. Over the next 24 hours, the patient’s urine output is recorded as 500mL and contains 6.8 grams of protein. Her plasma albumin level is 3.1 g/dl, hemacrit 48%, indirect bilirubin 1.5mg/dl and blood platelets=77000/uL, respectively. Her blood pressure is now 190/100. It is decided to try to deliver the foetus. The expelled placenta is small and shows signs of widespread ischmic damage. Within a week of delivery, the mother’s blood pressure returns to normal, and her oedema subsides. One month later, the mother shows no ill effects of thos later-term syndrome. Question What is the clinical diagnosis of this patient’s condition and its underlying pathophysiology? A. Gestational Hypertension B. Preeclampsia C. Gestational Diabetes D. Compression of the Inferior Vena Cava Answer The correct answer is "B. Preeclampsia". The patient’s symptoms and laboratory findings are consistent with a diagnosis of Preeclampsia, which is a condition occurring in some pregnancies that causes life-threatening organ and whole body regulatory malfunctions. The patient’s negative urine glucose is inconsistent with gestational diabetes. Gestational hypertension or vena caval compression cannot explain all of the patient findings. The patient has three major abnormal findings- generalised oedema, hypertension and proteinuria which are all common in preeclampsia. Although sequalae of a normal pregnancy can include water and salt retention, bloating, modest hypertension and leg swelling (secondary to capillary fluid loss from increased lower limb capillary hydrostatic pressure due to compression of the inferior vena cava by the growing foetus/uterus), oedema in the head and upper extremities, a rapid 10 pound weight gain and shortness of breath suggests a generalized and serious oedematous state. The patient did not have hypertension before or within 20 weeks gestation (primary hypertension) and did not develop hypertension after the 20th week of pregnancy with no other abnormal findings (gestational hypertension). Hypertension with proteinuria occurring beyond the 20th week of pregnancy however is a hallmark of preeclampsia. In addition, the patient has hemolysis (elevated bilirubin and LDH levels), elevated liver enzyme levels and thrombocytopenia. This is called the HELLP syndrome (HELLP = Hemolysis, Elevated Liver enzymes and Low Platelets.), and is considered evidence of serious patient deterioration in preeclampsia. A urine output of 500 ml in 24 hours is 1/2 to 1/4 of normal output in a hydrated female and indicates renal insufficiency. Protein should never be found in the urine and indicates loss of capillaries integrity in glomeruli which normally are not permeable to proteins. The patient has substantial 24 urine protein loss and hypoalbuminemia. However, generally plasma albumin levels must drop below 2.5 gm/dl to decrease plasma oncotic pressure enough to cause general oedema. The patient’s total urinary protein loss was insufficient in this regard. Capillary hyperpermeability occurs with preeclampsia and, along with hypertension, could facilitate capillary water efflux and generalized oedema. However myogenic constriction of pre-capillary arterioles could reduce the effect of high blood pressure on capillary water efflux. An early increase in hematocrit in this patient suggests hemoconcentration which could be caused by capillary fluid loss but the patient’s value of 48 is unremarkable and of little diagnostic value because increased hematocrit occurs in both preeclampsia and normal pregnancy. PGI2, PGE2 and NO, produced during normal pregnancy, cause vasorelaxation and luminal expansion of uterine arteries, which supports placental blood flow and development. Current theory suggests that over production of endothelin, thromboxane and oxygen radicals in preeclampsia antagonize vasorelaxation while stimulating platelet aggregation, microthrombi formation and endothelial destruction. These could cause oedema, hypertension, renal/hepatic deterioration and placental ischemia with release of vasotoxic factors. The patient’s right-sided pain is consistent with liver pathology (secondary to hepatic DIC or oedematous distention). Severe hypertension in preeclampsia can lead to maternal end organ damage, stroke, and death. Oedematous distension of the liver can cause hepatic rupture and internal hemorrhagic shock. Having this patient carry the baby to term markedly risks the life of the mother and is not considered current acceptable clinical practice. Delivery of the foetus and termination of the pregnancy is the only certain way to end preeclampsia. Read more This case is by David R Bell PhD, co-author of Medical Physiology: Principles for Clinical Medicine, 3e (ISBN: 9781451110395) For more information, or to purchase your copy, visit: http://tiny.cc/Rhoades4e. Save 15% (and get free P&P) on this, and a whole host of other LWW titles at (lww.co.uk)[http://lww.co.uk] when you use the code MEDUCATION when you check out! About LWW/ Wolters Kluwer Health Lippincott Williams and Wilkins (LWW) is a leading publisher of high-quality content for students and practitioners in medical and related fields. Their text and review products, eBooks, mobile apps and online solutions support students, educators, and instiutions throughout the professional’s career. LWW are proud to partner with Meducation.
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
almost 9 years ago
I just want to know if there has been any evidence for Radiotherapy use in metastatic prostate cancer? Also, the rate of success of Radiotherapy if combined with hormone therapy? What is the prognosis after treatment?
almost 9 years ago
Introduction GPs for a little while have been asked to compare each other’s outpatient referrals rates. The idea is that this peer to peer open review will help us understand each others referral patterns. For some reason and due to a natural competitive nature of human behaviour, I think we have these peer to peer figures put to us to try to get us to refer less into hospital outpatients. It’s always hard to benchmark GP surgeries but outpatient referral benchmarking is particularly poor for several reasons It's Very Difficult to Normalise Surgeries Surgeries have different mortalities morbidities ages and other confounding factors that it becomes very hard to create an algorithm to create a weighting factor to properly compare one surgery against another. There Are Several Reasons For The Referral I’ll go into more detail on this point later but there are several reasons why doctors refer patients into hospital which can range from: doctors knowing a lot about the condition and picking up subtle symptoms and signs lesser experienced doctors would have ignored; all the way to not knowing about the condition and needing some advice from an expert in the condition. We Need To Look At The Bigger Picture The biggest killer to our budget is non-elective admissions and it’s the one area where patient, commissioner and doctor converge. Patients want to keep out of hospital, it’s cheaper for the NHS and Doctors don’t like the lack of continuity when patients go in. For me I see every admission to hospital as a fail. Of course it’s more complex than this and it might be totally appropriate but if we work on this concept backwards, it will help us more. Likewise if we try to reduce outpatient referrals because we are pressurised to, they may end up in hospitalisation and cost the NHS £10,000s rather than £100s as an outpatient. We need to look at the bigger picture and refer especially if we believe that referrals will lead to less hospitalisation of patients further down the line. To put things into perspective 2 symptoms patients present which I take very seriously are palpitations in the elderly and breathlessness. Both symptoms are very real and normally lead to undiagnosed conditions which if we don’t tackle and diagnose early enough will cause patients to deteriorate and end up in hospital. Education, Education, Education When I first went into commissioning as a lead in 2006 I had this idea of getting to the bottom of why GPs refer patients to outpatients. The idea being if we knew why, we would know how to best tackle specialities. I asked my GPs to record which speciality to refer to and why they referred over a 7 month period. The reason for admission was complex but we divided them up into these categories: 2nd care input required for management of the condition. We know about the condition but have drawn the line with what we can do in primary care. An example of this is when we’ve done a 24 hour tape and found a patient has 2sec pauses and needs a pace maker. 2nd care input required for diagnosis. We think this patient has these symptoms which are related to this condition but don’t really know about the diagnosis and need help with this. An example of this is when a patient presents with diarrhoea to a gastroenterologist There could be several reasons for this and we need help from the gastroenterologist to confirm the diagnosis via a colonscopy and ogd etc. Management Advice. We know what the patient has but need help with managing the condition. For example uncontrolled heart failure or recurrent sinusitis. Consultant to Consultant Referral. As advised between consultants. Patient Choice. Sometimes the patient just wants to see the hospital doctor. The results are enclosed here in Excel and displayed below. Please click on the graph thumbnail below. Reasons For Referrals Firstly a few disclaimers and thoughts. These figures were before any GPSI ENT, Dermatology or Musculosketal services which probably would have made an impact on the figures. There are a few anomalies which may need further thought eg I’m surprised Rheumatology for 2nd input for diagnosis is so low, as frequently I have patients with high ESRs and CRPs which I need advise on diagnoses. Also audiology medicine doesn’t quite look right. The cardiology referral is probably high for management advise due to help on ECG interpretation although this is an assumption. This is just a 7 month period from a subset of 8-9 GPs. Although we were careful to explain each category and it’s meaning, more work might need to be done to clarify the findings further. In my opinion the one area where GPs need to get grips with is management advice as it’s an admission that I know what the patient has and need help on how to treat them. This graph is listed in order of management advice for this reason. So what do you do to respond to this? The most logical step is to education GPs on the left hand side of this graph and invest in your work force but more and more I see intermediary GPSI services which are the provider arm of a commissioning group led to help intercept referrals to hospital. In favour of the data most of the left hand side of the graph have been converted into a GPSI service at one point. In my area what has happened is that referrals rates have actually gone up into these services with no decline in the outgoing speciality as GPs become dis-empowered and just off load any symptoms which patients have which they would have probably had a higher threshold to refer on if these GPSI services were not available. Having said that GPSI services can have a role in the pathway and I’m not averse to their implementation, we just have to find a better way to use their services. 3 Step Plan As I’m not one to just give problems here are my 3 suggestions to help referrals. To have a more responsive Layered Outpatient Service. Setting up an 18 week target for all outpatients is strange, as symptoms and specialities need to be prioritised. For example I don’t mind waiting 20 weeks for a ENT referral on a condition which is bothering me but not life threatening but need to only have a 3 week turn over if I’m breathless with a sudden reduction in my exercise tolerance. This adds an extra layer of complexity but always in the back of my mind it’s about getting them seen sooner to prevent hospitalisation. Education, education, education It’s ironic that the first budget to be slashed in my area was education. We need to education our GPs to empower them to bring the management advice category down as this is the category which will make the biggest impact to improving health care. In essence we need to focus on working on the left hand side of this graph first. Diagnose Earlier and Refer Appropriately The worst case scenario is when GPs refer patients to the wrong speciality and it can happen frequently as symptoms blur between conditions. This leads to delayed diagnosis, delayed management and you guessed it, increased hospitalisation. The obvious example is whether patients with breathlessness is caused by heart or lung or is psychogenic. As GPs we need to work up patients appropriately and make a best choice based on the evidence in front of us. Peer to peer GP delayed referral letter analysis groups have a place in this process. Conclusion At the end of the day it's about appropriate referrals always, not just a reduction. Indeed for us to get a grip on the NHS Budgets as future Clinical Commissioners, I would expect outpatient referrals to go up at the expense of non-elective, as then you are looking at patients being seen and diagnosed earlier and kept out of hospital.
almost 9 years ago
Many may be familiar with aspergillosis as the infecting agent in acute cases where the patient is severely immunocompromised - but there is more to this fungus' repertoire. There are rare cases where the patient's immune system is overwhelmed by a large inhalation of spores e.g. after gardening, but these are insignificant in terms of total numbers effected. The following are far more common:- Aspergillus and other fungi are increasingly identified as the active agent in sinusitis - if you have cases that don't respond to antibiotics this is worth thinking about. Chronic pulmonary aspergillosis (CPA & aspergilloma) is an infection of immunocompetent people, causing respiratory difficulty, coughing and haemoptysis. The UK NHS has a specialist centre for these patients In Manchester (National Aspergillosis Centre (NAC)). NAC has particular expertise and extensive facilities for the diagnosis of CPA, ABPA, SAFS and use of systemic antifungal drugs. Allergic infection (Allergic Bronchopulmonary Aspergillosis - ABPA and chronic sinusitis) is thought to be heavily underdiagnosed and undertreated. ABPA is particularly common in Asthma, Cystic Fibrosis patients and those with bronchiectasis. There is estimated to be 25 000 cases in the UK alone. Many (50%) of the most severe asthma cases are sensitive to fungi (SAFS) - in particular Aspergillus. These tend to be the most unstable cases that don't respond to antibiotics and several studies have been published that show giving an antifungal helps reduce the use of steroids for these patients. Last but not least - Tuberculosis is on the rise in the UK and the rest of the world. It is estimated that 2% of cases progress to CPA and should be treated using an antifungal - this is usually not done until considerable time has passed and much damage has been done. In total it is estimated that many millions of people across the world suffer from aspergillus - ABPA - 5 million, Tb - 400 000 per year and Asthma (SAFS - 1 - 4 million cases in EU & US). Sinusitis cases may number many tens of millions worldwide. So - the next time you assume aspergillus infections and aspergillosis are rare and confined to those who are profoundly immunocompromised - think again! If you have a patient who has increasingly severe respiratory symptoms, doesn't respond to multiple courses of antibiotics then give aspergillus a thought. Browse around these articles for further information Aspergillus Website Treatment Section. NB For a broader look at the prevalence of fungal diseases worldwide the new charity Leading International Fungal Education (LIFE) website is worth looking at.
almost 9 years ago
A Recap Last week in my personal blog I reflected on humility as defined by James Ryle: God given self-assurance that eliminates the need to prove to others the worth of who you are and the rightness of what you do. Ryle suggests, from 1 Peter 5:5-7, that central to humbling ourselves is throwing our cares on to God. Every concern, care and fear being hurled on to God who is faithful and powerful enough to handle them. When we know that we are loved by Him no matter what and that He is in control no matter what, then we remove the need to prove ourselves or protect ourselves. We become humble – secure enough to allow God to be in control and to serve others. Once our eyes are lifted from ourselves we are able to see others to love and serve them. Stafford Hospital Just before writing the last post I was reading an article about the report by Robert Francis QC on the appalling treatment of patients at Stafford Hospital. One of the recurring comments made by many different people is that the pressure of targets and incentives increasingly displaces focus on compassion and patient care. When doctors, nurses and managers alike are bombarded with ever increasing and regularly changes hoops to jump through and targets to meet, no wonder their attention and efforts are dragged from patient care. I’ve seen something of the effects of this in a family member who for many years worked as a Health Visitor. In their decades of service they saw an ever increasing and ever changing string of targets and goals alongside cost cutting moves that stripped resources and personnel. Their desire to be compassionate and offer the best care possible became more and more stressful until it finally proved too much. She recently changed jobs. Now I’m not trying to attack the NHS and I am well aware that so many people receive great care. But this is not a new concern that is being bandied around with fresh vigour in the light of Stafford Hospital. What struck me is that it demonstrates on an institutional level what also seems true at a personal level. Namely, that when we are forced to operate from a place of insecurity we begin to miss the most important things. NHS services have to meet targets to receive funding to simply keep operating – there will be no patient care if there is no hospital. Oftentimes, especially as a leader, we can live with a sense that, unless we meet expectations or make people like us or recognise our worth, then we’ll have no influence to do any of the things we know we are called to do. The secret of personal humility is to recognise that we are already loved by our Father before we even move our finger; to recognise that He is control and we can throw every care on Him. A person who can live from that place of security finds, free from the need to prove themselves or their actions, can begin to simply do what they are made and called to do. They are no longer pulled in different directions by a multiplicity of cares. What about an institution? It strikes me that a similar solution is needed for the NHS. Is there a way to give security for doctors, nurses and caring professionals so that they are able to do what they are called to do without constantly watching their back? Obviously there is a need for accountability for the safety of patients and to ensure a good standard of care, but the constant need to prove worth and achievement cannot be helpful for those who are called to compassionate care. I’m not a healthcare professional. I don’t know exactly what this would look like. But I recognise in the diagnosis of struggles in the NHS, God’s diagnosis of struggles in many people’s lives. The way He designed us to live with Him is often a good basis to begin to imagine a new way for every level of society to function. So, my question is this: what would a humble NHS look like? To whom could a National Health Service throw it’s concerns and cares?
Rev Samuel Pollard
almost 9 years ago
Female patient 19 years old came to outpatient clinic with goitre, type 1 DM since one month, and hepatosplenomegally in ultrasound. Hepatitis markers are negative. What is the most likely diagnosis? That's the case which I was asked today!
almost 9 years ago
An essay I wrote for my course, with which I received an Honours grade (75%). I have an interest in Medical Ethics, and this essay discusses the possible physiology and ethics surrounding the controversial topic. **Introduction** (taken from the essay): My topic is designer babies. A designer baby is defined by the Oxford Dictionary of English as, “a baby whose genetic make-up has been selected in order to eradicate a particular defect, or to ensure that a particular gene is present” (1). In this essay, I shall be exploring the arguments and ideas surrounding the selection of a baby’s genes, which in modern times has become a highly controversial subject. This essay will start by describing the methods by which designer babies may be produced, namely pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and pro-nuclear transfer, also coined the ‘three-parent baby’ by some (2). Once these procedures have been presented, ethical considerations forming both sides of the debate will be discussed. Whilst the typical argument used is ‘autonomy vs. playing god’, other ideas include whether such procedures will have a drastic effect on the future, and change the world as we know it, as suggested in the science-fiction film Gattaca (3). The ‘nature vs. nurture’ debate is also described: whether we are defined by our genes as shown in Gattaca, or if the environmental influence we are subjected to can cause our genotype to be negligible, i.e. our genes have no impact on our traits; personality, looks etc. The expectations placed upon our offspring; the definition of disease and disability; the fear of the rate of medical development – will all be discussed in this essay. The conclusion will summarise the arguments of both sides, and will attempt to answer the following question: should we be allowed to design our babies?
about 9 years ago