I can't get my head around pharmacology

The book of the week this week has been Chris Patten’s “Not quite the diplomat” – part autobiography, half recent history and a third political philosophy text. It is a fascinating insight into the international community of the last 3 decades. The book has really challenged some of my political beliefs – which I thought were pretty unshakeable – and one above all others, the EU. I read this book to help me decide who I should vote for in the upcoming MEP elections. I have to make a confession, my political views are on the right of the centre and I have always been quite a strong “Eurosceptic”. Although recently, I have found myself drifting further and further into the camp of “we must pull out of Europe at all costs” but Mr Patten’s arguments and insights have definitely made me question this stance. With the European Parliamentary elections coming up, I thought it might be an interesting time to put some ideas out there for discussion. From a young age, I have always been of the opinion that Great Britain is a world leading country, a still great power, one of the best countries in the world - democratic, tolerant, fair, sensible - and that we don’t need anyone else’s “help” or interference in how our country is run. I believe that British voters should have a democratic input on the rules that govern them. To borrow an American phrase “No taxation without representation!” I believe that democracy is not perfect but that it is the best system of government that humans have been able to develop. For all of its faults, voters normally swing back to the centre ground eventually and any silly policies can be undone. This system has inherently more checks and balances than any meritocracy, oligarchy or bureaucracy (taking it literally to mean being ruled by unelected officials). This is one of my major objections to how the European Union currently works. For all intents and purposes, it is not democratic. Institutions of the EU include the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, the European Council, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Central Bank, the Court of Auditors, and the European Parliament. Only one of these institutions is elected by the European demos (the parliament) and that institution doesn’t really make any changes to any policies – “the rubber stamp brigade”. The European Council is made up of the President of the European Council (Unelected), President of the European commission (Unelected) and the heads of the member states (elected) and is where quite a lot of the "major" policies come from but not all of the read tape (the European Commission and Parliament). I am happy to be proved wrong but it just seems that the EU, as a whole, is made up of unelected officials who increasing try to make rules that apply to all 28 member states without any consent from the voters in those states – it looks like the rule of “b-euro-crats” (bureaucrats – this version has far too many vowels for a dyslexic person to use). A beurocratic rule which many of us do not agree with but seemingly have to succumb to, a good example for medics is the European Working Time Directive (EWTD) which means that junior doctors only get paid for working 48h a week when they may spend many, many more hours in work. The EWTD has also made training a lot more difficult for many junior doctors and has many implications for how the health service is now run. Is it right that this law was imposed on us without our consent? If we imposed a treatment on a patient without their consent then we would be in very big trouble indeed! I cannot deny that the EU has done some good in the world and I cannot deny that Britain has benefited from being a member. I just wish that we could pay to have access to the markets, while retaining control over the laws in our lands. I want us to be in Europe, as a partner but not as a vassal. In short, I would like us to stay within the EU but with major reforms. I know that any reforms I suggest will not be read by anyone in power and I know they are probably unrealistic but I thought I would put it out there just to see what people think. I would like to see a NICE’er European Union. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence is a Non Departmental Public Body (NDPB), part of the UK Department of Health but a separate organisation (http://www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/whoweare/who_we_are.jsp). NICE’s role is to advise the UK health service and social services. It does this by assessing the available evidence for treatments/ therapies/ policies etc and then by producing guidelines outlining the evidence and the suggested best course of action. None of these guidelines are enforced by law, for example, as a doctor you do not have to follow the NICE recommendations but if you ignore them and your patient suffers as a consequence then you are likely to be in big trouble with the General Medical Council. So, here would be my recommendations for EU reform: First, we all pay pretty much the same as we do now for access to the European market. We continue with free movement and we keep the European Council but elect the President. This way all the member states can meet up and decide if they want to share any major policies. We all benefit from free movement and we all benefit from a larger free trade area. Second, we get rid of most of the rest of the EU institutions and replace them with an institute a bit like NICE. The European Institute for Policy Excellence (EIPE) would be (hopefully) quite a small department that looks at the best available evidence and then produces guidance on the policy. A shorter executive summary would hopefully also be available for everyday people to read and understand what the policy is about - just like how patients can read NICE executive summaries to understand their condition better. Then any member state could choose to adopt the policy if their parliaments think it worthwhile. This voluntary opt-in system would mean that states retain control of their laws, would probably adopt the policies voluntarily (eventually) and that the European citizens might actually grow to like the EU laws if they can be shown to be evidence based, in the public’s best interests, in the control of the public and not just a law/red tape imposed from above. The European Union should be a place where our elected officials go to debate and agree policies in the best interests of their electorates. There should therefore be an opt-out of any policy for any member state that does not think it will benefit from a policy. This looser union that I would like to see will probably not happen and I do worry that one day we will wake up in the undemocratic united federal states of Europe but this worry should not force us to make an irrational choice now. We should not be voting to "leave the EU at all costs" but we should be voting for reform and a better more co-operative international community. I would not dare suggest who any of you should vote for but I hope you use your vote for change and reform and not more of the same.  

A medical student reflects on exams: the pressure to perform, and the temptation to cheat (original post here) New and naive the journey begins, Forsaking folly for study and service, To "make the world a better place", To "alleviate suffering" to "give hope". The public trust, respect, maybe even revere us. They offer us their arms for a third attempt, They bleed and bruise so we can learn, Enduring pain for our practice. They think our vocation "the noblest of professions". Their trust they freely offer, We snatch it, thinking ourselves worthy, Considering ourselves men of noble blood, Trustworthy, moral and virtuous beings. Hours, days, years invested in books, Given in worship to the acquisition of knowledge. On wards we arrive in dress rehearsal, Regurgitating information at the whim of the gods. We desire their glory and brilliance, Panting for success, respect, power, control, Nothing terrifies more than failure, Exams loom incessantly... Offers of assistance entice. Tantalising tip-offs tempt, Some sharpen skills whilst others sully their souls. Time to swear the Hypocrite's Oath.  

BOXING Day, 1.30am. “Are you the doctor on call?” I wrenched my reluctant brain from its REM state. “Yes.” “I’m worried about my wife. She’s 16 weeks pregnant and very gassy.” “Gassy?” “Burping and farting. Smells terrible! It’s keeping us both awake. I’m worried it could be serious.” By the time I ascertained that there were no sinister symptoms and that the likely culprit was the custard served with Christmas pudding (the patient was lactose intolerant), I was wide awake. My brain refused to power down for hours, as if out of spite for being so rudely aroused. I have a confession to make. When the Australian Federal Government announced that it was planning to abolish after-hours practice incentive payments, I was delighted. I know, I know, I should have been outraged along with the rest of you. After all, the RACGP predicted that after-hours care would be decimated if incentives were removed. Comparisons were made with the revamp of the UK system in 2004, which led to 90% of the profession opting out of after-hours work. Much as I sympathised, I was secretly rubbing my hands together with selfish glee. Surely this would mean that our semi-rural practice would stop doing all of our own on-call and free me from my after-hours responsibilities? I detest being on call. I loathe it with a passion completely out of proportion to the imposition it actually causes. I’m on call for the practice and our local hospital only once a week and the workload isn’t onerous. Middle-of-the-night calls aren’t all that frequent, but my sleep can be disturbed by their mere possibility, leaving me tired and cranky. If I’m forced suddenly into “brain on, work mode” by a phone call, I can kiss hours of precious slumber goodbye. I love to sleep, but, as with drawing and tennis, I’m not very good at it. I gaze with envy at those lucky devils who nap on public transport and fight malicious urges to disturb their peaceful repose. If I’m not supine, in a quiet, warm room, with loose-fitting clothing, a firm mattress and a pillow shaped just-so, I can forget any chance of sleep. Let’s just say I can relate to the Princess and the Pea story. I bet she wouldn’t have coped well with being phoned in the middle of the night either. If these nocturnal calls were all bona fide emergencies, I wouldn’t mind so much. It’s the crap that really riles me. I’ve received middle-of-the-night phone calls from patients who are constipated, patients with impacted cerumen (“Me ear’s blocked, Doc. I can’t sleep”) and patients with insomnia who want to know if it’s safe to take a second sedative. The call that took the on-call cake for me, though, was from a couple who woke me at 11.30 one night to settle an argument. “My husband says that bacteria are more dangerous than viruses but I reckon viruses are worse. After all, AIDS is a virus. Can you settle it for us so we can get some sleep? It would really help us out.” I kid you not. Genevieve Yates is an Australian GP, medical educator, medico-legal presenter and writer. You can read more of her work at http://genevieveyates.com  

Imagine a world where procrastination became a productive pastime… Procrastination, as it stands, is a core feature of the ‘human condition’ and most would argue that it is here to stay. However, what if we could hijack the time we spend playing Candy Crush saga and trick ourselves into contributing towards something tangible. Today, I wish to explore this possibility with you. The phrase ‘gamification’ is not a new or made up word (I promise) although I agree it does sound jarring and I certainly wouldn’t recommend trying to use it in a game of scrabble (yet). The phrase itself refers to the process of applying game thinking and game mechanics to non-game contexts to engage users in solving problems. For our purposes and for the purposes of this blog ‘problems’ will equate to promoting healthy living for our patients and maintaining our own medical education. For one reason or another, most people show addictive behaviour towards games especially when they incorporate persistent elements of progression, achievement and competition with others. The underlying psychology won’t be discussed here; call it escapism, call it procrastination, call it whatever you will. What I want you to realise is that every day millions of people spend hours tending to virtual farms and cyber families whilst competing vigorously with ‘online’ friends. If we can take the addictive aspects of these popular games and incorporate them in to the non-game contexts I indicated to above, we could potentially trick ourselves, and even perhaps our patients, into a better way of life. The first time I heard the phrase ‘gamification’ was only last year. I was in Paris attending the Doctors 2.0 conference listening to talks on how cutting edge technologies and the Internet had been (or were going to be) incorporated into healthcare. One example that stood out to me was a gaming app that intended to engage people with diabetes to record their blood sugars more regularly and also compete with themselves to achieve better sugar control. People who have the condition of Diabetes Mellitus are continuously reminded of their diet and their blood sugar levels. I am not diabetic myself, but it is not hard to realise that diet and sugar control is going to be an absolute nightmare for people with diabetes both from a practical and psychological standpoint. Cue the mySugr Compainion, an FDA approved mobile application that was created to incorporate the achievement and progression aspects of game design to help encourage people with diabetes to achieve better sugar control. The app was a novel concept that struck a chord with me due to its potential to appeal to the part in everyone’s brain that makes them sit down and play ‘just one more level’ of their favorite game or app. There are several other apps on the market that are games designed to encourage self testing of blood sugar levels in people with diabetes. There is even a paediatric example titled; “Monster Manor,” which was launched by the popular Sanofi UK (who previously released the FDA / CE approved iBGStar iPhone blood glucose monitor). So applying aspects of game design into disease management apps has anecdotally been shown to benefit young people with Diabetes. However, disease management is just one area where game-health apps have emerged. We are taught throughout medical school and beyond that disease prevention is obviously beneficial to both our patients and the health economy. Unsurprisingly, one of the best ways to prevent disease is to maintain health (either through exercise and / or healthy eating). A prominent example of an app that helps to engage users in exercising is ‘RunKeeper,’ a mobile app that enables people to track and publish their latest jog-around-the-park. The elements of game design are a little more subtle in this example but the ability to track your own progress and compete with others via social media share buttons certainly reminds me of similar features seen in most of today’s online games. Other examples of ‘healthy living apps’ are rife amongst the respective ‘app stores,’ and there seems to be ample opportunity for the appliance of gamification in this field. An example might be to incorporate aspects of game design into a smoking cessation app or weight loss helper. Perhaps the addictive quality of a well designed game-app could overpower the urge for confectionary or that ‘last cigarette’… The last area where I think ‘gamification’ could have a huge benefit is in (medical) education. Learning and revising are particularly susceptible to the rot of procrastination, so it goes without saying that many educational vendors have already attempted to incorporate fresh ways in which they can engage their users to put down the TV remote and pick up some knowledge for the exams. Meducation itself already has an area on its website entitled ‘Exam Room,’ where you can test yourself, track your progress and provide feedback on the questions you are given. I have always found this a far more addictive way to revise than sitting down with pen and paper to revise from a book. However, I feel there could be a far greater incorporation of game design in the field of medical education. Perhaps the absolute dream for like-minded gamers out there would be a super-gritty medical simulator that exposes you to common medical emergencies from the comfort of your own computer screen. I mean, my shiny new gaming console lets me pretend to be an elite solider deep behind enemy lines so why not let me pretend and practice to be a doctor too? You could even have feedback functionality to indicate where your management might have deviated from the optimum. Perhaps more sensibly, the potential also exists to build on the existing banks of online medical questions to incorporate further aspects of social media interaction, achievement unlocks and inter-player competition (because in case you hadn’t noticed, medics are a competitive breed). I have given a couple of very basic examples on how aspects of game design have emerged in recent health-related apps. I feel this phenomenon is in its infancy. The technology exists for so much more than the above, we just need to use our imagination… and learn how to code.