PubMed · 234100
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
T R Van Dellen. 1975. Editorial: Physician behavior.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/234100/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
In every medical specialty bad, sad, and difficult information must be given to patients and their families. An insensitive approach increases the distress of recipients of bad news, may exert a lasting impact on their ability to adapt and adjust, and can lead to anger and an increased risk of litigation. Many doctors also find these interactions stressful, and in the absence of much effective training they may adopt inappropriate ways of delivering bad news and coping with the emotional fall-out. Recognition of these difficulties has led to many initiatives, ranging from increased communication skills training to the development of guidelines and protocols. We review some of the research on the impact that giving sad, bad, and difficult news has on doctors and patients, and assess whether interventions are helping. We focus mainly on difficulties encountered involving parents in an obstetric or paediatric setting, people in acute trauma situations such as accident and emergency departments, and patients with cancer.
BACKGROUND: Although sentinel node biopsy (SNB) is becoming the standard approach for axillary staging in patients with small breast cancer, criteria for patient selection and some technical aspects of the procedure have yet to be clearly defined. The aim of the present survey was therefore to investigate the way in which SNB is used by general surgeons working in the Veneto region, Italy. METHODS: A 29-item questionnaire regarding various aspects of SNB practice was mailed to surgeons in charge of breast surgery in all the 56 surgical centres of the region. RESULTS: The rate of response to the questionnaire was 82.1% (n = 46); 69.6% (n = 32) of the respondents routinely perform SNB in their clinical practice. Most of the interviewed surgeons (93.5%) expressed the belief that the acceptable false negative rate should be < or =5%. However, among the surgeons who perform SNB, only 34.4% performed more than 20 SNB during the learning phase. Indications are limited to tumours of < or =1 cm by 31.2% (n = 10) of respondents, < or =2 cm by 46.9% (n = 15) and < or =3 cm by 21.9% (n = 7). Almost all respondents (93.7%) agreed that a clinically positive axilla is a contraindication to SNB, while opinions differed widely concerning other potential contraindications. In most of the centres considered, SN identification is undertaken on the day before surgery using a subdermal injection of 30-50 MBq of 99mTc-albumin-nanocolloid followed by lymphoscintigraphy. CONCLUSIONS: SNB is currently performed in the majority of hospitals in the Veneto region. However, the training phase and criteria used for patient selection differ from centre to centre. Certified training courses and shared guidelines are therefore highly desirable.
BACKGROUND: Medical certificates form the basis for important decisions in society, e.g. the issuing of a driver's licence or the granting of a disability pension. We wanted to know how often doctors deliberately write favourable certificates as seen from the patient's point of view, and why doctors do so. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Questionnaire survey to a representative sample of 1605 Norwegian doctors. Doctors who answered yes to the question above gave information about the frequency of such writing of various types of certificates and their reasons for doing so. RESULTS: 1175 (73%) doctors responded. 39% confirmed deliberately writing in favour of their patients. For most types of certificates, a frequency of less than once a year was most common. 55% admitted writing favourably in disability pension certificates more than once a year, 69% so in referrals. The most common reasons given were securing just treatment and quick access to treatment. Many doctors emphasised that by answering yes, they meant that they were indeed writing expert judgments based on correct facts. INTERPRETATION: Medical certificates deliberately written in favour of the patient is not uncommon. This should lead to a critical discussion of the need for such certificates and medical diagnoses as a basis for resource allocation, rather than the tightening of control over the practice of doctors.