A friend of mine was kind enough to drive his 85 yo mother to get a colonoscopy. She had a normal study 18 months before. There was some evidence of minor bleeding & her doctor just wanted to be sure. This meant the "prep," with instructions to drink the last bit at 3 am, followed by a trip to the doctor's office at 530 am. Another friend was told they had melanoma. As you might imagine, this caused concern. The doctor recommended a biopsy followed by 2 additional surgeries. When I asked what stage melanoma, I was told it was stage zero; in terms of danger, this is just above freckle, the lowest potential for growth.
Both examples represent common medical experiences. In each case, there was an alternative- do nothing. For the older woman, it was reasonable to ask what the doctor expected to find and, if bad, what would be done about it. I personally want to die with an undiagnosed cancer. In the second example, surgery for the “near benign” required pain, risk and expense. If removing the lesion via biopsy gave a 98.5% chance of not getting the disease, were the 2 surgeries worth the incremental improvements?
Each situation gets to the heart of "consent." Ideally every procedure offers the patient a real choice. After explaining the risks, benefits and alternatives, the patient chooses to proceed. However this is rarely done. Bias, myth and, on some level, well meaning paternalism all play a role.
Bias- Mental tendency or inclination, especially an irrational preference or prejudice
Imagine spending 20 years learning a trade. It is natural to believe you are helping, not hurting. Physician's believe in their art. To expect all options are equally considered, goes against human nature.
Myth- a widely held but false belief or idea.
Although medicine is shrouded in science, we often do what we do because we do them. Practice is passed on from generation to generation. Many things are taken as "truths," without any real justification. A recent Mayo Clinic Proceedings reviewed reversal of a 146 contradicted medical practice (MCP, August 2013). Medical knowledge is purported to be based in science but in actuality, this often not the case.
Paternalism- Though I walk through the shadow of death, ...thou art with me, thy rod and staff to comfort me. Psalm 23:4
Rod of a healer |
It is difficult for both providers and patients to have a conversations as equals. For the patient fear and anxiety go hand and hand with illness. This is overlooked by those thinking computers will replace providers in the near future. Most patients do not want to make life threatening decisions alone.
Providers may feel pressed for time and a responsibility to act as a filter for their patients, leading them to the right choice. Unfortunately, well meaning desire can often result in an unbalanced discussion.
In Seinfeld, Elaine was blacklisted as a bad patient. |
I should note that most providers are not consciously motivated by financial gain. Yes, treatment results in payment, but the vast majority of people believe that they are offering the best option.
What to do…Ask- what are you getting for the risk, what is the downside to waiting?
With all these well meaning forces, I would suggest a relatively simple approach of asking and when possible, consider watchful waiting. For many patients, asking is intimidating. There is a fear asking will degrade the relationship. Most physicians are willing to explain there reasoning; and if they won’t, get a second opinion. Definitive answers are not always the best answers. Finally, ask the harm in waiting. Avoiding risk today may be better than possible risk tomorrow.
No comments:
Post a Comment