I don't think the mental health services thought I would get the files & read all the contents. The records include a lot of inaccuracies in note taking & dates. It is here I noted CKD due to medication 2005 11 years after it came to attention & finally removed in April 2007.
-
-
Replying to @feanderson7 @C7RKY and
the problem is inaccuracies in the medical record are hard to prove unless it is something very concrete... like date of birth.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @m4delen @feanderson7 and
And (from a professional POV) you mustn’t just delete what (in hindsight) were obviously stupid misdiagnoses - as that’s fraudulently changing a record to hide a mistake. There is a complicated way to “re-code and replace” the headline dx but it’s timeconsuming and clunky.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @DrAnneMurphy @m4delen and
So in summary - nonsense like weed and seed seems to be easy enough for the nefarious. But improving accuracy of med records for the benefit of patients and legit clinicians is quite hard.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @DrAnneMurphy @m4delen and
You have to wonder who set the priorities for creating these systems sometimes.
@dr_shibley talks about 'little revision of diagnosis' & I get the impression pride plays a part sometimes. Systems that discourage revision will only worsen the phenomenon. https://drshibleyrahman.wordpress.com/2018/09/16/can-you-do-the-tto-for-the-appendix-in-bed-5/ …1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @C7RKY @DrAnneMurphy and
Yes and colleagues are also loathe to contradict fellow medic so even getting a second opinion can be difficult.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @m4delen @DrAnneMurphy and
Absolutely right. I find you have to travel a very long way out of town before you find a true 2nd opinion. And even then you have to carefully research the history of the person behind the 1st opinion, to ensure their influence doesn't extend to your new choice. Sad, but true.
1 reply 2 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @C7RKY @DrAnneMurphy and
Yes - and even then simply the 'profession' identification may exert some influence, both are doctors. A truly independent opinion is like gold dust though I do think some, more reflective professionals, can provide it
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @m4delen @DrAnneMurphy and
I agree. Evidenced based medicine is one thing, but opinion is opinion. 'Whatever he/she said' is never going to be an approach to forming an opinion that can be justified, but it is common nonetheless. 'Professional courtesy' - damaging though that may be. I remember it so well!
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @C7RKY @DrAnneMurphy and
On slightly different note, do you have any links/ know what constitutes 'clinical opinion' in contrast to 'an opinion a doctor has about a patient during course of treating them'.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes
I'm afraid I don't, but that's a very interesting question. I've RTd it, so let's see if any of my followers might know. I did read copious amounts on record keeping many years ago, but not with that question in mind & it's likely been updated since then anyway. Sorry.
-
-
Replying to @C7RKY @DrAnneMurphy and
Thanks for RTing - hope someone will know!
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.