In my last post, I praise the Choosing Wisely® list, which is aimed at cutting down on unnecessary testing by docs.
I got into medicine because it is FUN, and, of course, to help people. I think most of my colleagues did so as well. I get up every day and I get to go to work and figure out puzzles all day. How cool is that? Sure, it may not always be unwarranted or a bad thing, but testing and more testing can definitely take the fun out of taking care of patients… I want to figure out your problem the old-fashioned way with a good old history and physical! Then and only then, get a test if it is warranted. This is the correct way, and the safe way, to help improve your quality of life.
So why else am I in favor of the Choosing Wisely® (and the mentality behind it)?
Our over-testing can place the patient in harms way, especially if your doctor is not vigilant. There are only three results that can come from any medical study or test. You might find what you are looking for, find nothing (negative/normal result), or a result that is unexpected. A test that shows what you are highly suspecting should be the most common result. Testing that shows nothing or is “normal” should be far and few between. Warranted screening testing or similar testing is not what I am talking about here – I am talking about a patient who has a problem for which an active diagnosis is being sought. On the other hand, we would all hope the any and all screening testing would come up normal.
Tests that show something unintended are where it can get scary folks. And this is something few ever really think about. It is sort of “beware of what you ask for.” Of course, an unintended result such as serendipitous finding an early case of early leukemia or similar is a good thing. Nobody can deny what that discovery can mean to that person and their family.
But what about information that is discovered that might be something….or not? What do we do with that information? Let me say with pure clarity, it is my job to interpret and clinically correlate any and all findings. FYI, clinical correlation is medical jargon for connect the dots, which is vitally important. Furthermore it is a bit of a lost art in my opinion.
A vital part of connecting the dots is whether the “finding” is relevant to your problem, and whether this is really there. I deal mostly with imaging tests (MRI, bone scans, ST-scans, etc.) and I can assure you that radiologist love to find all kinds of things, whether they are actually there or not. It is my job to determine if that extra finding is relevant.
So here is a piece of very good advice: ask your doc if they actually read the test themselves, and not just the report. If they do not read your test themselves…RUN!
The only way I can answer what to do with this extra information is by way of a story. This is only one of many such yarn I could spin. Sorry to keep bashing the MRI, but it’s so easy. In the past ten years I have seen several patients presenting with ankle pain after an ankle reconstruction surgery with a history of only heel pain or plantar fasciitis prior to the surgery. In each case they had never had ankle pain or a history of ankle injury. For any or all reasons noted above, an MRI was obtained and the read was “chronic rupture of the ATFL” or ankle ligament rupture. In my experience, approximately 80% of all MRI’s that include the ankle region note this finding. In most of these cases (hundreds) the ligaments are not an issue and do not represent a dot.
Well, as you would guess, the surgeon probably did not know what they were looking for, looked at the report, did not read the study for themselves, did not connect the dots, and the patient got an ankle reconstruction… And they still have heel pain. So, even if all these MRI reports were correct, the information was used un-wisely. The dots were not connected.
What I want you to takeaway is this: I have been taught as a doc, that when you get a test, you should know what it will show. This was true then and it is true now. When a good doctor sits down with you, obtains a good history and physical, and then judiciously orders a test on you, I can guarantee you they will rarely be surprised by the results because they already know!
Too much Hitech and LastGenertion Stuff makes this to all of us, both medical professionals and patients.
We tend to forget the value of old History Taking, Physical Examination, Hypothesis Making, Good Recording. Which are actually “Old Tech”.
Back in 1988, my teachers used to say “If you don’t know what you’re search, you’ll never understand what you get!”
Starting as a Pathology in a hospital, I got the feedback: -“Great! we shall earn more $$ for making more exams!”; I answered: “Quite the opposite: we shall waste less money for making less exams”…
Most of people don’t get that, though. They want HigTech. They want LastGeneration. And tehre’s always somebody willing to sell these.
I get MRIs every 3 mths because I am alleric to iodine used in CT scans and need to monitor my liver. I had liver cancer last year but I am concerned about this frequency and number of gadolinium injections I’m having. I have just read that a study has identified two areas of the brain becoming hypersensitive to these injections and being linked to MS and liver disfunction.
This will be hard for many of you to believe, but I have no clue on this very good question. It is definitely above my pay grade. My one piece of advice is coral your doc and ask this exact question and don’t let them wiggle free util you get an answer. Then get back and tell all of us. Sorry about you medical problems and I am sure all reading wish you the best as I do.
I don’t know if you saw this post but it might bring you peace in that you are not alone.
Stay healthy my friends,
Stay healthy my friends,