At what point are we unsafe?

[GLW]

Read this article, pay attention to the error percentages, at what point are we unsafe?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/health/24radiation.html

[RDTroja]

In my opinion, we are never safe when we put our trust in the medical profession.

Harsh? Maybe. But based on a little inside information and a lot of anecdotal evidence I stand by it. The number of mistakes caused by pure incompetence is astounding and most of it happens below the radar (as the linked article describes) so we only see the tip of the iceberg. (How about that for a mixed metaphor?) I once asked some very basic questions of an x-ray technician (and I wasn't playing stump-the-chump) and was surprised how little they knew about radiation and RP... very simple stuff. I got in a conversation with a medical pharmacy technician and was equally disappointed. The amount of uncontrolled radioactive materials released from a hospital is staggering (and not all short lived.) And all that is above and beyond the wrong limbs being amputated and the hysterectomy being performed on the 18-year-old patient instead of the 58-year-old... maybe the doctor or a nurse might have noticed the age discrepancy from the patient to the chart?

Mistakes happen in all professions, but some jobs need to be a little less tolerent of errors. Certainly some doctors are true heroes and do impeccable work, but the failure rate is just too high for the magnitude of the consequences. Hospitals scare the crap out of me, and not just because that is where all the sick people are.

What do you call a medical student that graduates last in his class?

Doctor.

[cincinnatinuke]

WOW!  One quote from a doctor stated 1 in 20 will suffer an injury (radiation related).  Not good odds at all.

[Neutron_Herder]

I'm not going to even try to defend what happened to those people,  but the fact that they're just now starting to install interlocks to verify that the equipment is properly configured doesn't make sense either.  I'm going to assume that some regulatory agency approved the use of this machine and didn't bother to think of the need of interlocks?  Plus, no second (peer) check on the machine before use?  It's just a recipe for disaster!

Maybe I'm just being naive, but shouldn't things that could cause damage to the body have something like that?  They've got it on lawnmowers, snowblowers, etc. 

Hopefully these people weren't harmed in vain, but I'm not that naive...  Money talks, and the medical companies will spend it to get their new gadgets approved without thinking about the level of knowledge of the people operating them.

It's just sad.

[SloGlo]

WOW!  One quote from a doctor stated 1 in 20 will suffer an injury (radiation related).  Not good odds at all.

hail, its only 5%.
interlocks 'n safety concerns on equipment dat doktors use?  heresy!  maybe hisesay too, butt i ain't going their.  dockturs no best.  gist axe them.

[stormgoalie]

To be honest I am not surprised.  The medical industry seems to suffer a lot from "Institutional Arrogance".  Almost as much as politicians.

[sandyfl]

Simply lack of paying attention to details.In a majority of the recent cases of incompetence, radiotherapy throughout the country, the question has to do with who validates the treatment planning, and the answer is, it's supposed to be the medical physicist. In some cases it's not a matter of over-dosing the patient, it's also under-dosing the patient. The root cause isn't simply making the equipment better. Doctors plan treatment, medical physicists setup the treatment plan and it's absurd that there is minimal verification.

One answer is to have real-time patient dosimetry and someone actually watching the procedure. If there is any reason a dose is incorrect, the technologists needs to turn the unit off.

It's pathetic that a majority of physicians simply don't know enough about, or care, about radiation and radiation safety. The large lobbyist groups, such as AMA, don't help!

[Bradtv]

In How Doctors Think, Dr. Jerome Groupman similarly covers the problems of misdiagnosing patients.  In medical school, emphasis is put into the collection of data (past medical history, current symptoms, etc).  In practice, insurance policies dominate the list of procedures used to diagnose.  Hospital Administrators seek high patient turnout.  These various factors discourage doctors from being able to properly listen to their patient (who's description usually provides the answers to the hardest cases) as well as not give the doctors the time to properly reflect on the care of the patient (or dictate more sensible procedures due to insurance policy).

He also goes on to say that doctors are not immune to error or guessing.  Each individual needs to disclose the information that will lead to a successful diagnosis, or question the doctor/medical staff when things don't seem clear.

Unfortunately, these mistakes end up increasing Government intervention and Insurance premiums.