Issues of Non-compliance

Posted by Sheri Harris on Monday, September 7, 2009 Under: medicine
Doctors rate absentee visits similar to students who cut class. Physicians make notice of the missed visit and soon afterward render the patient as non-compliant. But, here's the ticker- for what does the physician want the patient to comply with during the next visit? If the visit is to again become very much of conversation instead of procedure when conversation leads to no suggestion of answer to ailment, and vice versa when repeated treatments or tests from the physician have been performed to no avail; it is then the physician who is in neglect and non-compliant with regard to proper care of the patient.

The patient in afterwards of visit, by not adequately receiving a balance in answer and well though out approach in finding a diagnosis hopefully leading to corrective treatment, the patient simply decides to remedy any condition present elsewhere. Because no answer or solution of worth was provided during any of the doctors visits.

For example:

If a physician wants to diagnose with immediate response the "pea", then they have to tackle the pod in understanding their own poor health literacy regarding their patients. Hence a mammogram can become a test that is lost with regard to interpretation of diagnosis, or it may provide a non-specific answer. If doctors rely on this as a thump in biblical context the patient's condition then provides a gateway for mistranslated results. Urgo, the patient has no furthur information to go on resulting from non-diagnosis which would then be interpreted as "there is nothing wrong".

The archaic in this form is that now the paper becomes three sided. In that 1- You were sent for a test that did not provide solid results. 2- Based on a finding that was not absolute, why does the physician continue to order the same type of test? 3- Why would a patient continue to see a doctor that places you under unnecessary burden by having you undergo  a repetition of tests that are unable to establish an answer to a continuing problem or symptom?

Therefore, it becomes imperative that doctors utilize "all" technology and equipment available that will more effectively translate and diagnose a specific ailment. At onset, a bi-lateral breast ultrasound could correctly determine an abnormality; and would be of additional finding as opposed to a patient just having a mammogram that may not lead to the conclusion of results and perhaps having them follow up within six months for another one. When indeed there could be something definately wrong and left untreated for that length of time or longer if the patient decides not to take the test again because it was unable to determine at that time if a disease is present in the body or not. This can be considered negligent in procedure of diagnosis determination by the physician. Because of the lapse in time that a patient is left without recourse for furthur testing or treatment, in that the physician fails to explore other options of exams or procedures to accurately determine any presence or existence of disease or not.
 
When the void in regards to lapse in exam determination is filled by physicians exploring other test options available, the compliance between patient and doctor may resume resulting from the patient being offered other available options.

In : medicine 



null

About Me


The writer professes a desire for human existence to evolve itself. If in effect change cannot withstand such struggles of forefather implementation; then it will be that of America who will exist without furthur progress. Sadiq's General e-mail: gdi104@aol.com

Issues of Non-compliance

Posted by Sheri Harris on Monday, September 7, 2009 Under: medicine
Doctors rate absentee visits similar to students who cut class. Physicians make notice of the missed visit and soon afterward render the patient as non-compliant. But, here's the ticker- for what does the physician want the patient to comply with during the next visit? If the visit is to again become very much of conversation instead of procedure when conversation leads to no suggestion of answer to ailment, and vice versa when repeated treatments or tests from the physician have been performed to no avail; it is then the physician who is in neglect and non-compliant with regard to proper care of the patient.

The patient in afterwards of visit, by not adequately receiving a balance in answer and well though out approach in finding a diagnosis hopefully leading to corrective treatment, the patient simply decides to remedy any condition present elsewhere. Because no answer or solution of worth was provided during any of the doctors visits.

For example:

If a physician wants to diagnose with immediate response the "pea", then they have to tackle the pod in understanding their own poor health literacy regarding their patients. Hence a mammogram can become a test that is lost with regard to interpretation of diagnosis, or it may provide a non-specific answer. If doctors rely on this as a thump in biblical context the patient's condition then provides a gateway for mistranslated results. Urgo, the patient has no furthur information to go on resulting from non-diagnosis which would then be interpreted as "there is nothing wrong".

The archaic in this form is that now the paper becomes three sided. In that 1- You were sent for a test that did not provide solid results. 2- Based on a finding that was not absolute, why does the physician continue to order the same type of test? 3- Why would a patient continue to see a doctor that places you under unnecessary burden by having you undergo  a repetition of tests that are unable to establish an answer to a continuing problem or symptom?

Therefore, it becomes imperative that doctors utilize "all" technology and equipment available that will more effectively translate and diagnose a specific ailment. At onset, a bi-lateral breast ultrasound could correctly determine an abnormality; and would be of additional finding as opposed to a patient just having a mammogram that may not lead to the conclusion of results and perhaps having them follow up within six months for another one. When indeed there could be something definately wrong and left untreated for that length of time or longer if the patient decides not to take the test again because it was unable to determine at that time if a disease is present in the body or not. This can be considered negligent in procedure of diagnosis determination by the physician. Because of the lapse in time that a patient is left without recourse for furthur testing or treatment, in that the physician fails to explore other options of exams or procedures to accurately determine any presence or existence of disease or not.
 
When the void in regards to lapse in exam determination is filled by physicians exploring other test options available, the compliance between patient and doctor may resume resulting from the patient being offered other available options.

In : medicine 



null

Issues of Non-compliance

Posted by Sheri Harris on Monday, September 7, 2009 Under: medicine
Doctors rate absentee visits similar to students who cut class. Physicians make notice of the missed visit and soon afterward render the patient as non-compliant. But, here's the ticker- for what does the physician want the patient to comply with during the next visit? If the visit is to again become very much of conversation instead of procedure when conversation leads to no suggestion of answer to ailment, and vice versa when repeated treatments or tests from the physician have been performed to no avail; it is then the physician who is in neglect and non-compliant with regard to proper care of the patient.

The patient in afterwards of visit, by not adequately receiving a balance in answer and well though out approach in finding a diagnosis hopefully leading to corrective treatment, the patient simply decides to remedy any condition present elsewhere. Because no answer or solution of worth was provided during any of the doctors visits.

For example:

If a physician wants to diagnose with immediate response the "pea", then they have to tackle the pod in understanding their own poor health literacy regarding their patients. Hence a mammogram can become a test that is lost with regard to interpretation of diagnosis, or it may provide a non-specific answer. If doctors rely on this as a thump in biblical context the patient's condition then provides a gateway for mistranslated results. Urgo, the patient has no furthur information to go on resulting from non-diagnosis which would then be interpreted as "there is nothing wrong".

The archaic in this form is that now the paper becomes three sided. In that 1- You were sent for a test that did not provide solid results. 2- Based on a finding that was not absolute, why does the physician continue to order the same type of test? 3- Why would a patient continue to see a doctor that places you under unnecessary burden by having you undergo  a repetition of tests that are unable to establish an answer to a continuing problem or symptom?

Therefore, it becomes imperative that doctors utilize "all" technology and equipment available that will more effectively translate and diagnose a specific ailment. At onset, a bi-lateral breast ultrasound could correctly determine an abnormality; and would be of additional finding as opposed to a patient just having a mammogram that may not lead to the conclusion of results and perhaps having them follow up within six months for another one. When indeed there could be something definately wrong and left untreated for that length of time or longer if the patient decides not to take the test again because it was unable to determine at that time if a disease is present in the body or not. This can be considered negligent in procedure of diagnosis determination by the physician. Because of the lapse in time that a patient is left without recourse for furthur testing or treatment, in that the physician fails to explore other options of exams or procedures to accurately determine any presence or existence of disease or not.
 
When the void in regards to lapse in exam determination is filled by physicians exploring other test options available, the compliance between patient and doctor may resume resulting from the patient being offered other available options.

In : medicine 



null

Issues of Non-compliance

Posted by Sheri Harris on Monday, September 7, 2009 Under: medicine
Doctors rate absentee visits similar to students who cut class. Physicians make notice of the missed visit and soon afterward render the patient as non-compliant. But, here's the ticker- for what does the physician want the patient to comply with during the next visit? If the visit is to again become very much of conversation instead of procedure when conversation leads to no suggestion of answer to ailment, and vice versa when repeated treatments or tests from the physician have been performed to no avail; it is then the physician who is in neglect and non-compliant with regard to proper care of the patient.

The patient in afterwards of visit, by not adequately receiving a balance in answer and well though out approach in finding a diagnosis hopefully leading to corrective treatment, the patient simply decides to remedy any condition present elsewhere. Because no answer or solution of worth was provided during any of the doctors visits.

For example:

If a physician wants to diagnose with immediate response the "pea", then they have to tackle the pod in understanding their own poor health literacy regarding their patients. Hence a mammogram can become a test that is lost with regard to interpretation of diagnosis, or it may provide a non-specific answer. If doctors rely on this as a thump in biblical context the patient's condition then provides a gateway for mistranslated results. Urgo, the patient has no furthur information to go on resulting from non-diagnosis which would then be interpreted as "there is nothing wrong".

The archaic in this form is that now the paper becomes three sided. In that 1- You were sent for a test that did not provide solid results. 2- Based on a finding that was not absolute, why does the physician continue to order the same type of test? 3- Why would a patient continue to see a doctor that places you under unnecessary burden by having you undergo  a repetition of tests that are unable to establish an answer to a continuing problem or symptom?

Therefore, it becomes imperative that doctors utilize "all" technology and equipment available that will more effectively translate and diagnose a specific ailment. At onset, a bi-lateral breast ultrasound could correctly determine an abnormality; and would be of additional finding as opposed to a patient just having a mammogram that may not lead to the conclusion of results and perhaps having them follow up within six months for another one. When indeed there could be something definately wrong and left untreated for that length of time or longer if the patient decides not to take the test again because it was unable to determine at that time if a disease is present in the body or not. This can be considered negligent in procedure of diagnosis determination by the physician. Because of the lapse in time that a patient is left without recourse for furthur testing or treatment, in that the physician fails to explore other options of exams or procedures to accurately determine any presence or existence of disease or not.
 
When the void in regards to lapse in exam determination is filled by physicians exploring other test options available, the compliance between patient and doctor may resume resulting from the patient being offered other available options.

In : medicine 



null

Issues of Non-compliance

Posted by Sheri Harris on Monday, September 7, 2009 Under: medicine
Doctors rate absentee visits similar to students who cut class. Physicians make notice of the missed visit and soon afterward render the patient as non-compliant. But, here's the ticker- for what does the physician want the patient to comply with during the next visit? If the visit is to again become very much of conversation instead of procedure when conversation leads to no suggestion of answer to ailment, and vice versa when repeated treatments or tests from the physician have been performed to no avail; it is then the physician who is in neglect and non-compliant with regard to proper care of the patient.

The patient in afterwards of visit, by not adequately receiving a balance in answer and well though out approach in finding a diagnosis hopefully leading to corrective treatment, the patient simply decides to remedy any condition present elsewhere. Because no answer or solution of worth was provided during any of the doctors visits.

For example:

If a physician wants to diagnose with immediate response the "pea", then they have to tackle the pod in understanding their own poor health literacy regarding their patients. Hence a mammogram can become a test that is lost with regard to interpretation of diagnosis, or it may provide a non-specific answer. If doctors rely on this as a thump in biblical context the patient's condition then provides a gateway for mistranslated results. Urgo, the patient has no furthur information to go on resulting from non-diagnosis which would then be interpreted as "there is nothing wrong".

The archaic in this form is that now the paper becomes three sided. In that 1- You were sent for a test that did not provide solid results. 2- Based on a finding that was not absolute, why does the physician continue to order the same type of test? 3- Why would a patient continue to see a doctor that places you under unnecessary burden by having you undergo  a repetition of tests that are unable to establish an answer to a continuing problem or symptom?

Therefore, it becomes imperative that doctors utilize "all" technology and equipment available that will more effectively translate and diagnose a specific ailment. At onset, a bi-lateral breast ultrasound could correctly determine an abnormality; and would be of additional finding as opposed to a patient just having a mammogram that may not lead to the conclusion of results and perhaps having them follow up within six months for another one. When indeed there could be something definately wrong and left untreated for that length of time or longer if the patient decides not to take the test again because it was unable to determine at that time if a disease is present in the body or not. This can be considered negligent in procedure of diagnosis determination by the physician. Because of the lapse in time that a patient is left without recourse for furthur testing or treatment, in that the physician fails to explore other options of exams or procedures to accurately determine any presence or existence of disease or not.
 
When the void in regards to lapse in exam determination is filled by physicians exploring other test options available, the compliance between patient and doctor may resume resulting from the patient being offered other available options.

In : medicine 



null