You don’t have to see the same doctor twice. In fact you don’t even have to go to the same practice. Come to think of it you don’t even have to go to a practice. In many countries including where I work you can dial-a-doc. He or she will turn up Uber taxi style. All you have to do is make the call. There is a cost of course. That’s the whole point. But is medicine a special case? Choice is a good thing but is there a down side to the commercialisation of health care?
Suppose you experience some worrisome condition. Something that isn’t painful but shouldn’t be ignored. Let’s say you notice blood in your pee. You might go to a doctor eventually because you, quite rightly, decide you need to find out what’s causing it. You go to the first doctor who can see you. It might not be the one you’ve seen before and if you are worried enough you might even go across town to someone who can ‘fit you in today’. The doctor might order a test or two. Possibly ask you to provide sample of your urine, perhaps organise some blood tests and may be recommend a scan. The next day the blood is not so obvious and you think there is no need for all this fuss. Either that or you have the tests and they come back negative or you decide that there is no need to make another appointment with the doctor when the blood seems to have disappeared. You breathe a sigh of relief and leave it there. No need to worry. But of course there is. Painless frank haematuria warrants thorough investigation.
Understand, however, that hematuria may be intermittent in patients with significant urologic disease and a repeat urinalysis should be obtained if the clinical suspicion is present. American Urological Association.
If you are a doctor reading this:
- How does your practice deal with the possibility that people may fail to follow up positive test results?
- What is your policy for people who have negative test results in the context of significant clinical signs or symptoms?
- How do you take into account the possibility that a patient may fail to attend for investigations for reasons various?
In some countries it is easier to track people who fail to turn up or return after tests. In other countries it is up to the practice to have a fail-safe mechanism. In healthcare, occasionally, the ‘customer’ falls between the cracks and the consequences can be a delayed diagnosis or worse. First and foremost it requires the service provider to know the circumstances in which it is prudent to go the extra mile. If you work in a place where it may be possible that people might be harmed by the way they use healthcare services what are the circumstances in which you take more precautions? What do those precautions look like? It might be that your approach could scale to protect more people who wish to exercise choice.
Picture by Mark Wilkie