The latest study in this realm, coming out of Indiana University, claims to validate predictive computer models that help physicians prescribe the optimal course of medicine for their patients vs. the physician alone. The idea is simple – that doctors should rely heavily on data rather than their own “intuition” in order to make better and more “economical” prescribing decisions. On its face, the rationale behind the prescribing study makes perfect sense. Patient outcome studies are, by and large, reliable data from which one can make informed decisions.
And I understand that most (as the article states) aren’t calling for data models to “replace” a physician’s judgment. But the concept of physicians relying too heavily on data to make critical treatment decisions is troublesome, as physicians’ “intuition” and personal experience is exactly what you are paying for when you seek a certain course of therapy.
In the field of psychiatry, for example, talk therapy is woven into the fabric of a patient’s diagnosis and treatment cascade. Although psychiatrists are medical doctors, and sustain an astounding base of biological and neurological knowledge, their practice is as much of an art form as it is a scientific endeavor. The physician’s intuition is critical, and they must rely on their experience, gut, and focus on the individual case. Human interaction and emotional connection are irreplaceable in this field, and will be decisive factors in prescribing the right medical treatment – whether it’s a drug, device or procedure.
In the case of an internist, we may see more of a use for the computer model – especially if he/she is isolated and doesn’t see the sheer number of patients the way urban doctors do. And older internists that are set in their ways, and not familiar with the latest and greatest therapeutic options and procedures in their profession, would certainly elevate their patients’ standard of care by looking closely at this data.
- More Here
And I understand that most (as the article states) aren’t calling for data models to “replace” a physician’s judgment. But the concept of physicians relying too heavily on data to make critical treatment decisions is troublesome, as physicians’ “intuition” and personal experience is exactly what you are paying for when you seek a certain course of therapy.
In the field of psychiatry, for example, talk therapy is woven into the fabric of a patient’s diagnosis and treatment cascade. Although psychiatrists are medical doctors, and sustain an astounding base of biological and neurological knowledge, their practice is as much of an art form as it is a scientific endeavor. The physician’s intuition is critical, and they must rely on their experience, gut, and focus on the individual case. Human interaction and emotional connection are irreplaceable in this field, and will be decisive factors in prescribing the right medical treatment – whether it’s a drug, device or procedure.
In the case of an internist, we may see more of a use for the computer model – especially if he/she is isolated and doesn’t see the sheer number of patients the way urban doctors do. And older internists that are set in their ways, and not familiar with the latest and greatest therapeutic options and procedures in their profession, would certainly elevate their patients’ standard of care by looking closely at this data.
- More Here
No comments:
Post a Comment