Subscribe by Email

Your email:

Posts by Month

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Does Patient Centered Care add to ER Overcrowding?

Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on Facebook Facebook | Submit to Digg digg it |  Submit to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn | 
By Prentice Tom, MD

In a recent issue of Health Affairs, (28, 4, 2009: w555-w565), Dr. Don Berwick makes an argument for Patient Centered Care, where physicians rely on patients to make informed decisions regarding diagnosis and treatment plans.  He states:

"Evidence-based medicine sometimes must take a back seat. First, leaving choice ultimately up to the patient and family means that evidence-based medicine may sometimes take a back seat. Should patient ‘wants' override professional judgment about whether an MRI is needed?  My answer is, basically, ‘Yes.'  On the whole, I prefer that we take the risk of overuse along with the burden of giving real meaning to the phrase ‘a fully informed patient.'"

I agree with the concept that it is critically important to have patients involved in their care and be part of the decision making process. And as physicians, we need to strongly encourage patients to take an active role in their health maintenance and disease management.  Over the last twenty plus years of practice, I have found that by informing and educating patients and their families regarding their medical condition, diagnostic and treatment options, and by seeking their input regarding their health goals and their expectations, I am much better able to serve and care for my patients.

Still, there are times - especially in the emergency department - when this approach may not be in the patient's best interest, nor the best interests of overall patient care.  Unfortunately, in the emergency department, where time and resources may be severely limited, the emergency physician may be required to provide care in a manner that most efficiently utilizes resources and maximizes patient outcome, even though the patient may want a test that is not necessary for treatment or the physician may not have had the opportunity to fully explain his/her decision.

In a physician's office, clinic, or in-patient ward, care that's truly patient-centered considers patients' cultural traditions, personal preferences and values, family situations, and lifestyles.  But in the emergency department where beds are scarce, resources are limited and the patient has no prior relationship with the physician, we need to balance patient education and demand for limited resources with overall patient flow, and the type of patient-centered care that Dr. Berwick describes may not be the best solution.

It is likely that every emergency physician can recall seeing a patient similar to the one that Dr. Berwick describes:  Doctor, I have a headache, and I want an MRI.  Access to an MRI can take multiple hours in a busy hospital, and even explaining why we can't offer such testing can take many minutes.  In principle, I agree with Dr. Berwick.   But in a system where the patient may not bear any financial responsibility, and where resources and time are limited, Such a practice may not always be in the best interests of overall patient care.  I only wished I lived in a world where emergency physicians had the time and resource availability to provide patient centered care to all our patients.

I would appreciate your thoughts or experiences with Patient Centered Care in the emergency department.

 

Comments

In an ideal world, where costs and other people’s time are not a consideration, Dr. Berwick’s ideas are laudable. However the ER unlike other entry points into the healthcare system must ultimately serve the needs and wants of the “many” over those of the individual.  
 
 
 
Allowing one or two patients every week or so to take this route might not cause a problem, but allowing many to do so will likely have a negative overall effect on everyone who uses the emergency room. Allowing a patient to decide to get an MRI when the doctor does not believe it’s indicated, especially contradicting various specialty guidelines and evidence based medicine, has significant consequences to others. In the ER we must weigh what is best for each patient in the context of the other patients in the ER we serve concurrently, taking into account the inconvenience, delay in diagnosis and treatment, as well as potentially increased morbidity to others. This would be a good debate for ethicists, who could help us understand how to assist patients to make informed decisions.  
 
 
 
When someone is sick can they truly incorporate the needs of others when making a decision about the use of healthcare resources? Will an informed decision eventually come to mean more than what’s best for the individual – when the decisions the individual makes will have a negative impact on the more favorable outcomes for those with much more serious problems? I doubt most of us, whether we are a patient or a physician whether would want to take on that additional burden. 
 
Posted @ Wednesday, March 03, 2010 1:03 PM by Wesley Curry, M.D.
The concept is laudable. I think we all, as physicians and healthcare providers, can agree that patients and families must be informed, educated, and involved in decision-making. That being said, I agree that our field requires pragmatic and flexible considerations. Also, we have a fiduciary duty to society (as well as to the individual patient) to ensure that our limited healthcare resources are allocated efficiently and in the most fair manner possible. Our system, which often disconnects patient demands from the costs, requires some stewardship on our part. Balancing desires vs. needs and the individual vs. society as a whole is will always be challenging.
Posted @ Friday, March 05, 2010 6:21 PM by Gary Li
It has taken years for me to feel competent at this part of my practice- that I can truly inform the patient and family with confidence in both my knowledge and communication skills. I think Dr. Berwick's ideas are provocative and may point us in a direction that has significant merit. We can all think of those patients for whom such an approach may lead to what we consider the "wrong" choice. Somehow that is generally portrayed as "wanting to much" from the system, though it may mean wanting less ("I don't want to spend 5 K on that CT"). Key to Berwick's argument is that we should design systems not to address the concerns of what can happen with the exceptional cases, but rather for the majority of cases. The care of the majority of patients will benefit by this notion of patient centrality. Those patients that are "outlyers"-.... that request too much or take too little....should be simply allowed to do so as the overall benefit of such an approach would have such a far reaching positive effect.
Posted @ Saturday, March 06, 2010 10:51 AM by Jim Dietz
Comments have been closed for this article.