I have long been an advocate of a no refusal, admit all patients policy for physicians . Any physician is bound by his Hippocratic oath and the law to treat any patient (within the bounds of his skill and expertise) whatever the circumstances of that patient will be. The physician also has the social responsibility of reporting any patient (to proper authorities) that may pose danger to any other person or to the society for which the patient belongs.
Lately however, I’ve noticed a few non-compliant patients pushing limits of our patience and resources. My case in point.
A thirty something male patient brought to the ER (allegedly from another hospital) for a 2 day old gun shot wound. The GSW entry point is at the postero-medial portion of his right leg, with no exit wound noted. He has a comminuted fracture on the middle part his tibia. On examination, the bullet slug is palpable on the postero-lateral side of his knee. I noted a wide area of contused skin from the leg, extending to the lateral posterior of his right thigh. Patient is febrile and have an elevated BP. We immediately started IV antibiotics and scheduled the patient for an emergency debridement and external fixation of the fracture. Surgery went well and while the skin contusion did grew to a alarming size, the patient eventually recovered and was on his recovery 5 days after surgery. The patient ran away from the hospital without proper discharge procedure and without paying his bills. As we learned later, all patient’s data and circumstances were dubious and the patient is nowhere to be found. My worst fear is the danger of this patient contracting osteomyletis if ever his fracture isn’t followed up carefully.
If he ever goes back to any hospital, and if you are the physician, what would you do?
The dilemma is much more difficult in government hospitals. In the Philippines, government hospitals are funded by people’s taxes. Funding that are at less than optimal and is finite. Government physicians sometimes sees patients, that for some reason,are rarely compliant. Most often these patient’s’ non compliance results to complications and prolonged treatment. Prolonged treatment siphons physician and hospital resources that could have been allocated to other patients. This is where the decision making abilities of a physician enters and is very crucial. It can actually make or break his career because litigation and malpractice suits isn’t easy to come by.
My take on this? I’d still treat the patient according to what his medical problem requires and to what treatment the patients consents to. But I’m going to document it very carefully and protect myself with detailed consents and waivers. I will also get the opinions of appropriate legal or social services department. Sometimes, its more with communicating with the patient and convincing them of their most beneficial treatment option. This is not easy. But aren’t we surgeons and doctors now if our job is easy?
I may sound like crap but again, the simple fact remains the same. We are the physicians, the very persons privileged to touch and care for sick people. When we treat patients, we (and the hospital) enter a ‘contract” with that patient. Contract that to an extent, requires both the doctor and the patient to work for the wellness of the patient, for so long as that treatment is not detrimental to others. It all boils down to both parties being aware of their responsibilities in this contract. If one violates this contract, that ceases the existence of the contract and therefore, ceases the doctor- patient relationship.
If you are a physician in this situation, what would you do? If, you are a patient, what do you think should the physician do?