Double-Booked: When Surgeons Operate On Two Patients At Once

a reply to: Morrad

That is amazing.

I think the story was focusing on abuses and mistakes.

originally posted by: VegHead
While I would want my surgeon to be good at multi-tasking, I would never want him (or her) to be juggling multiple surgeries at once. Yikes. And this practice is so commonplace that it has a name. Double yikes.

I grew up in a small-sized University town and locals all knew to avoid the teaching hospital due to this very type of thing.

Young doctors need the opportunity to learn, this is true... but patients undergoing non-emergency surgery have the right to know who their surgeon will be. Patients need an opportunity to agree to be a doctor's (or resident's) patient. It seems so obvious, it is scary that this isn't a right granted to the patient.

I think the senior doctor should wear a surgeoncam, and record his work. Then the young doctors could use a VR headset and watch the entire operation. There is a VR training system for doctors that was made by the nursing college in Ireland/Northern Ireland. Gave a sample case of a road crash victim and you had to lung drains, X-rays, prescribe various drugs. Get it wrong and the nurses aren't happy.

www.newstalk.com...

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Khaleesi

Sorry, responding to Diabolical1972.

And something I learned before surgery, I guess a newbie from the teaching hospital said it was okay for me to drink Gatorade and not water before the surgery. Don't do it. The doctors almost canceled my surgery because of it. Only clear liquids and a small sip at that. It can fill your lungs in surgery from what the anestiologist told me.

Diabolical1972's 'newbie' was probably not a doctor or nurse. Medical staff know what NPO means. Every pre surg patient is NPO after midnight the day of surgery. NPO means NOTHING by mouth, not even water or other clear liquids. Absolutely nothing by mouth after midnight before surgery because if there is a problem the patient could aspirate even water and have major problems.

originally posted by: Khaleesi
a reply to: VegHead

I understand what you are saying but my experience is totally different. Residents were usually the first doctor to see the patient. They did rounds, interviewed the patients etc. The attending usually came in to see the patient last and got most of the patient information from the resident before ever stepping in the room. It one of the reasons I can't watch television medical fiction shows. They make it look like the attending has a gaggle of idiot junior residents following them around asking stupid questions. Reality is far different. Patients usually meet the residents first and anyone that thinks the attending will be the only surgeon in the room has watched too much television.

I'm sure university hospitals vary greatly in quality of care, as do private hospitals. The hospital in my hometown had a horrible reputation with the locals ... but that reputation was largely due to local "horror stories" that were part-truth and part-legend. Fair or not this led to genuine fear about the hospital. Locals avoided it whenever possible.

Thanks for your "insider" info. I can see how cheesy medical dramas would make you want to slap your tv.

originally posted by: FredT

originally posted by: VegHead

I grew up in a small-sized University town and locals all knew to avoid the teaching hospital due to this very type of thing.

Most teaching hospitals have better outcomes than private. Also in a teaching facility, there is more systems in place and the staff is more empowered to say 'No" or ask that critical question 'Why" etc.

Teaching hospitals tend to be research facilities as well so they often offer more cutting edge treatment etc.

Good points and absolutely true... but that's not enough to overcoming local urban legend and decades of paranoia and mistrust.

Of course this was 20 years ago... I should ask my friends still living there if the current locals still view the university hospital so negatively.