And WTF is “borderline personality distorder”? Is it akin to borderline
pregnancy or borderline senility or borderline? 
I don’t see it in ICD-9.

If the referral was to a psychiatrist it was unnecessary. If it was to
anybody else it was irrelevant.

Just give me the facts?

David de Bhál
www.v-practice.com

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of john hilton
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 3:28 PM
To: General Practice Computing Group Talk
Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Clinical software recommendations

A "particular" patient once came hurrying back to me with  a referral letter

in hand, to ask me what the "Borderline Personality Disorder" was that I had

included in her history.
jh

On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 22:01, David de Bhál wrote:
> If you knew that the patient could go home and look at the record you
might
> have a much better document, a better record of care. If he did not record
> the vaccination the patient could bring it to his attention and if it were
> noted that the mother died of, say, breast cancer, rather than bowel
> cancer, then the patient could clarify the record. Were this to happen too
> frequently then the doctor might find he lost the occasional patient.
>
> Some of it has to do with full and frank disclosure and we need to get
away
> from the mentality of "It wasn't me, nobody saw me, you can't prove it".
> Everybody knows that things go wrong in medicine but if you are slack then
> you deserve to have your ass sued.
>
> How many hypertensives have a target BP written in the notes? How
objective
> is the evidence?
>
> David de Bhál
> www.v-practice.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of john hilton
> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 11:46 PM
> To: General Practice Computing Group Talk
> Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Clinical software recommendations
>
> There is another aspect. The "quality" of medical records varies by many
> orders of magnitude, between practitioners. A GP who is meticulous in the
> recording and upkeep of records, taking care and considerable time, can be
> thwarted by another who fails to record immunisations, important history
or
> diagnoses or investigations or by one who records spurious crap. Result is
> that the usefulness of the record as an accurate record is diminished.
> A meticulous doctor will be able to put the record to better use in
> managing
>
> the patient.
> Further, a fully consumer-orientated record (with patient having
> permissions
>
> to modify?) will render it effectively useless.
> jh
>
> On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:50, Mario Ruiz wrote:
> > It appears that the only reason for the practitioner to own the record
> > is purely medico-legal, aka ACD's (ass covering documents).
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gpcg_talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.6/324 - Release Date: 4/25/2006

-- 
MIKE: Right, that's it, we're going to the launderette, now!
VYVYAN: We can't Mike.
MIKE: Why not?
VYVYAN: Because they don't open for another eight hours. It's midnight.
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.0/325 - Release Date: 4/26/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.0/325 - Release Date: 4/26/2006
 


_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk

Reply via email to