I’m suffering from a cold right now (started out with a fever a little over a week ago) and lots of yellow/green snot that no longer shows signs of dissipating and I think to myself, “sinus infection?†I don’t really want to take antibiotics, but I’d like to do something to help myself heal. And this is, I think, where western medicine falls short. Of course you don’t want to prescribe antibiotics, but you give people no alternative–â€thanks for coming in, I’ll surely take your money for the visit, but there’s nothing you can do, but suffer.†I suggest you educate yourselves about alternative therapies and help people to heal themselves naturally.
Colds are caused by viruses. Some infections do not respond to any treatment. Alternative therapies do not work either. Multiple studies document their failure in this situation.
Our society discourages discomfort of any kind. Just watch TV for an hour and you will see ads for anything that ails you. Sometimes we really should “grin and bear it”. When I get a cold, I drink hot tea (because it makes me feel a bit better). Sometimes I have chicken soup – because that is what my mother always recommends. But mostly I really just wait for the cold to improve. It does, and I have yet to pay a physician’s bill for a cold.
The challenge is for any patient to know when his/her illness is not a simple virus. Key clues include: significant fever, shaking chills, night sweats, markedly productive greenish yellow sputum, severe headaches, severe sore throat which impairs any swallowing, or failure to improve at all after a week (slow improvement is expected, no improvement is a warning sign). Then and only then would I seek medical attention.
Related posts:
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
10 Responses to A patient writes on antibiotics for sinusitis
Lawrence M. Markman, M.D.
July 7th, 2005 at 8:13 am
This is a serious dilemma that primary care physicians are going to face with the current trend toward improved access and “same day” appointments. The easier it is to come to the doctor, the more people are going to show up with self limited viral infections, self limited musculoskeletal pain, and other issues for which it might be best just to wait it out. I predict this is going to result in MORE prescriptions for antibiotics. Maybe
e-mail access is the answer. I would find it much easier to tell a patient to wait it out by e-mail than face to face with the green snot dripping out of the nose.
Daniel Newby
July 7th, 2005 at 11:19 am
“Alternative therapies do not work either.”
Warm saline is sometimes just the thing for a woefully plugged up nose. I’m also fond of Simply Saline nasal spray, which has no preservatives so it doesn’t sting and irritate. When the humidity is low a humidifier can also help. Medicine is more than just pills.
Rich Goldstein, MD
July 7th, 2005 at 12:01 pm
It’s a shame that people believe that if they do not leave a doctor’s office with a prescription, then it was a waste of money. I presume one comes to my office for more than one reason:
1. They are feeling ill and want to know why, and if it’s serious.
2. They are feeling ill and want to know what they can do to feel better.
Even if someone leaves with the advice that the problem will subside spontaneously, and symptomatic treatment is all that is required, I have accomplished both. If an antibiotic was required, prescrobing it would also address # 2, but not prescribing one when not required does not mean that a valuable service was not rendered.
Dr. Markman makes a good point, however. With the current trend in third party payer systems, it is simply less expensive to see the doctor and fill a prescription for a $60 antibiotic (for a total cost to the patient of $10-$15) than it is to buy a bottle of Robitussin DM (10.99) and a box of sudafed ($7.99).
helen
July 9th, 2005 at 10:22 am
Interesting comment by Markman MD above about same day appointments making it MORE likely that doctors will prescribe antibiotics that are not needed. Umm, first step: ‘Just say no.’ If you prescribe drugs you do not believe are indicated just because someone else will do so if you don’t, shame on you. Poor judgment, and your patient isn’t getting good advice.
Another consideration and a logical conundrum: There are patients who will wait 3 weeks with a cold UNTIL they are quite ill as you indicate should happen, and then when they call for an appointment, are told the doctor will see them in…3 weeks (since of course you want to avoid ’same day’ appointments since they are only made by people who aren’t really sick but just demanding). By that kind of rationing behavior, you DRIVE patients to demand drugs, and demand them soon, because if the patients wait till they are really sick, they’re doubly screwed — sick AND neglected, since all patients by definition come in when not really sick and demand drugs they don’t need. You have then taught a behavior you deride: patients calling sooner in the course of an illness (because of the delay in receiving an appointment) and demanding meds early in the course of the illness (because of the delays in getting initial or follow up appointments). This behavior on the part of patients is a rational, if unintended, consequence of the mess at the front desk in too many medical offices — triage performed by the receptionist — and then the assumption that any patient who has deceived his/her way through triage can’t really be sick. You leave us not much choice.
I understand this setup doesn’t work properly — but it’s a mirror image of the system doctors are setting up, and both are twisted. The basic assumptions promoted above are that (1) patients seek care when they are not really sick and so you should delay seeing them to be sure they really are sick; AND (2) patients demand drugs unreasonably because they are seen when not really sick. You can’t have it both ways. Either see us when we call and refuse to prescribe unwarranted drugs, or see us later when we are very ill and then prescribe appropriately. But please don’t put us off and then refuse to prescribe when warranted simply on the assumption that patients are unreasonably demanding. Sometimes we really ARE sick…especially after waiting and waiting for an appointment.
Rich Goldstein MD in the previous post has it right. Doctoring is more than dispensing pills. I want to know if I have something serious after lingering for several weeks with an illness, and what to watch for to know if it’s GETTING serious. That last step is one doctors virtually never go to: “If your temp goes up to x, or if purple snot comes out your nose, call me.”
Rich Goldstein, MD
July 9th, 2005 at 1:45 pm
Helen -
You make some good points. There is one thing that is missing from your equation, which, politically-incorrect as it is, must be included: economics.
Why is it that there is a 3 week wait to see your physician? Similarly, why does the physician complain when someone comes in on the first day of mild symptoms? The answer to both is: economics.
In an ideal world, I would like to see fewer patients, spend more time with them, and provide a thorough, comprehensive service of highest quality. In the face of managed care, this has become very difficult. First, reimbursements are low, and generally getting lower (when corrected for inflation). In order to maintain a satisfactory level of revenue, then, I must increase volume. Second, the _economic_ disincentives (every choice we make has economic disincentives, even in healthcare) to visiting the doctor tend to be so low as to be negligible, at least for those people participating in managed care plans. So not only must I see more patients, more want to be seen, and as you point out correctly, right away.
The result is that my schedule becomes over-filled very early (perhaps 3 weeks in advance), and I am unable to accomodate you when you properly suggest that you need to be seen today.
This is illustrated by the pharmacy vs. doctor visit example I made above.
See my articles at http://richgoldsteinmd.com/ for more on my opinions about this.
Lawrence Markman, M.D.
July 9th, 2005 at 4:05 pm
Helen, I would like a full practice of informed, rational patients like you who can leave a medical visit fully satisfied after receiving an evaluation, advice, reassurance and no prescription. Unfortunately, you are in the minority. My patients don’t wait three weeks for an appointment. They are seen no later than the next day for any acute illness. However, as the above patient stated in the top of this string, “I may not necessarily want antibiotics, but I want something.” That’s the problem. Patients want “something” even when the best approach to their illness is NOTHING. I have spent 20 minutes with some patients evaluating their cold and explaining that time will take care of it. Two weeks later I receive a request to transfer their records to another physician. After 25 years of this, it gets pretty old.
marybeth
July 11th, 2005 at 12:12 am
A critical missing part of this discussion is answering the question, “Why do patients WANT A PRESCRIPTION ASAP?”
MY DAUGHTER IS GROWN NOW; HOWEVER BEING A WORKINGMOTHER , NOT WANTING TO USE SICK DAYS FOR MYSELF ( saving them for my child’s sick days), the idea of getting med’s quick, was a pro-active move to shorten illness if indeed it was or could turn into bronchitis or another bacterial infection ( ear sinus etc), so I could return to work ASAP.
The argument of cost saving for subscribers of HMO”S is weak and shows little insight into the day to day reality of the working family, as most RX co-pays are now 15.oo- 20.00. Even if an RX is given by the doctor , purchase of cough syrup, anti-histamines, Advil, lozenges are added to the consumers costs regardless.
If the AMA * APA took a strong view on the need for REST , ( aka- not going to work) when sick with a an infection, including a written document for the patient to give their employer, would create a more realistic ,tolerant attitude about illness in our work driven society, and also prevent god only knows how many thousands of cases of viral and bacterial infections spread everywhere, every year, by sick people going to work and spewing their germs amongst the masses.
Among most people I know who are highly educated, upper middle class, the attitude toward illness is no longer, “let me give my doctor a call and get checked out,”(the common response 5- 10 years ago), has now turned to (” Oh God, I don’t want to have to go through all the crap involved in even getting an appointment.” I see wide spread medical avoidance. In my mind , middle age is not a good time to adopt this attitude; but, none the less this appears to be a pervasive attitude folks are experiencing.
But I digress of topic.
Make viral infection = RX for rest * liquids O. K. and accepted by our culture; thus over use or unnecessary use of anti-antibiotics, would greatly decrease.
Namaste,
MB
helen
July 11th, 2005 at 11:28 pm
Here’s a question I never would have thought of till recently: Do docs look at the kind of insurance I have before they decide how much time to spend with me? If you get a bigger reimbursement from my insurance, do I rate a few more minutes of time?
I am about to completely rearrange my health insurance so I can see the doctors I want to instead of having to play dodge ball with my PCP’s front desk dragon…who seems to exercise more medical discretion than her boss — at least in my life. Until the switch over to the new plan and docs is complete, I have decided just to go ‘private pay’ — so when I recently saw the new doc outside of my current plan, did I get more of his time and attention because he got to charge me full freight, cash on the barrelhead? A tad disturbing, if that’s so.
I see tremendous variations among doctors’ offices in how accommodating they are about appointments and follow up and general management. They are all apparently up against the same reimbursement issues, yet some run ever so much better than others. Human variability, I suppose. It just goes to show that it’s possible to do it right, still.
One of the comments above said every patient wants to leave with ’something’ — how about an explanation that you understand that the patient wants to be well, and you would gladly give them medicine to make them so, but given the diagnosis, there are no pills to fix what ails them. It’s the truth. Can’t hurt to try it, and believe me, there are precious few doctors who treat patients with the respect the patients deserve in a collaborative relationship.
I am terribly distressed by the nasty, mean comments I read from doctors in some of the medblogs I frequent (does not include the docs above). It frightens me to think how these sourpusses disdain, resent and even hate their patients. Not good to place your life in the hands of a person who neither respects nor values you. Very sad. Very scary.
Rich Goldstein, MD
July 12th, 2005 at 9:05 am
Helen,
I can only speak for myself, but I do NOT alter my behavior regarding time, treatment, etc., based on someone’s insurance. It is important to note, however, that some health plans, intentionally or otherwise, DO incentivize doctors to make such distinctions.
Capitated health plans are one such example. With the exception of the copay, the doctor is reimbursed an essentiually fixed amount per month (generally about $10), whether you are seen or not, regardless of the number of times you are seen, etc. If a physician is busy and has a pick of patients to see, it makes financial sense to try to see the fee-for-service patient over the capitated patient.
Sad but true.
Rich
Laurent "CRP" Hogue
July 17th, 2005 at 5:20 pm
Hi,
I waited 2 weeks since the first symptoms before seeing a physician. My doctor prescribed me Nasonex for my sinusitis. I must say that it’s working well… It cost me nearly 40$ but I have the privilege to have a good health insurance. I can undestand that for others who are not in my situation, it can be problematic.