Dumbing down of medical terms.

[Badbessie]

A few days ago there was some discussion relating to medical letters being made easier to understand. My argument was that medical terms and definitions etc are there to convey precise information and important information could be lost by over simplified definitions. I believe this article proves my point.

bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-l...

[Kristicats]

I think it’s very important to give patients a verbal account of their diagnosis, prognosis , proposed treatment etc in layman’s plain language as most patients are not from a medical background. Terminology in Medical notes and letters should be explained to the patient.

[Badbessie]

I could not agree more. However most conditions do carry a degree of uncertainty. When patients ask medical professionals for outcomes there is always a guarded response where the words could, may or normally are used, as we are all individuals certainty of prediction is impossible. My wife attended a pre operation assessment yesterday and she asked what the possible outcomes were? The doctors response was this is what I hope will be the outcome, "but" then gave a long list of other outcomes. From my own research percentage wise a good outcome was more likely. However due to informed consent the doctor must give each individual a full run down of all risks.

[peege]

I totally agree badbessie. Personally, I prefer to be treated as an intelligent being. P

[cofdrop-UK]

I agreed with your points in this thread and the points raised in the previous thread.

Thank you for the link.

Cx

[SORRELHIPPO in reply to cofdrop-UK]

I also agree with points in both threads, I used to work in a Health Care based job, and could tell by a person's facial expression (blank look etc) what they were understanding and what they were not. I then used to use other words and information until I had the "light bulb" look come on. In many cases it was easy to tell from what they said back, as to whether they understood/believed!!

Medical notes and letters have to use precise medical terms, firstly so other medics understand (reduces the likelyhood of incorrect treatment) and if you wanted to take a Court Case about treatment/lack of treatment the information is invaluable only if correct.

I would not be impressed with a copy letter from a hospital to my GP saying something like "I examined her private parts" or " we did a CT Scan and looked at her baby producing area". If the the worst comes to the worst we can look things up or come onto a site like this and ask.

[cofdrop-UK in reply to SORRELHIPPO]

Agree. People with health conditions are diverse, from someone who only wants to know the bare minimum to someone who wants to know as much as possible and will be compliant in their own care. This was one of the probems we had to consider when putting together the Bronchiectasis Patient Priorities. As you say the medics can sus out and explain when necessary. On the other extreme you have people such as scientists or within the medica profession who seek out all the scientific papers going.

I would say however, that it is the responsibility of a good consultant or GP to take time to explain and be prepared to answer any questions a person may have when they receive a copy of the letter. Although this isn’t universal, the medical profession are much better these days. In the main the paternalistic attitude is getting less. It always used to annoy me that the docs used to have the attitude that as long as they knew that was all that mattered and on the other hand expected you to give a good history. They can’t have it both ways. Always works best when working as a team.

Cx

[SORRELHIPPO in reply to cofdrop-UK]

I do agree with the bit about a good history, I used to end up saying to some people Drs are not mind readers, but Consultants especially have little time, I was an Occupational Therapist mainly working in the community, and it could take ages to get a good medical history, often they said the thing that mattered the most as you were saying goodbye!! I often used to send a report to the GP or a Consultant highlighting the things I was pretty sure they had not been told, such as I cannot sleep, or I do not fancy food any more, or in one case " I am still taking Valium even though my GP stopped giving it to me, My sister brings it over every 3 months from France!!!" in this case the GP got an urgent phone call as the lady was also taking the meds he had given her to replace the Valium.

I do feel Medics should be using Practice Nurses, Specialist Clinic Nurses and the rest of us in the service, to ferret out info, also those of us that see people at home can help the person and the Medic by assissting the people with complex conditions in making a written list of symptoms and past/present problems, there were quite a few I would tell to make diary's for pain/food intake/fluid intake/dizzy spells anything where they would be asked how often or is it getting worse or why are you loosing/gaining weight. It is not just older people with poor memories who forget to tell Medics things, but anyone flustered by the situation. I had a very good friend who was also an OT in her 60's had the kick of a cancer diagnosis, where no help could be give but Pal Care, she said the minute the Dr had said Stomach Cancer her brain turned to mush, could not get a coherent question together or give any useful info. It was the Clinic Nurse, who over a few visits, got and gave the info needed.

[katieoxo60 in reply to SORRELHIPPO]

Had to laugh , because when reading what you wrote it makes you realise how ridiculous it sounds in a medical context.

[katieoxo60]

Hi there I think things should be recorded in medical terms , but then maybe translated to more understandable terms for those less able to comprehend medical jargon. It has been agreed for some medical advice to be in picture style to cover all learning abilities. Why does the female anatomy get singled out, guess its cause only ladies can have babies and ladies might be more easily offended by discriptions. In my case none of this matters as they never tell me any results anyway or show me Xrays have to pay for my records if I want to know. Everyones different in what they would like.

[SORRELHIPPO in reply to katieoxo60]

When reading this I wanted to ask what century we were in, then wondered if you were in the UK? The Consent for Treatment is Informed Consent, if the Medics do not give you the info. so you are not "Informed" in theory they cannot treat you. I must admit I picked the female anatomy bit out of the examples given because it just struck me as rediculous that it was thought women were so stupid we needed such dumb language. I do not mind "kidney" replacing "renal" or "heart" replacing "cardiac" as exact replacements. However with lung problems, there has to be the specific qualifications related to which areas of the lung are damaged as this is so important. With the heart, there often has be to be specific info. added, I would rather have the proper name for the chamber that is damaged, so I could check what was being talked about (or ask) than have have someone say the "top right side chamber".

I found it irritating enough when the word Geriatrics was phased out and Elderly Care came to be the norm. I think people thought Geriatrics had become a "bad" word but the two things mean the same. We do not seem to have phased out "paediatrics", I think a lot of these changes are being mooted, to cover for the "bad Medics" who cannot be bothered to explain things or do not wish to discuss things with their patients. Either that or I am getting grouchy and doing a "Victor Meldrew"!!

[katieoxo60 in reply to SORRELHIPPO]

Thank you for reply, you are right if not informed then a patient is not technically giving consent, as is giving treatment for an illness you don't have can be constituted as assault. But we won't go in to too much detail , think you might be right about descriptions being changed to cover "poor "medics" . In Respect of heart chambers it is important to know which one as the symptoms are different i.e left or right. And some doctors don't know that raised uric acid levels are an illness not just a symptom of other illness. There are distinct differences between lung conditions and a definate diagnosis is required and the patient informed so they can manage their illness. I recall many years ago a consultant putting a word in my records that mean't it was above my intelligence to understand, of course in his eyes I was merely a young mum living in a working class area. That's a case of making judgement on what you see. Doctors of any status are paid to make an informed diagnosis and inform the patient, the records are yours and you have a right to be told whats in them. Any way think we both agree we the patient should be given the correct medical details when being diagnosed or tested.

[Hidden]

Id just like to point out a few things, firstly the medical industry and that's what it is an industry, is controlled by the pharmaceutical companies and others like the FDA and the medicines control Agency in the UK. Doctors get freebees from pharmaceutical companies and they get money for every vaccination. Doctor Vernon Coleman explains this in his book 'Paper Doctors.' If you get the BNF (British National Formulary) it tells you all the side effects of every drug, but in their language. And I disagree that it is to make information more accurate, not always. For instance they put heart attack in their language, Acute myocardial infarction, why not just say heart attack? And it doesn't stop there! When they do experiments they use this language to hide what they are doing. Having worked in the pharmaceutical industry for 16 years, but I might add not as a pharmacist or scientist, I still know what is going on having studied this subject for 25 years.

[Hidden]

Thank you Redsox, it is much appreciated. I learned a lot from my research and time in the pharmaceutical mafia. I obviously don't have to tell you that its all about making money, sadly we are in the minority others just blindly follow. Its a religion not a science.