3 ms·
> Let's take fluoroquinolones for example. It is an extremely dangerous antibiotic, no longer recommended as a first line treatment for simple infection. Yet, p
by rkk3 5y ago
> Let's take fluoroquinolones for example. It is an extremely dangerous antibiotic, no longer recommended as a first line treatment for simple infection. Yet, patients are being prescribed it for SUSPECTED unconfirmed infections. This screams either incompetent physician or lack of familiarity with current scientific knowledge/new guidelines.
Which is the same example you gave in your first post...
> Yet, patients are being prescribed it for SUSPECTED unconfirmed infections.
AFAIK bacterial infections are in-practice often only suspected not confirmed before prescribing anti-biotics so why emphasize this?
Like I said I think you are ignoring other incentives (Malpractice Risk, Bias for action etc.) at play that cause a Physician to look at the same situation and come to a more aggressive treatment plan than your armchair diagnosis.
- avgDev 5y ago>AFAIK bacterial infections are in-practice often only suspected not confirmed before prescribing anti-biotics so why emphasize this? It does happen but is a HUGE problem in medicine. This doesn't mean this is the CORRECT procedure and exactly what I am talking about. Infection should be confirmed and correct antibiotic used. Plus, not all infections require antibiotics. >Like I said I think you are ignoring other incentives (Malpractice Risk, Bias for action etc.) at play that cause a Physician to look at the same situation and come to a more aggressive treatment plan than your armchair diagnosis. By not following guidelines and prescribing wrong medication or when medication does not help a specific problem the physician is a lot more likely to be sued if patient suffers from side effects.