> Sometimes a more hands on approach is required, especially when dealing with the elderly. I'd say that extends to far beyond the elderly. I did the majority

> Sometimes a more hands on approach is required, especially when dealing with the elderly. I'd say that extends to far beyond the elderly. I did the majority of my clinical training in hospitals all throughout Brooklyn, and poor compliance/follow-up was evident across the board for a number of patient populations. Persistent hounding by social workers only proved successful half the time. There are cultural and educational factors at play, in addition to blatant laziness, that I think if addressed would yield improvement. Like you said, many of the patients just aren't tech savvy, but I'd say more are just not well-informed, educated properly on the importance of continued adherence, and actively engaged in their care. Patients are usually given a card with appointment details scribbled on for when to next see their cardiologist for their CHF, or whatever that is. The period between them walking out of their cardiologist's office to their next appointment is, I guarantee, almost never spent reflecting on their condition or actively taking steps to mitigate the complications, save for taking pills. A patient's conditions are only serious problems to them within the walls of their doctor's office. Once they leave, they're forgotten, understandably, out of fear and comfort and the chaos of life. That's why I think it's critical that a patient receive continuous education and encouragement in the interim between check-ups, to close the gaps and help maintain continuous patient self-conern.