I am still seething about a presentation at Australasian Diabetes Congress 2018, #18adc that discussed the results of a 12 month review of an “Insulin Dose Adjustment Clinic”, in a major teaching hospital in innerEastern-Sydney.
This was the least patient-centric, most egregiously substandard research methodology and ethically questionable thing I’ve seen presented. I know these are strong words but I stand by them not least because people with diabetes who attend this so-called clinic are being denied adequate care if the centre’s actions are truly the way they were presented in this talk, I have no reason to doubt what was presented but if some of the illustrious names associated with this hospital want to correct or clarify things, I’d be delighted to hear from them:
Substandard Research Methodology and Ethically Questionable.
Several times during the presentation the Registered Nurse and Credentialed Diabetes Educator making the presentation said that over a year, 7% of total referees to the clinic were “discharged from our care” for non-adherence AND this was in addition to the 20% of patients who were discharged because they didn’t respond to 2 attempts at phone contact. In total, 33% of people referred to the clinic did not complete the insulin dose adjustment clinic-if you were a business and 1/3rd of your customers didn’t return you’d be out of business/our of a job pretty quickly.
So why is this a substandard (as in it wouldn’t pass a High School research project test) research methodology? Simply because of an abject failure to define their terms.
When asked by an audience member what the definition of non-adherence that led to discharge was, the response was cringe-worthy. “Oh it’s a bit subjective I suppose… you can just tell”
EXCUSE ME YOU CAN JUST TELL??????????????????
How foolish of those of us questioning this presenter, I didn’t realise that clairvoyance was a skill utilised by public servants employed as health care professionals in NSW hospitals.
This is the most outrageous insult to ‘research’, to people with diabetes and to the many dedicated and diligent health professionals who are slaving their guts out to help people.
The look on my face to the “you can just tell” response elicited the follow-up “you don’t agree”- OH GOOD GRIEF, I said no and the response after an embarrassingly awkward pause where this professional looked bewildered that somebody would question her ability to “just know” something was …………….”Sometimes they’re rude”
WE ARE DENYING PUBLIC HEALTHCARE TO PEOPLE IN AUSTRALIA FOR UNDEFINED REASONS INCLUDING A SUBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT OF RUDENESS??????? No not abusive or physically threatening, no just “rude”.
I suggest person who is a RN CDE that you go spend half an hour in the Emergency Department of your hospital where your saintly colleagues are being regularly abused and spat upon by people in mental health and/or substance abuse crisis and learn what health care is all about. It’s an insult to all those hard working professionals who are subjected to verbal abuse and threats and yet they soldier on because they know they have a responsibility to save lives.
How dare you deny medical treatment paid for by Australian taxpayers for reasons you cannot even define. YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE THAT RIGHT! In fact I’d argue you’re bringing your whole profession into disrepute.
As you can tell I’m furious about this but not despairing. The reason I’m not totally despairing is not only do I personally know many health care professionals who aren’t like this, but there were good questions from the audience of healthcare professionals who were obviously also concerned about the nature of this presentation but during the conference I had a couple of quiet chats with CDEs I hadn’t met before. They worked in public hospitals, one just on the other side of Sydney from the offending party mentioned above, the other in the ACT. They gave me hope, their compassion, their understanding of the difficulties of diabetes care both from the patient and the practitioner perspective and their horror at the lack of professionalism in discharging somebody for non-adherence showed me that despite a few bad apples (or in this case it appears an entire diabetes “unit”) kind, compassionate, and competent care is out there you just need to sort the small amount of dirt from the gold.