drk1980
Forum Guru
Topics: 147
Posts: 1,038
|
If anyone can remember accurately this Qbank question....wht ws the answer?
A nurse gets a needle prick while drawing blood from a homosexual man. She gets worried and orders the doctor to do HIV tests on the patient. What should the doctor do?
Order tests like the nurse says?
Refuse to order the tests in respect to patients privacy?
Order the tests without the patient knowing?
|
| karusmle
Forum Guru
Topics: 292
Posts: 986
|
the answer is refuse to order the tests in respect to patients privacy..............
|
| netlover
Forum Junior
Topics: 3
Posts: 54
|
The answer is definitely to order test like the nurse says. The general rule is that patient's confidentiality is to be respected at all times. This means that no medical procedure, including laboratory tests, can be run on a patient without his or her consent. There is one exception: threat of harm to self or others. The guidelines of the American Medical Association explicitly state that the exception applies in this case. Don't forget the fact: the patient is homosexual already places him in one of the high-risk groups.The nurse may be at risk. If the patient is HIV-positive, treating her quickly greatly reduces the chance of becoming HIV-positive and increases her life span should she become HIV-positive But my question is even though the patient's permission is not required, do we need to inform the patient what we are going to do? If not, when the patient ask why you draw blood, how we can answer him?
|
| drk1980
Forum Guru
Topics: 147
Posts: 1,038
|
concerning your Q netlover, if thats the answer to my Q then i suppose you do inform the patient for what purpose you are taking the blood sample. however you leave it upto the patient to decide whether he wants to know about the results of his HIV status test or not....this way you are following the regulation of keeping the patient informed as well as giving him the option of not wanting to know.
about the exception regarding harm to oneself or others...reminds me of anthr Q in this forum earlier...about an adult anorexic patient refusing treatment in the ER, whether the doctor shd accept her decision or to carry on with treating her despite her refusal. I would think we must carry on with treatment as there is harm to her life, but the conclusion of the discussion in the forum was going with whtever the patient decided.
?!
|
| netlover
Forum Junior
Topics: 3
Posts: 54
|
The answer is from Qbank, so I guess that it should be right. I got confused with that Q too. If the threat of harm to others, the answer is much easier to answer. If the threat of harm to self is the case, it's hard to decide which one has high priority. My thought is to disregard her refusal and treat her, at least just maintain her life.
|
| netlover
Forum Junior
Topics: 3
Posts: 54
|
One more thing I need to mention is that it's possible that the patient had psyco abnormality, which means she doesn't have ability to decide her sitatuation by herself. If that is the case, I think we need to consult the psychiatrist before we move on.
|
| sturge_weber
Forum Guru
Topics: 77
Posts: 1,042
|
if the patient has altered mental status, then the doc decides.if however the patient more than 18 than she decides,
|
|
| |
| | | | | | | |
