November

Dr Richardson asked if one would order cortisol levels because a patient told her that her naturopath said she needed them checked, order hormones for someone who wants to start bioidentical hormones, order X-rays of the back because someone’s chiropractor wanted them ordered, or order a cervical MRI because someone’s massage therapist wanted the imaging done [Pressed to test: How should GPs respond? BCMJ 2013;55:312].

As I pedal my bike into another spectacular hill town in the Italian countryside, I am reminded of the saying, “Beauty often stems from madness.” 

I would like to share the story of someone I have known for 10 years—a patient who was referred to me when her previous endocrinologist retired. Her story is even more special to me because she and I shared a childhood dream to spend time with elephants in the wild. Her dream came true—in a much more complicated way than mine will likely ever come to pass (or so I hope).

In January 2011 the General Practice Services Committee (GPSC) Personal Health Risk Assessment Fee (G14066) came into effect, supporting physicians in providing prevention services to patients.[1] One of the patient populations targeted by this initiative is those with unhealthy eating behaviors, such as the consump-tion of excess calories, fat, or cholesterol, or low fibre intake. Family physicians can now initiate a personal health risk assessment visit with this patient population, or book an assessment in response to a patient’s request for preventive care. 

References

Reviewing recent credible medi-cal studies is essential to the practice of evidence-based medicine, which may be defin-ed as “the integration of best research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values.”[1] A question that frequently arises at the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia library from doctors conducting searches to support their practice is, “What is the difference between a systematic review and a meta-analysis?”

hidden

References