And I have to agree with Drs Dunn and McCormick, who are making a lot of
sense, and whose views are not as irreconcilable as they might at first
appear.
It's all about the rate-limiting factor in your department, isn't it? In the
old days that was always the medics. In the 1980s, I was often a lone
casualty officer either in small departments by day or in large departments
by night, but there was always several nurses around. It made perfect sense
then for the nurses to "assist" me, by bringing patients in, by actually
assisting me during procedures (shock horror!), or by sorting patients out
after my consultation ended. It was a highly efficient way of working.
Now of course, I work in a department that has 12 doctors on the floor at
our busiest time, while our nurses number something around 12 or 13 at the
same time. The nurses can't possibly assist doctors in the way they used to
20 years ago. And rate-limitation is now as likely to be related to nursing
tasks, specialty review or bed availability.
By the same token, it often makes sense for the doctor to "work beneath" his
skill set, particularly if it's clear the nurses are tied up at that moment.
It's more efficient for the doctor to get the TTAs etc, isn't it, rather
than leave the task lying around for half an hour, and risk miscommunication
in the process. And are our F2 SHOs really paid much more than our
experienced nurses on an hour-by-hour basis? I doubt it. (But of course Drs
Cottingham and myself are paid vastly superior rates per hour and we
couldn't possibly wheel trolleys to x-ray on that rate of pay. It just
wouldn't be right, would it?)
Which reminds me, there's nothing wrong with "entering data in the computer"
if by that you mean clinical records, which to my mind should be done by the
treating physician, and not by anyone else. But perhaps you're referring to
some other data.
It's a brave new world out there...
AF
|