As a retired Internal Medicine physician who counseled many patients and their families about the risks and benefits of procedures that had been recommended by friends, family, their pastors, gurus, the internet, and the specialists who "offered" whatever procedure it was supremely challenging to help worried and needy people understand that just because something CAN be done does not mean it SHOULD be done. Take as an extreme example, for instance, the person who says, "Do whatever you can" which means they are highly likely to die in the ICU on a ventilator when the probability that they would end up any other way was essentially nil. In my view it all comes down to educating patients about the true risks of a given procedure + honest and realistic expectations about THAT patient's expected post-procedure recovery and outcome. And this TAKES TIME on the part of the surgeon or other person performing that procedure. Sadly, too often that time is not taken and because it CAN be done it IS done. Any tool that increases the chances patients getting a useful, positive outcome from any procedure instead of a "no benefit" or negative outcome is a good thing in my book...
I am skeptical of the need for this type of research...if my valve needs replacing, I would not accept some doctor telling me that I do not really need the TAVR procedure. This procedure is less stressful for the patient anyway...so why not use it, even if the patient may be considered "weak"?....is this study aiming to please insurance companies, who do not want to pay for the TAVR operation?
IS THIS VIDEO ABOUT THE STUDY…. OR ABOUT THE FINDINGS…OR ABOUT …OH GEEEE I DONT..KNOW…….. HOW LONG WILL I LIVE AFTER A TAVR. START WITH THE GODDAMN ANSWER …AND THEEEENNNNNNN qualify the data.
I had TAVR. Doing fantastic
As a retired Internal Medicine physician who counseled many patients and their families about the risks and benefits of procedures that had been recommended by friends, family, their pastors, gurus, the internet, and the specialists who "offered" whatever procedure it was supremely challenging to help worried and needy people understand that just because something CAN be done does not mean it SHOULD be done. Take as an extreme example, for instance, the person who says, "Do whatever you can" which means they are highly likely to die in the ICU on a ventilator when the probability that they would end up any other way was essentially nil. In my view it all comes down to educating patients about the true risks of a given procedure + honest and realistic expectations about THAT patient's expected post-procedure recovery and outcome. And this TAKES TIME on the part of the surgeon or other person performing that procedure. Sadly, too often that time is not taken and because it CAN be done it IS done. Any tool that increases the chances patients getting a useful, positive outcome from any procedure instead of a "no benefit" or negative outcome is a good thing in my book...
Always ask yourself one question; who is funding the study? That will determine the outcome you are hearing.
I am skeptical of the need for this type of research...if my valve needs replacing, I would not accept some doctor telling me that I do not really need the TAVR procedure. This procedure is less stressful for the patient anyway...so why not use it, even if the patient may be considered "weak"?....is this study aiming to please insurance companies, who do not want to pay for the TAVR operation?
IS THIS VIDEO ABOUT THE STUDY…. OR ABOUT THE FINDINGS…OR ABOUT …OH GEEEE I DONT..KNOW…….. HOW LONG WILL I LIVE AFTER A TAVR.
START WITH THE GODDAMN ANSWER …AND THEEEENNNNNNN qualify the data.