Tal Bergman-Levy MD MHA, Oren Asman LLB LLM LLD, Eyal Dahan MD, Binyamin Greenberg MD, Shmuel Hirshmann MD and Rael Strous MD MHA
Background: In Israel a general code of ethics exists for physicians, drafted by the Israel Medical Association. The question arises whether psychiatrists require a separate set of ethical guidelines.
Objectives: To examine the positions of Israeli psychiatrists with regard to ethics in general and professional ethics in particular, and to explore opinions regarding a code of ethics or ethical guidelines for psychiatry.
Methods: A specially designed questionnaire was compiled and completed by psychiatrists recruited for the study.
Results: Most participants reported low levels of perceived knowledge regarding ethics, professional ethics, and the general code of ethics. Older and more experienced professionals reported a higher level of knowledge. Most psychiatrists agreed or strongly agreed with the need for a distinct code of ethics/ethical guidelines for psychiatrists. This support was significantly higher among both psychiatrists under 50 years and residents.
Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the existing code of ethics and position papers may not be sufficient, indicating a potential need to develop and implement a process to create the ethical code itself. In addition, the findings highlight the importance of ethics education, suggesting that the need for a code of ethics is more urgent in the early stages of professional training, as younger professionals may be more exposed to advanced media technology. While some may fear that a distinct code of ethics will distance psychiatry from modern medicine, others assert that the profession combines aspects from the humanities and social sciences that require a unique sort of management and thus this profession requires a distinct code of ethics.
Isabel Santos MD, Pedro Cantista MD, Carlos Vasconcelos MD PhD and João Amado MD PhD
Background: The effects of balneotherapy on rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are still controversial partly due to poor methodology used in randomized controlled trials, as reported in the international medical literature.
Objectives: To determine whether spa therapy plus pharmacological treatment offers any benefit in the management of RA as compared to pharmacological treatment alone.
Methods: We conducted a prospective, controlled, unblinded randomly assigned study of patients with RA according to American College of Rheumatology criteria. Following the 2007 recommendations of AFRETH, the method designed for this study was “immediate treatment versus delayed treatment.” All patients were followed at the Centro Hospitalar do Porto and each physician observed the same patients throughout the study. Patients continued with their usual medications and maintained their daily life activities at home, at leisure and/or in the workplace. The spa therapy group received spa treatments for 21 days at S. Jorge Spa-Santa Maria da Feira. The main outcome measure was the HAQ-DI; the moderated regression analysis, together with the Johnson-Neyman technique, was used for statistical analysis.
Results: HAQ-DI at the end of treatment (21 days) and at the 3 month follow-up was improved in the spa group (odds ratio 0.37, confidence interval 0.09–0.64, P = 0.01 at 21 days, and 0.44, 0.15–0.72, P = 0.004 at 3 months).
Conclusions:
Shimon A. Goldberg MD, Diana Neykin MD, Ruth Henshke-Bar-Meir MD, Amos M. Yinnon MD and Gabriel Munter MD
Background: Medical history-taking is an essential component of medical care.
Objectives: To assess and improve history taking, physical examination and management plan for hospitalized patients.
Methods: The study consisted of two phases, pre- and post- intervention. During phase I, 10 histories were evaluated for each of 10 residents, a total of 100 histories. The assessment was done with a validated tool, evaluating history-taking (maximum 23 points), physical examination (23 points), assessment and plan (14 points) (total 60 points). Subsequently, half of these residents were informed that they were assessed; they received their scores and were advised regarding areas needing improvement. Phase II was identical to phase I. The primary endpoint was a statistically significant increase in score.
Results: In the study group (receiving feedback after phase I) the physical examination improved from 9.3 ± 2.4 in phase I to 10.8 ± 2.2 in phase II (P < 0.001), while in the control group there was no change (11.3 ± 1.9 to 11.5 ± 1.8 respectively, P = 0.59). The assessment and plan component improved in the study group from 6.4 ± 2.7 in phase I to 7.4 ± 2.6 in phase II (P = 0.05), while no change was observed in the control group (8.2 ± 2.7 and 7.8 ± 2.3, P = 0.43). Overall performance improved in the study group from 30.4 ± 5.1 in phase I to 32.9 ± 4.5 in phase II (P = 0.01), a 10% improvement, while no change was observed in the control group (35.5 ± 6.0 to 34.6 ± 4.1, P = 0.4).
Conclusions: A review of medical histories obtained by residents, assessed against a validated score and accompanied by structured feedback may lead to significant improvement.
Galit Pomeranz MD, Avishalom Pomeranz MD, Alexandra Osadchy MD, Yigal Griton MD and Ze’ev Korzets MBBS
Marina Khvan MD and Sandro Vento MD