The ‘Digital Chaperone’

Volumes have been written, over millennia, about the Doctor-Patient relationship.  Recording what goes on during such an encounter is relatively recent, and has multiple functions, including:

  • To help the patient remember important information
  • To pass on information to other professionals
  • To protect the patient from assault
  • To protect the clinician from litigation
  • To satisfy 3rd parties, including relatives, regulators and the public

The format varies according to the purpose and can be a source of endless disagreement.

Wouldn’t it be better to have a complete, impartial record of everything that went on?  A bit like the ‘black box’ recorders in aircraft.

As an anaesthetist, I spend considerable time during the operation manually recording vital signs, which I could fabricate if I so chose.  Automatic medical device output is better, but still subject to interpretation; if the oximeter falls off the patient and shows a dangerous level of oxygenation, how is this validated and verified?

If a total record (audio/visual and device output) were available, there would be much less room for argument.   This would provide a high-fidelity recording of the encounter, reviewable information for the patient and other clinicians, and perhaps most importantly, for interested third parties.

Currently, wise doctors insist on having chaperones present during sensitive consultations, etc.  A ‘digital’ or ‘electronic’ chaperone would be impartial and even more reliable.

The technology is beginning to emerge to enable a digital chaperone of each and every doctor-patient encounter.

Advertisements

One thought on “The ‘Digital Chaperone’

  1. Cameras record us as we walk the streets; we are often warned (by a recorded voice) that our telephone conversation will be recorded ‘for training purposes’. Healthcare is where we most need recordings, because they can be so useful.
    As well as recording the doctor/patient consultation, I’d like to see cameras installed in mortuaries where post-mortem examinations are carried out (they are installed in children’s nurseries, even in dog ‘creches’) – not because the people who work there are bound to be perverts, but because people with unusual leanings/practices do tend to gravitate to where they can most easily have the access they need – and surely our dead relatives deserve as much protection?
    And while on the subject of corpses, I’d really like the practice of tagging corpses’ big toes to end. It simply shows disrespect for them as a person. You wouldn’t let someone do that when you were a live patient would you? An ankle band would be more dignified, if identification needs to be put on that end of the body. (So, where do they tag someone who has no legs?)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s