¿Podemos aprender de los errores del pasado? <span class="so-article-trans-title" dir="auto"> Translated title: Can we learn from errors of the past? </span>

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Los errores médicos cometidos durante las etapas de diagnóstico y tratamiento de las enfermedades, son en cierta forma inherentes a la práctica de la medicina pero necesitan ser disminuidos constantemente. Es habitual considerar al médico como único responsable de estos errores, la mayoría de los cuales se cometen actualmente durante el proceso de introducción y difusión de nuevas tecnologías. Con el presente artículo se trata de recordar a los médicos los procesos mediante los cuales las nuevas tecnologías llegan a formar parte de la práctica médica habitual y como frecuentemente el médico responsable del enfermo, no ha sido quien directamente introdujera e impulsara la tecnología utilizada. Al poner en conocimiento de los médicos las observaciones realizadas sobre la historia de las diferentes etapas por las que pasa toda innovación en medicina, se le da la posibilidad de conocer la responsabilidad que le corresponde cunado se produce un error médico. También se hace énfasis en el imprescindible escrutinio científico, y en la necesaria evaluación tecnológica periódica de todos los procedimientos que forman parte de la práctica médica.

Translated abstract

The medical mistakes made during the stages of diagnosis and treatment of the diseases are in a certain way inherent to medical practice, but they need to be constantly reduced. It is usual to consider the physician as the unique responsible for these mistakes, most of which are made at present during the process of introduction and spreading of new technologies. In this article, an attempt is made to remind the doctors the processes by which the new technologies are incorporated to habitual medical practice and how frequently the doctor responsible for the patient is not the one who directly introduces or impulses the technology used. On informing the doctors about the observations carried out on the history of the different stages every innovation in medicine pass through, they have the possibility to know their responsibility when a medical mistake is made. Emphasis is also given to the indispensable scientific scrutiny, and to the necessary periodical technological evaluation of all the procedures being part of medical practice.

Related collections

Most cited references 17

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The dissemination of new medical information.

W Harlan, J K Stross (1979)

Dissemination of new medical information to the practicing physician is a complex and often faulty process. To examine the magnitude of this problem, we surveyed primary care physicians to determine their knowledge of the results of the cooperative trial of photocoagulation in diabetic retinopathy. Despite the acknowledge relevance to their practice, only 28% (38/137) of family physicians and 46% (42/91) of internists were aware of the study results (P less than .001). Respondents were asked to manage two patient problems involving diabetic retinopathy. Only 33% (75/229) handled both correctly, although the retinopathy photocoagulation study had been published 18 months earlier. These findings indicate that results from clinical trials may not be disseminated to practicing physicians and, therefore, not incorporated into practice. Greater attention should be directed toward making findings from clinical trials available to practitioners.