Well, this is the perfect case of having too much technical, clinical information for some, but not being able to completely comprehend what’s going on–for those of us who don’t have medical degrees.
The article I’m talking about concerns what the “author,” a doctor, refers to as an “excellent review” of managing a serious condition known as status epilepticus.
While that may be true, I find it highly unlikely that a “commoner” – or shall we say a non-medical professional would find this article to be very helpful and or useful.
That, I guess, we all know is part of the “beauty” of the Internet. We’re exposed to and have access to a plethora of information—an abundance of anything and everything, which is all good—as long as we can understand it, right?
Well, we all know we don’t and can’t understand a great deal of medical information unless we roll up our sleeves and put in some serious time, taking each piece of information on for consideration.
To be brief because, well, I have to be, the doctor who wrote the article wasn’t very clear about the events that took place.
What I gather is that a woman in her 30s came to the emergency room and was treated after she’d been seizing for about 20 minutes. She was treated with a variety of drugs and then something went wrong, horribly wrong. She was not responsive and so they intubated her, meaning she was hooked up to a respirator, a breathing machine because she was not able to breathe on her own.
What’s not clear is what happened to her.
Did she succumb? The account does disclose challenges, or at least the circumstance of having to disclose a medical error to the woman’s family.
Word to the wise: You don’t have to read every article out there—especially when it looks initially like it’s going to be clinical, dry. Maybe we should leave that for medical professionals to curate?
You can read the article here. Aaack. So frustrating.
