Apologies if there is already a thread.
After listening to the news about the poor baby who died from sepsis last year and the blame being laid at NHS 111 feet, i was struck by the fact that the poor woman had taken her child to two doctors who sent her away with her son saying that it was a virus and would be fine etc.
Of course there were failings on the part of 111 and its a service i really don't have much faith in but surely there must have been some questions over whether this child should have been prescribed anti-biotics at an earlier stage.
It may well have been "just" a virus and non responsive to anti-biotics and Drs are stuck between a rock and a hard place because of anti-biotic resistance. However, Very often bacterial infections are able to take hold because a person is laid low with a virus. Surely if a mother is returning after some weeks with a child that is still unwell, it shouldn't be dismissed as something and nothing.
I think Drs seem to have gone from a default - here have some antibiotics, which was wrong to sending everyone away with a lecture on antibiotic resistance, which can be equally as wrong i feel.
I can think of two examples (at least) where anti-biotics/further investigation were appropraite but that was not the route followed.
I went to an OOH with really bad tonsilitis - man flu (even though im a woman) and felt terrible, im usually pretty stoic and i don't remember ever being so ill. I saw a trainee GP who examined my blistered, pustulating tonsils and proceeded to give me the AB resistance lecture - the experienced GP who was monitoring him, looked at me, raised his eyes to the sky and proceeded to write me up a prescription for big gun antibiotics. I went from feeling like i was about to die to feeling much better within 24 hours. I'm not saying i would have been in any more trouble than having to suffer feeling like shit for a few more days but my illness was clearly bacterial as I responded to the treatment.
The second example - more serious, a friend of mine's child was poorly with flu like symptoms (this may not be that accurate in terms of symptoms), she was due to fly abroad to see relatives in a few weeks, she returned to the Drs a few times during this time, made to feel like paranoid parent, told he would be OK to fly. Come the day before they were due to fly, my friends son was still very poorly, worse even, so she took him back to the Dr, who called an ambulance, suspected meningitis. It turned out to be leukemia and was very nearly, too late. Thankfully this was years back and he is in full remission now, but it could have been very different.
So yes, 90% of the time, it is a virus, and we absolutely should not be giving anti-biotics for viruses, and even some bacterial infections i believe we have perfectly functioning immune systems and we should not rely on anti-biotics but if there is ANY doubt (and not just in the Drs mind - parents are an excellent guage of how poorly their child is) testing for bacterial infection needs to be offered, blood tests, swabs, whatever. Yes AB resistance is a massive problem and ABs should not be handed out like they were, but people should not always be sent away to the chemist for paracetemol either. Sepsis can occur in hours and is easily preventable.
I wonder what the statistics are of the incidents of sepsis with relation to the holding back of anti-biotics and if there is a correlation. Of course i am willing to bet that resistance is probably more of an issue, then surely more testing is the way to go. Yep, its expensive but i think its a fair use of resources.