 |
|
| << To Blog Home >> |  |
|
What
is |
October 1, 2006 -- 6:00pm ET Relaunches and Recalls On Angioplasty.Org we've created an entirely new section on the site dealing with Imaging and Diagnosis -- CT angiography, MRA, stress tests, catheterization, etc. Within a couple weeks of its appearance, it has become one of the most popular sections on the site. Patients are interested in getting the latest information on new imaging technologies. The section is supported by a grant from Toshiba America Medical Systems. Our readership was also boosted by two major news scare-cycles, the first being the CHARISMA trial results back in March -- when misleading headlines appeared in major newspapers, like "Plavix and aspirin combo can be deadly", patients flocked to the net to find out the real story. They found it here. Except for those unfortunates who didn't find our Patient Advisory and stopped their Plavix and had heart attacks. Yes, it's true. The news can kill you. The second set of dreadlines occurred just a few weeks ago when the World Congress of Cardiology meeting in Barcelona heard reports from European centers about increased late stent thrombosis and raised mortality rates in patients who got drug-eluting stents. Again, we posted a Patient Advisory to clarify the headlines. (And we'll be writing about this situation more in the coming days.) With each incident of "press stress", our readership increased. We sort of wished this didn't have to be the way to a wider audience, but Angioplasty.Org seems to be one of the few places on the Web that provides this kind of up-to-date information that can clarify for patients and others the implications of new studies being reported in the mainstream media. So the stent blog is relaunched. As for the recalls... ...it's beginning to look like "recall" may be recalled. The Heart Rhythm Society released its recommendations last week regarding the tracking and reporting of medical device problems and one of its points was that the term "recall" was misleading to patients. The panel felt that when patients hear that their defibrillators have been "recalled", they assume they need to go into the hospital and have a surgical procedure to remove it and replace it with a new part, kind of like the potentially defective gas tank on my minivan (really, only one of them actually ever blew up...). But it doesn't quite work that way. There is a margin of error, a statistical probability of a complication from the required surgery that may in fact be higher than the chances of the device being harmful. So the Society is suggesting using the terms "advisory notice" or "safety alert" so as not to unnecessarily panic patients. So, don't panic. Please. Doesn't that make you feel better? |
|
