werner@aecom.UUCP (Craig Werner) (03/05/86)
> In the dozens of times that my friends and I have had cause to seek help from > members of the medical profession with infections of various sorts, not one > of these doctors has EVER done or ordered a sensitivity test on a culture of > the little beasties causing the problem. > Is there some legitimate reason why doctors will not have such a sensitivity > test performed? Most of the doctors I have gone to say that it isn't worth > the time and expense to the patient, but I have NEVER seen a case where the > correct antibiotic was prescribed the first time. > -- > Mark D. Freeman mdf@osu-eddie.uucp Most of the time it isn't worth the time and expense, and most of the time the correct antibiotic is prescribed the first time.. You just happen to be unlucky. In the hospital situation, however, it is routinely done, because the beasties are more likely than not to be resistant. Also for a bacterial sore throat - a culture is mandatory to rule out Strep A, and for respiratory infections, etc., but most of the really serious will get you hospitalized, so rule 1 applies. For the rest, time is not of life and death consideration, so playing around is probably a better strategy than culturing. In the case of non-specific Urethritis, it used to be everything was sensitive to Penicillin. Since the Vietnam War, this is no longer the case, and I suppose sensitivity should be done, but this can take up to a week, and does indeed add to the cost of health care. Of course, most Infectious Disease specialists shudder at the thought of blind use of antibiotics. -- Craig Werner !philabs!aecom!werner "..pursuing Dharma, Artha, and Kama (although not nearly enough of the last)."