I don’t know how hospitals work in the US (assuming that OP is a US citizen, because that’s what we do on the internet), but where I come from, determining the cause of an injury is very important to decide on an effective treatment. Bites in particular are very nasty and can lead to a lot of scary complications (including human bites!).
There’s no way in hell the nurse just said “yeah ok got it fam” and went along with her day like it wasn’t important.
And maybe I’m too jaded, but I read “we also got engaged” and my mind automatically added “and everyone clapped” at the end of the sentence lol
There’s no way in hell the nurse just said “yeah ok got it fam” and went along with her day like it wasn’t important.
I suspect that, if true, it was clarified further down the line before treatment. Or, considering how I’ve been in-and-out of the ER, the nurse just wrote down ‘human bite’ regardless of what the patient claimed lmao.
Like I said. It’s the internet. I’m not saying it’s definitely real. But it’s far from impossible.
She would chart the cause as accurately as she can; whether she also writes down the obvious lie is up to her. Which means she would write down “human bite”; not because it’s best for the patient, not because of liability, but because every other staff member (nurses and doctors included) would laugh at her if she didn’t. Nurses got a pecking order, and writing down obvious nonsense in a patient’s chart is a good way to drop ranks.
Preface: I am not a doctor, this is just my understanding. Human bites are, on the whole, much worse. You have to consider that the human mouth is full of bacteria that the human immune system hasn’t already dealt with, so human bites can infect really bad.
Not that rats don’t have awful things in their mouths. Get it looked at either way.
Cat bites as well. Cat scratch fever is a real thing, but it’s far easier to contract directly from the source. I would extrapolate to carnivorous animals = bad infection when bit, but somehow dogs don’t have as much bad bacteria in their mouths, should still get a dog bite looked at, even though there’s way less chance of infection due to saliva bacteria.
That’s where the myth that having a dog lick a wound is a good thing. They don’t have as much bad bacteria, so back in the day before antibiotics and Neosporin, having a dog lick the wound would help clean away some of the bad bacteria.
We like to use the narrowest spectrum antibiotics possible to limit side effects and breeding resistance. Also, the really broad spectrum ones are expensive.
Correct. I’m a third year medical student on my clinical rotations right now, and I worked in the medical field for 4 years before starting med school.
I’ve been in clinical rotations and my attending physicians have been very clear about antibiotic use and there is a lot of clinical evidence and guidance for minimizing broad spectrum use.
Everyone knows you get a culture for an animal bite and then write a prescription for the single species of bacteria infecting the wound. It’s just procedure! Same for tick bites, definitely not just writing out amoxicillin and calling it a day, gotta wait two weeks and send in some blood work first to give the Lyme disease time to settle in and show up nice and clean.
Empiric treatment is not the broadest spectrum possible. Yes, they will put someone on Augmentin for a human bite, but that’s very different from putting someone on IV vancomycin or meropenem. The augmentin will probably cover anything in that bite, but if the culture comes back showing resistance, then you switch to something else.
I don’t know how hospitals work in the US (assuming that OP is a US citizen, because that’s what we do on the internet), but where I come from, determining the cause of an injury is very important to decide on an effective treatment. Bites in particular are very nasty and can lead to a lot of scary complications (including human bites!).
There’s no way in hell the nurse just said “yeah ok got it fam” and went along with her day like it wasn’t important.
And maybe I’m too jaded, but I read “we also got engaged” and my mind automatically added “and everyone clapped” at the end of the sentence lol
I suspect that, if true, it was clarified further down the line before treatment. Or, considering how I’ve been in-and-out of the ER, the nurse just wrote down ‘human bite’ regardless of what the patient claimed lmao.
Like I said. It’s the internet. I’m not saying it’s definitely real. But it’s far from impossible.
She would chart the cause as accurately as she can; whether she also writes down the obvious lie is up to her. Which means she would write down “human bite”; not because it’s best for the patient, not because of liability, but because every other staff member (nurses and doctors included) would laugh at her if she didn’t. Nurses got a pecking order, and writing down obvious nonsense in a patient’s chart is a good way to drop ranks.
As someone that has worked in healthcare and knows what ER staff see every day:
Lol, bet?
I feel like there’s not much hygiene difference between a human bite and a rat. They’re probably both equally bad
Preface: I am not a doctor, this is just my understanding. Human bites are, on the whole, much worse. You have to consider that the human mouth is full of bacteria that the human immune system hasn’t already dealt with, so human bites can infect really bad.
Not that rats don’t have awful things in their mouths. Get it looked at either way.
Cat bites as well. Cat scratch fever is a real thing, but it’s far easier to contract directly from the source. I would extrapolate to carnivorous animals = bad infection when bit, but somehow dogs don’t have as much bad bacteria in their mouths, should still get a dog bite looked at, even though there’s way less chance of infection due to saliva bacteria.
That’s where the myth that having a dog lick a wound is a good thing. They don’t have as much bad bacteria, so back in the day before antibiotics and Neosporin, having a dog lick the wound would help clean away some of the bad bacteria.
Probably different types of infections you can get from that.
And all treated with broad spectrum antibiotics so…
We like to use the narrowest spectrum antibiotics possible to limit side effects and breeding resistance. Also, the really broad spectrum ones are expensive.
Sure we do, bro.
Their username is literally medgremlin, I’m 99% certain they know about at least some fields of medical treatment.
Correct. I’m a third year medical student on my clinical rotations right now, and I worked in the medical field for 4 years before starting med school.
I’ve been in clinical rotations and my attending physicians have been very clear about antibiotic use and there is a lot of clinical evidence and guidance for minimizing broad spectrum use.
Everyone knows you get a culture for an animal bite and then write a prescription for the single species of bacteria infecting the wound. It’s just procedure! Same for tick bites, definitely not just writing out amoxicillin and calling it a day, gotta wait two weeks and send in some blood work first to give the Lyme disease time to settle in and show up nice and clean.
Empiric treatment is not the broadest spectrum possible. Yes, they will put someone on Augmentin for a human bite, but that’s very different from putting someone on IV vancomycin or meropenem. The augmentin will probably cover anything in that bite, but if the culture comes back showing resistance, then you switch to something else.