ToneAl
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Reminds me of a quote from Frances Allen from twitter about FND where he says it's to easy for Neurologist to dish out a quick FND diagnosis and blame psych issues rather than to find the real diagnosis.I just wanted to point out a few things that go beyond me reacting to your quote, and to look at the podcast itself.
Firstly, the podcast is available n from all the usual podcast libraries like Apple Podcasts or Pocket Casts etc if you want to download it and listen to it properly.
https://pca.st/episode/3bdcd91f-f771-4249-8ba6-628454006ffd
This is interesting, take-home points for practitioners, from the official Goodfellow link you provided:
Point 5: are they really? Are you sure about that?
The podcast is a goldmine of telling quotes. Hard to know where to start but here are just a few:
11:50 - “and to be honest the history is, I would say 90% of the diagnosis. The examination is rarely super helpful”
11:57 - “I think the best thing about doing the examination is that, uh, the patient knows that you’re looking hard and you’re taking them seriously and you’re really trying to tease out if there’s any other structural issues going on”
Very suggestive to me that he feels it’s very important to reassure the patient that you’re taking them seriously. We see this a lot in in FND literature - don’t let on.
13:05 - “…are we doing investigations to exclude organic pathology?
“Not so much to exclude it, but to see if there’s additional organic pathology.”
As we see again and again, it seemingly doesn’t matter that the real world practice around FND is self-contradictory.
FND is meant to be something that involves no organic pathology, but we see that in practice they will diagnose FND even if organic pathology is found - that is if you ever even do testing that can actually reveal that.
14:44 - “tests are there to confirm what your brain thinks. They’re not there to give you the answer. We fall into this trap of ordering an MRI or something to give you an answer”
There we have it. The only utility of tests is to confirm your assumptions. If the tests don’t contradict your assumptions, then they must be correct. Of course the problem here is that you assuming you’ve done the right test and that the test result is accurate.
I had tests that could be taken (and were) to ‘confirm’ the consultants assumption of FND, because they didn’t reveal any organic disease. The problem was that the tests I was given were physically incapable of revealing the organic disease I had.
He also is implying that many Neurologists have a lackluster diagnostic ability and biases towards a psych diagnosis rather than a true biological diagnosis.