Correspondence 233 should be assumed as an equally beneﬁcial system as a Acknowledgements relating to this article Assistance with the letter: none. null hypothesis. Financial support and sponsorship: none. All criticisms raised in the Editorial are valid. However, it is not clear to me if the alternative model (coined as a Conﬂicts of interest: none. longitudinal system) – in which the primary specialties are taking the lead – does not present similar problems. Reference Certainly, an average emergency physician spends most 1 De Robertis E, Bottiger BW, Soreide E, et al. The monopolisation of of his time dealing with patients with nonlife-threatening emergency medicine in Europe: the ﬂipside of the medal. Eur J Anaesthesiol diseases. This is equally true for most other specialties. 2017; 34:251 – 253. Anaesthetists on the other hand are very skilled in treat- DOI:10.1097/EJA.0000000000000770 ing these conditions and can possibly be seen as the best ‘resuscitationists’. They may, however, lack experience in diagnosing complex medical conditions and following up patients over days and weeks. A multidisciplinary approach is therefore mandatory, which in a longitudinal Reply to: who takes the lead in critical model may lead to unclear responsibilities and commu- illness? nication problems. Edoardo De
European Journal of Anaesthesiology – Wolters Kluwer Health
Published: Mar 1, 2018
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud