Better: A Surgeon's Notes on Performance

Features

• Cover Type: Paperback with 288 pages
• Published by: Picador
• Edition: 1st Edition January 22, 2008
• Written in: English
• ISBN 10 Number: 0312427654
• ISBN 13 Number: 978-0312427658
• Book Dimensions: 8.1 x 5.4 x 0.9 inches
• Weighs: 8 ounces

From Publishers Weekly
Starred Review. Surgeon and MacArthur fellow Gawande applies his gift for dulcet prose to medical and ethical dilemmas in this collection of 12 original and previously published essays adapted from the New England Journal of Medicine and the New Yorker. If his 2002 collection, Complications, addressed the unfathomable intractability of the body, this is largely about how we erect barriers to seamless and thorough care. Doctors know they should wash their hands more often to avoid bacterial transfer in the ward, but once a minute does seem extreme. Using chaperones for breast exams seems a fine idea, but it does make situations awkward. "The social dimension turns out to be as essential as the scientific," Gawande writes—a conclusion that could serve as a thumbnail summary of his entire output. The heart of the book are the chapters "What Doctors Owe," about the U.S.'s blinkered malpractice system, and "Piecework," about what doctors earn. Cheerier, paradoxically, are the chapters involving polio and cystic fibrosis, featuring Dr. Pankaj Bhatnagar and Dr. Warren Warwick, two remarkable men who have been able to catapult their humanity into their work rather than constantly stumble over it. Indeed, one suspects that once we cure the ills of the health care system, we'll look back and see that Gawande's writings were part of the story. (Apr.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

From Bookmarks Magazine
A surgeon at the Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston and an assistant professor at the Harvard School of Public Health, Dr. Atul Gawande succeeds in putting a human face on controversial topics like malpractice and global disparities in medical care, while taking an unflinching look at his own failings as a doctor. Critics appreciated his candor, his sly sense of humor, and his skill in looking at difficult issues from many perspectives. He conveys his message—that doctors are only human and therefore must always be diligent and resourceful in fulfilling their duties—in clear, confident prose. Most critics' only complaint was that half of the essays are reprints of earlier articles. Gawande's arguments, by turns inspiring and unsettling, may cause you to see your own doctor in a whole new light.

Copyright © 2004 Phillips & Nelson Media, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Reader Reviews
This review is from: Better: A Surgeon's Notes on Performance (Hardcover) First, as a quick proxy of how good it is, and as a way of enticing busy readers, I should note that I finished Atal Gawande's book Better: A Surgeon's Notes On Performance in less than four hours. I can't remember the last time that happened. True, it's a relatively short book, and I had some uninterrupted time on a bus. But mostly it's that Gawande is a straightforward, energetic, thoughtful writer whose essays relentlessly pull you forward. Each discusses one or two ideas in enough depth to make you realize that they're not easy problems -- which is all most people need, and which does a world of good on its own. Every country has its unquestioned assumptions; it's the rare writer who helps us question them and gently remind us that if there were easy solutions, we'd have found them by now. Gawande is good at that. The most moving and thought-provoking of these essays, to me, was "The Doctors of the Death Chamber," in which Gawande interviews four doctors (whom he labels "A," "B," "C" and -- wait for it -- "D," in order to secure their anonymity) who help states carry out the death penalty humanely. The use of "humanely" here is questionable; it's humane in the sense that, if we are to use the death penalty, we must not be needlessly cruel at the time of the criminal's death. But it's inhumane in the larger sense that we are furthering a corrupt system -- we are "tinker[ing] with the machinery of death," to use Justice Blackmun's words. Since a doctor's role is to protect human lives, are anaesthesiologists who help execute people painlessly violating their roles? To put it more succinctly: should a doctor make the best of the machinery of death, or should he take no part in the machine? The American Medical Association has its answer and its role. Democratically elected governments have their own. It's Gawande's job to teach us that easy answers don't exist for complicated problems like this. One reason it's so easy to come up with easy answers for questions like this is that we rarely come face to face with the system we critique. Gawande does the legwork for us. He's at his best, in this regard, when he interviews a medical-malpractice attorney, a doctor, and the family of a dead patient involved in one malpractice case. We're all inclined to boo at the malpractice attorney . . . right up to the moment we feel we've been wronged, when that attorney is the man we want on our side. Gawande knows that this is how we work, so he takes some time to look at a case when doctors failed other doctors: Gawande's friend Bill Franklin found that doctors had failed to treat a tumor on Franklin's son that they should have noticed years before -- that someone had actually singled out on an X-ray for further study. This is the test case where ethics hits the road: when it's your own son, and you're a doctor, and you're well aware of the expenses of medical malpractice, what do you do? After trying other routes, Franklin did what so many others do: he sued and won. (Along the way Franklin helped establish a precedent in the Massachusetts Supreme Court, in the case of Franklin v. Massachusetts General Hospital et al., affecting the statute of limitations on malpractice cases. Seems worth reading.) Better contains lots of great little insights into the medical profession -- for instance, how difficult it is to get doctors and nurses to wash their hands as often as is safe for patients, or the awkwardness of a male doctor palpating a naked female patient. Throughout it all, Gawande's organizing principle is to lay out for us the system in which doctors work, the limitations they operate under, and how they make the best within those limitations. I'm less inclined than I used to be to believe that Gawande has an agenda, but I do think that a slightly different arrangement of the chapters within Better would have sent a different message. Had the chapter on malpractice come at the end of the book, after we've read about Gawande's own mistakes and about sloppy handwashing, we'd be less sympathetic toward doctors. In "The Score," which I've mentioned before, Gawande tells us that C-sections are vital in a world where doctors can't be expected to be very talented; in "The Bell Curve," he reveals that not all cystic-fibrosis clinics are the same, and that the medical industry was reluctant for years to release data on how well individual clinics performed. With these insights in mind, malpractice would seem to the reader to be completely justified. As it is, the malpractice article is tucked into the middle of the book; Better ends with a story about heroically performing surgery in poor rural India, and with a few pieces of advice to newly-minted doctors. It's a hopeful ending. I can't decide whether this arrangement was deliberately obfuscating. Nor does Gawande spend much time explaining whether malpractice makes doctors better. He's fair throughout, however, and his point is that doctors' work is hard. Understanding precisely why it's hard, and what they do to get their jobs done under trying conditions, is Better's job, and it succeeds admirably. It's a great, thought-provoking, fun read.