Michael Tam
Dr Michael Tam is a clinical academic Specialist General Practitioner, combining the provision of family medicine, research, health services development, and governance. Michael’s clinical interest is in the whole-person primary care of people living with mental illness. He is actively involved in mental health policy, strategy, and governance, with local, state, and national bodies. Michael’s research is in integrated care and preventive care in general practice. He has expertise in both qualitative and quantitative research methods.
Tags
alcohol
alcohol user disorder
antibiotics
Australian Journal of General Practice
beliefs and attitudes
brief interventions
CAM
cardiovascular disease
Chinese women
common cold
contraception
COVID-19
e-learning
EBM
emergency departments
ethics
general practice
general practitioners
infection control
integrated care
learning and teaching
medical certificates
medical education
medical myths
mental health
newsGP
older people
older person
p-values
paediatrics
pain
patients
preventive health
primary care
public health
research
research ethics
risky drinking
screening
shared-decision making
statin
statistics
vitamin C
vocational training
warts
Recent Posts
- Development and pilot testing of the Population And ContExt adaption of decision aids (PACE) framework
- Heavy drinkers’ expectations and experiences when discussing alcohol use during a general practice visit in Australia: A qualitative study
- RACGP Future Leaders Program 2023 Breakfast Oration
- Multifaceted intervention to increase the delivery of alcohol brief interventions in primary care: a mixed-methods process analysis
- General practitioners’ perspectives regarding early developmental surveillance for autism within the australian primary healthcare setting: a qualitative study
- Parental experience of an early developmental surveillance programme for autism within Australian general practice: a qualitative study
- Supporting conversations about medicines and deprescribing: GPs’ perspectives on a Medicines Conversation Guide
- Melanoma risk assessment and management: a qualitative study among Australian GPs
- Watch me grow integrated (WMG-I): protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial of a web-based surveillance approach for developmental screening in primary care settings
- Myth-busting: role of the GP in primary mental health care
Categories
- Australian Doctor (4)
- Conference presentation (41)
- eBook (3)
- General article (85)
- GP careers presentation (1)
- GPSN presentation (2)
- Interview (39)
- Journal article (38)
- Lecture/Tutorial (12)
- Letter/Comment (13)
- Medical Observer (47)
- Public presentation (4)
- Research presentation (25)
- The Medical Republic (1)
- Tweet (5)
- Type (229)
- Audio (3)
- Book (6)
- PDF (123)
- Powerpoint (7)
- Prezi (20)
- Radio (10)
- Video (21)
- Web article (112)
- Website (4)
- Workshop (1)
Nov 14 2013
Comment: To statin or not to statin?
The following is a comment to the online article, “To Statin or not to Statin? – That is the question” by Dr Robin Park. This article is a very readable summary of a number of practical questions about statins for GPs.
Great summary Rob!
A few comments… The evidence for the benefit of LFT and CK monitoring for statins is poor, and the rationale for doing so is questionable in light of the accumulated safety data for statins. An argument can perhaps be made for baseline LFT (even in otherwise fit and well people), but the utility of a baseline CK is rather low in someone not at high risk of myopathy. Stopping a statin in someone who is at mod/high CVD risk, due to an asymptomatic rise in CK, probably does more harm than good.
We need to recognise that most of us (me included!) have an intrinsic bias to do biometric testing (rather than not) when there is uncertainty. We are always going to get apparent good patient outcomes by identifying and labelling non-disease. This type of practice is far from harmless, however, and contributes to overdiagnosis, overtreatment, and medicalising the human condition. For instance, we generally vastly over-order serum lipids for the purposes of screening/monitoring – who here can honestly say they typically only order serum lipids at the the frequency of 5-yearly intervals? I love EBM but even that makes me feel anxious… Nonetheless, as ethical practitioners, the testing we recommend should be directed at maximising meaningful patient outcomes, and not at managing our therapeutic neuroses!
Share this:
Like this: