Maria Laura Mingo is a cardiologist in Salta (Argentina). She has been a physician since 2011 and a professor since 2013. Dr. Mingo emphasizes the value of Practicum Script as a collaborative learning network and a vast forum for debate and reflection. She likes to quote the French physiologist Claude Bernard and mentions that “those who do not know what they are looking for will not understand what they find.” Also according to her, “to develop the mental ability to question different hypotheses and request different complementary tests helps and simplifies the path to the final diagnosis.” She also believes that the fact that we "know that [Practicum] is a simulator brings a bit of tranquility."
Cardiovascular health is a significant problem. What is the situation in Argentina? And how does it translate to your care practice?
In Argentina, the increasing prevalence of risk factors continues to concern. The latest survey regarding risk factors, from 2013, showed the following active indices in this regard:
Salta still has a long way to go regarding cardiovascular prevention, despite the changes that are already evident in people’s behaviors.
Additionally, poor eating habits and sedentary lifestyle are increasing in children, which is worrisome.
What is the value of a virtual athenaeum like Practicum Script in this context?
Today, virtual athenaeums have a substantial value. Sometimes, we are unable to attend conferences, so the opportunity to take online courses makes learning much more accessible. Doctors must train continuously.
In Medicine, we know a lot of data and numbers, but little or sometimes nothing about the spaces between them. Do you think that Practicum Script helps to cover these gaps?
Specifically for this type of patients, Practicum has helped me. Following one’s reasoning, the inclination is first to try to think about the most common rationalization, which is why several cases had diagnostic probabilities that were not close to the definitive diagnoses. The truth is that implementing the mental ability to question different hypotheses and, with them, carry out different complementary tests, helps and simplifies the path towards a definitive diagnosis. "He who does not know what he is looking for will not understand what he finds." (Claude Bernard)
The value of this tool lies not only in maintaining the content current but also in improving thinking skills. Should we make more mistakes?
Professionals study a case a thousand times, especially the difficult or complicated ones, to see if everything was done right, consult colleagues, and try to do the best for the patient. However, like every human being, something can escape us or may go unstudied, and mistakes can happen while we know that the patients’ life and quality of life is in our hands. For this reason, knowing that we are working on a simulation, in which we can make mistakes and start over again, and that we can reflect on our clinical and diagnostic reasoning, brings a bit of tranquility. However, this does not mean that there is no concern or regret for not having thought on this or that pathology or not having requested the necessary tests in some of the cases presented.
During the course, has any case been especially relevant to you? Which resource has been most useful? Would you change anything?
A case of arteritis was one of the most relevant [cases] for me because we don’t see this condition on a daily basis, so it is not in our minds as a primary diagnosis. I answered the case at the time and I realized that [this condition] should be taken into account from now on.
I would change the subject of the hypotheses. There were many complaints concerning them because they had to be reviewed every time the proper word was not there. There were several cases in which my hypotheses were coincidental but were not considered a "coincidental hypothesis."
Our personalized help center enables you to obtain technical support and help for navigating through the site and using the program.