Appendicitis (i.e. inflamed appendix) remain one of the world’s most common health issue. In order for readers to gain a better visualization on this topic, Brody (2016) discussed the scenario of Gwen Deely; whom spent some of time in Venice contemplating about her appeared symptoms. When she arrived back in New York, she was found with a ruptured appendix after the careful examination via CT scan and traditional blood test. Consequently, she was put on antibiotics and later, removing the appendix through the exploitation of laparoscopic surgery. Fortunately, though, such intervention is not necessary anymore, as researches have shown that patients diagnosed with this type of condition may be better off with a trial of antibiotics instead of the traditional surgical method. …show more content…
Moreover, there is another study only about 5.9% of patients required further surgery, and approximately 4.4% were discovered with reoccurring inflammation of the aforementioned appendix. Brody (2016) further mentioned how some patients have the right to choose whether they would prefer surgery or not, albeit the effectiveness of trials of antibiotics. Furthermore, there’s as well legal issues in this topic. In accordance with Obama’s Affordable Care Act, primary care physicians are forced to inform patients about both treatment options i.e. surgical method, use of antibiotics, and even placing no intervention at all. Surgeons and professional though, are criticizing the nonsurgical treatment, as they believe there is not enough evidence and data to fully make a conclusion (Brody,