[Ovah]

I can only comment on why it's important for the physician to know about any allergies. Some people have a history or risk of severe allergy and anaphylactic reactions can be potentially fatal. I've had to managed such a reaction in a healthcare setting. Such a reaction is not only potentially fatal but is often very dramatic and sudden. After that I always err on the side of caution and ask for allergies regardless of what the patient's chart says. It's often a wise idea to confirm what's in the chart rather than to blindly trust what's already in there regardless.

It's the physicians job to weigh the benefits against risk of a drug. And potential allergic reactions is a part of that. If a patient with a known history of severe allergic reactions gets another one from a prescribed drug, and the physician hasn't done their due diligence, then the physician could be at fault. I can only imagine that it's even more prudent for US-based physicians to ask that question due to lawsuits and or personal liability.

Also a patients medical status is never static. While unlikely a patient could have had a reaction since the last visit. I guess a more realistic example of something non static is pregnancy status which can be equally important when prescribing drugs etc.

[lindseymysse]

Yes, why do we have to have reams of paperwork? It would be better if my doctor had time to get to know me. Instead, he fills out paper work, everyone around him fills out paper work.

[sofixa]

Because your doctor doesn't deal only with you. Having hundreds of patients it's impossible to remember everything about everyone, and they're not the only doctor that would need to know you(specialists). Hence, normalisation of data.

[lindseymysse]

Have you read a single one of my arguments? Less paper work, more doctors and nurses handling fewer patience.