Hand surgery not needed (probably).

A human bite wound I sustained on December 29th of last year has left my middle left finger still scarred and swollen, with no sensation at the tip and vulnerable to tremendous pain if the finger is squeezed in any manner. The nail is chipped and yellowed and beneath are large blotches of black and purple.

Because it's been two months and the wound didn't seem to be healing very much, my doctor referred me to a hand specialist and put me on a course of an antibiotic, augmentin, which I had already been put on soon after the injury occurred. I hesitated to fill the prescription for augmentin because it didn't "feel" right - I'd been on it before, plus, I was also taking high doses of ibuprofen (then naproxen sodium) to reduce the tendinitis in my knees. My stomach was undergoing enough damage without subjecting it to a yet higher dose of antibiotics, which I feared would give me diarrhea and make nauseated, while not contributing to the healing of my finger.

The hand specialist agreed wholeheartedly and said I did the best thing. We all know our own bodies best. He wasn't sure why augmentin had been prescribed again for the same injury anyway and said if I'd have started taking it he would have had me stop. He doesn't see evidence of an infection but said, obviously, if it starts to get worse or change color or characteristics then we'd have to look at that possibility, but with a different drug.

I'm not angry at those who recommended what they thought was best - I know they were acting out of caring - but it turns out I was right and that just waiting a few more days (after more than two months) to see what the specialist would recommend saved me a $10 copay and an aborted course of another strong medicine. I should have expressed my concerns more clearly, but when two doctors tell you something, sometimes you go against your gut instinct. I'll refund the $10 loaned for the copay and I hope my actions are understandable, given the description of my reasoning and the outcome that justified it.

There is new nail growth, he says, though it's occurring slowly and it may just take time for the inflammation to subside enough where the new nail can push out the old (and the dried up blood beneath it). X-rays showed no bone damage. I am to see him in 10-14 days to see if he can detect growth from a spot he cleverly marked on the nail at the cuticle line, and then will decide if anything besides waiting should be done to help to injury heal. Overall, good news.