-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: RAND Study Redux From: Anna Meenan, MD (annam@uic.edu) Sun Jun 29 10:43:11 2003 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: Camila: "Yasmin birth control pill" Previous message: Kimberly: "Pap Smear" In reply to: Don Miller: "RAND Study Redux" Next in thread: Don Miller: "Re: RAND Study Redux" Reply: Don Miller: "Re: RAND Study Redux" Gosh, and here I am feeling guilty that I forgot to order a CF carrier screen on the caucasian pt I saw Friday. I disagree, however, that 90% would be bad for glucose screen. I believe it is acceptable to screen only high-risk pts now and I know my practice is not 90% high risk (although it sure is getting there, and we do screen all anyway). I find some of those numbers difficult to believe, however. -- Anna Meenan, MD At Sat, 28 Jun 2003, Don Miller wrote: > >Although the levels of compliance don't ring true to me for the prenatal >care I've seen delivered for over 20 years, I think anyone who delivers >prenatal care should at least look at the guidelines that the recent >RAND study used and consider how their practice would compare in theory >and in *reality*. For example, I can't believe that 100% of patients >aren't screened for anemia at the first visit (who doesn't do a CBC?) >but it *was* shocking that only 43% of the patients in the study >received a glucose screen between 24-28 weeks (even 90% compliance would >be bad). > >Whether you believe the results are completely bogus or not, what the >study does show is that pregnant patients fall through the cracks *all >the time* (or at least their care is not documented which brings glee to >trial lawyers). If you say "but not in MY practice!", you're probably >wrong. > >If you're curious, I've made the RAND results applicable to prenatal >care available at http://www.eNATAL.com/pdfs/RAND-PrenatalCare.pdf > >-- >Donald W. Miller, Jr., MD, FACOG >Founder & Chief Architect >eNATAL, LLC >http://www.eNATAL.com > Next message: Camila: "Yasmin birth control pill" Previous message: Kimberly: "Pap Smear" In reply to: Don Miller: "RAND Study Redux" Next in thread: Don Miller: "Re: RAND Study Redux" Reply: Don Miller: "Re: RAND Study Redux"

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Fri May 2 04:36:51 2008

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.