|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: JAMA articleFrom: DuBose, Terry (DuboseTerryJ@uams.edu)Wed Jan 5 07:53:19 2005
I think Dr. Jeanty is correct. Patients are more likely to sue if they are unhappy or believe the practitioner is hiding something (incompetence?). This non-medical use of sonography is going to be a continuing problem until we have some kind of licensure for all sonographic operators. As photography and cinematography have developed, one of the first things that people have pointed their cameras at are their children. First, the Kodak box, then 35mm, 8mm home movies, video, now digital images and video clips of the grandchildren zip around the world. Sonography, apparently, is no different. Because we have done such a good job over the last 30 years of convincing the public that ultrasound is not dangerous to their progeny, we now have this problem of the uneducated and unwashed doing fetal imaging in the malls. The real problem is that the unsuspecting public may have no idea if the operator has any clue of what they are doing, and may believe that is all the prenatal care they need. As objectionable as regulation is to many, it appears that may be the only solution,... or "Caveat Emptor: Let the Buyer Beware". Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS, FSDMS, FAIUM Associate Professor & Director Diagnostic Medical Sonography Program University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, CHRP 4301 West Markham St. Mail Slot #563 Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205 USA 501-686-6510 DuBoseTerryJ@UAMS.edu http://www.io.com/~dubose/ http://www.uams.edu/chrp/dms/default.asp http://www.obgyn.net/us/panel/panel.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- --------------------------------------------------------------- From: ultrasound@obgyn.net [mailto:ultrasound@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of Philippe Jeanty, MD, PhD Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 8:39 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND Subject: Re: JAMA article Sure they have... I do not care the least bit... I have given the full exam on tape for the past 26 years. It documents that we have done a thorough exam. I prefer to practice for the patient then for the lawyer and I fully admit I make a lot of misdiagnoses... I have a whole lecture on CD on this :) -----Original Message----- From: ultrasound@obgyn.net [mailto:ultrasound@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of Joe Cutchin Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 8:30 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND Subject: Re: JAMA article Wonder if they have DVD readers in Court?
"Philippe Jeanty, MD, PhD" wrote:
> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ultrasound@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: terry.dubose@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Mon Nov 2 05:36:22 2009 |
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.