-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: Clincial Pelvimetry From: Elrod, Darryl G Maj 48 MDOS/SGOBO (Darryl.elrod@LAKENHEATH.AF.MIL) Fri Aug 4 04:48:38 2006 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: rmodugno@aol.com: "Arrest of dilation - yo, Dr Siegel" Previous message: Dr Eberhard Lisse: "Re: Arrest of Dilation" In reply to: Garry E. Siegel, M.D.: "Clincial Pelvimetry" Next in thread: Myer Bornstein: "Re: Clinical Pelvimetry" I wasn't trained in clinical pelvimetry, other than to know which was which for the CREOG exam. We never used it in practice. Glen //SIGNED// D. Glen Elrod, Maj., USAF, MC Obstetrician/Gynecologist Chief of Obstetrics 48 MDOS/SGOBO RAF Lakenheath, England Telephone DSN: 314-226-8130 Comm: +44 (0) 1638 52 8130 Notice of Confidentiality Under the Privacy Act of 1974, you must safeguard all information reflected on this e-mail and, if applicable, all attachments. Disclosure of information is IAW AFI 33-119, AFI 33-127, AFI 37-131, AFI 37-132, AFI 33-219, and PL 93-579" 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. Any questions pertaining to disclosure should be directed to the privacy officer. -----Original Message----- From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of Garry E. Siegel, M.D. Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 4:55 AM To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Subject: Clincial Pelvimetry Hank: It was anethema in my training not to perform clinical pelvimetry and a clincal EFW pre-induction. I am pretty sure that these are passe, and that someone somewhere has said--just go ahead and induce anyway, as you will be surprised at how wrong you are upfront, i.e. more babies will deliver vaginally than you think. CNMs--do you perform clincial pelvimetry? Are you trained in it? MDs--ditto? In our practice, this patient might not have had a physical examination by the MD, only a chart review/curbside consult pre-induction. Garry At Thu, 3 Aug 2006, Henry Gregor wrote: > >Clinical pelvimetry...independent of any actual medical issue, were there to be an adverse outcome, and were CPD or complication of induction to occur, plaintiff's attorney will definitely have a paragraph in the suit papers calling one and all's attention to the deviation from good clinical practice evidenced by such a disregard for proper pelvic assessment. I knew a university department attending who never failed to provide some such wording on virtually all the plaintiff attorney case reviews she did. > > As she would put it, attention to an entry re pelvic adequacy will save all concerned some depsition time and eliminate at least one paragraph in the attorney's litany of charges of substandard practice. > > Hank > >"Garry E. Siegel, M.D." <garrys@mindspring.com> wrote: > Sue: > >What's the solution? > >I think we would agree that induction with pre-eclampsia at term is >warranted, and if she's not progressing, she's not progressing. > >Her reticence to proceed to a section allowed a fever to develop, and >she didn't progress, got antibiotics, and still had a section. > >Dan, this patient did not have an assessment of her pelvis before >induction. > >Listers, would you expect a CNM or MD to have done so? > >Dan, had I personally assessed her pelvis in the office, and told her >that it was not good, and that the chance of success was poor, I think >she would have looked at me like I was crazy, and then asked why not >try. I have not been successful convincing/selling/arguing/cajoling >patients who are not accepting of honestly given advice and direction, >and, you know, they don't always do what you want/tell them to do. > >Garry > >At Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Stmidwife@aol.com wrote: >> >>Respectfully, that is why they are going to a midwife for midwifery as >>opposed to an Obstetrician to participate in the Obstetrics of 2006. >> >>Sue >> >>In a message dated 8/2/2006 4:19:37 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, >>ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net writes: >> >>You're on the mark, but I truly think that the CNMs are pretty >>supportive and frankly attract those patients who are dissatisfied >>elsewhere, and are unrealistic about hospital based Obstetrics in 2006. >> >>Garry > >-- >Garry E. Siegel, M.D. >Private Practice >Roswell, GA > > Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. > -- Garry E. Siegel, M.D. Private Practice Roswell, GA Next message: rmodugno@aol.com: "Arrest of dilation - yo, Dr Siegel" Previous message: Dr Eberhard Lisse: "Re: Arrest of Dilation" In reply to: Garry E. Siegel, M.D.: "Clincial Pelvimetry" Next in thread: Myer Bornstein: "Re: Clinical Pelvimetry"

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: Tue Mar 2 05:04:06 2010

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.