-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: gynecologic oncologists From: Braun, R. Daniel (rbraun@iupui.edu) Wed Mar 31 13:00:41 1999 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: Robert J. Woolley: "Re: Trial of Labor?" Previous message: Braun, R. Daniel: "Re: gynecologic oncologists" Maybe in reply to: Robin: "gynecologic oncologists" Next in thread: Thomas Ind: "Re: gynecologic oncologists: YES YES YES, ABSOLUTELY YES" But if I remember right you got scorched about it. Am I right? Dan R. Daniel Braun, MD FACOG Clinical Professor Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Indiana U. School of Medicine Indianapolis, IN -----Original Message----- From: Geffrey H. Klein, MD [SMTP:gklein@icsi.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 1999 2:27 PM To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Subject: Re: gynecologic oncologists At 11:44 AM -0600 on 3/31/99, Betty Rommel, MD, PhD wrote: > At Wed, 31 Mar 1999, Paul Prior MD wrote: > > > >On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 19:20:44 -0600, you wrote: > > > >>The following is an excerpt from the NIH Consensus Development > >>Conference Statement, April 5-7, 1994: > >> > >>"Women with ovarian masses who have been identified preoperatively as > >>having a significant risk of ovarian cancer should be given the option > >>of having their surgery performed by a gynecologic oncologist" > > > >I do this routinely. > > > > Let's extrapolate the logic further... > > Ovarian mass = gyn onc referral > Low risk gyn = nurse practitioner > OCP = OTC > > Prolapse, incontinence = urogyn referral > > High risk ob = mfm referral > Low risk ob = midwife > > Infertility = endocrine referral > > Ob Gyn training = brief, superficial rotations with future referral docs > with emphasis on internal medicine... > > Seems like tomorrow's ObGyns are headed for the Museum of Natural > History! > Well, Betty. Your progressive thinking is still 2 years behind mine. Please see http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ob-gyn-l/OBGYNL.9706/1049.html I proposed a simple plan that I thought would immediately prompt action. I am apalled that ACOG has not acted more quickly on my recommendations to eliminate our unneeded specialty. :) Geffrey H. Klein, MD geffrey.klein@obgyn.net 2200 Nasa Rd 1 #200 Houston, Texas 77058 (713) 741 2273 ext 2628 Next message: Robert J. Woolley: "Re: Trial of Labor?" Previous message: Braun, R. Daniel: "Re: gynecologic oncologists" Maybe in reply to: Robin: "gynecologic oncologists" Next in thread: Thomas Ind: "Re: gynecologic oncologists: YES YES YES, ABSOLUTELY YES"

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: Mon Nov 2 05:31:02 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.