Re: consulting
From: ACF (evsono@pipeline.com)
Wed Aug 10 16:16:50 2005
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Philippe Jeanty, MD, PhD wrote:
> We have been doing 3-4D for 4 years. It does not add much time to
> normal exams (it does not add much diagnostic info either) but they
> are cute and fun in normal patient. 1 minute of 4D shows a lot about
> the baby. From time to time 3/4D shows something that could not be
> seen without. In difficult cases 3/4D add info and time. The ability
> to review something that was either missed or not well interpreted
> originally is very important (see Case of the week on http://www.TheFetus.net
> of tomorrow).
>
> I assume just about everyone checks the number of umbilical cord
> vessels with color Doppler along the bladder. Who would have thought
> of this as a common application when color Doppler was introduced ?
>
> New tools are always clumsy at first, just persist, this is not a fad.
> Remember how Ken Taylor famously said that "realtime was an
> unnecessary gimmick"... Don't make the same mistake with 3D.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ultrasound-history@medispecialty.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [mailto:ultrasound-history@medispecialty.com] *On Behalf Of *Allen Worrall
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2005 2:53 PM
> *To:* Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND-HISTORY
> *Subject:* Re: consulting
>
> No, I am sure you are not wrong. I am sure it takes more time when you
> both do and interpret the scan, as you and I do. I am not sure how
> experience influences the time - I have heard that after 6 months or
> so one does become faster.
>
> Of course the Doctor from Boston who gave the lecture at the GE
> evening event may have said that it takes the sonographers less time
> to acquire volumes than to take separate images. Maybe she was not
> including the time it takes the radiologist to work with the volumes.
>
> I tried to get my colleagues here at the clinic interested in a 3D/4D
> machine. It went over like a lead balloon, so I will have to wait longer.
>
> Allen
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* ACF <mailto:evsono@pipeline.com>
>
> *To:* Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND-HISTORY
> <mailto:ultrasound-history@dns.obgyn.net>
>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2005 7:38 AM
>
> *Subject:* Re: consulting
>
> Allen
>
> I also attended that event ... and as you, I do my own scans, many
> involve 3D. Here's my experience to date - NO net time-savings.
> Actually, for some studies, it takes more time - the time normally
> spent with the patient AND the time manipulating volumes for
> additional views. Also, while I'm at it - the ultrasound
> manufacturers need to get together on a uniform standard for
> volume storage to facilitate second opinions, etc. Hopefully,
> these details will get ironed out ASAP - especially if the mavens
> insist on it.
>
> Just my opinion - I could be wrong.
>
> Art
>
> Allen Worrall wrote:
>
> Terry, I think I saw you at that lecture in Orlando, a GE supper
> event, in which a young woman radiologist from Boston,(I think)
> related that her ultrasound department was bogged down with too
> many cases, and one of the things that helped them was 3D
> ultrasound. The volumes can be obtained quickly, and looked at
> later by the radiologist.
>
> Has this speaker published her lecture anywhere? I thought it was
> very good and very thought-provoking.
>
> Allen
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* Terry DuBose <mailto:terrydubose@sbcglobal.net>
>
> *To:* Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND-HISTORY
> <mailto:ultrasound-history@dns.obgyn.net>
>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 09, 2005 6:27 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: consulting
>
> Dr. De Lancer, you ask a question that many have asked. In
> general sonography (Abdomen and OB/GYN) usually no more than
> two an hour in peak rush times. It depends on how detailed
> the studies are, but at bottom line, two an hour average is
> too much if it is all day every day. This is based on my
> experience of 29 years and not on any scientific study.
>
> For you second question I would say anytime the sonographer is
> rushed enough to not be able to focus on the diagnosis, that
> is too many. There needs to be a bit of flexibility to allow
> for the unexpected twins or other detailed study.
>
> Also do not forget that over work, continuously over a period
> of months or years can injure the sonographer. Repeated
> Stress Injuries are well documented now. See:
>
> http://www.sdms.org/msi/default.asp
>
> Hope this helps. Terry
>
> */jose de lancer <josedelancer@yahoo.com>
> <mailto:josedelancer@yahoo.com>/* wrote:
>
> Hi, i am Dr. Jose De Lancer from Dominican Republic.
>
> I am obstetrician, gynecologist and sonologist.
>
> We have troubles in our hospital sonografy department for the
> "overdemand" in ultrasound studies.
>
> What is your opinion in the following isues:
>
> 1-How many studies are reasonable for each sonographer in one day?
>
> 2-How afect the excesive number of patients in the individual
> and department quality?
>
> Thanks for your cooperation!!
>
> */"DuBose, Terry" <DuboseTerryJ@uams.edu>
> <mailto:DuboseTerryJ@uams.edu>/* escribió:
>
> Congratulations to everyone on another landmark event. Good
> work. Terry
>
> 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 <mailto:DuBoseTerryJ@UAMS.edu>
> http://www.io.com/~dubose/ <http://www.io.com/%7Edubose/>
> http://www.uams.edu/chrp/dms/default.asp
> http://www.obgyn.net/us/panel/panel.htm
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* Dale R. Cyr [mailto:cyr@ardms.org]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 09, 2005 7:18 AM
> *To:* ALL STAFF; BOARD MEMBERS; All EDTF Committees
> *Cc:* Thomas Magallanes; steve_tapp@promissor.com
> <mailto:steve_tapp@promissor.com>
> *Subject:* Success in Hong Kong ARDMS Exam Delivery
>
> Hello Everyone:
>
> ARDMS began delivering examinations at the University of Hong
> Kong on August 8th. Two candidates sat for ARDMS examinations
> (Neuro and CPI), which were routinely and securely delivered
> with all data safely transmitted back to Promissor as
> per normal procedure. The ARDMS Hong Kong examinations and
> processes are exactly the same as here in the United States
> and Canada. Several other Candidates are scheduled to sit for
> ARDMS examinations in Hong Kong over the next couple of weeks.
>
> Congratulations everyone as ARDMS continues to increase the
> number of credentialed individuals to promote quality and
> patient safety through credentialing and continuing competency
> of ultrasound professionals.
>
> Also, a big thank you to Promissor who has been a great
> partner in assisting ARDMS in meeting our strategic
> initiatives, particularly in the global expansion program.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dale
>
> Dale R. Cyr, MBA, CAE
>
> Chief Executive Officer/Executive Director
>
> ARDMS and the Breast Ultrasound Foundation
>
> 51 Monroe St., Plaza East One
>
> Rockville, Maryland 20850-2400
>
> 301-738-8406, x223
>
> cyr@ardms.org,
> <mailto:ardms.orgcyr@breastultrasound.org>cyr@breastultrasound.org
> <mailto:cyr@breastultrasound.org>
>
> www.ardms.org <http://www.ardms.org/>
> www.breastultrasound.org <http://www.breastultrasound.org/>
>
> //You should always make sure. Verify the Registry status of
> employees - current and potential. ARDMS offers an _online
> directory of its Registrants.
> <http://www.ardms.org/statusverification/index.htm>_//
>
> **NOTICE:** This e-mail may contain information that is
> confidential, protected, or privileged. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please notify us by replying to
> sender, and delete this message and any attachments. If you
> are not the intended recipient, please note that any
> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this material is
> prohibited. Thank you.
>
> Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis!
> Regístrate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/
>
Gimmick? no not at all ... in fact, 3D has revealed more than a few
embedded IUD's.
Art
