Re: no subject received Wed, 16 Oct 2002 14:56:28 -0500
From: art fougner, md (evsono@pipeline.com)
Tue Oct 22 19:27:15 2002
Karen -
how can one "not allow" someone to perform entertainment sonography - am
sure the SDMS does not have transducer police. you can only appeal to
sense of integrity and professionalism - something insurance companies
don't seem to feel is worth the reimbursement. it must be so galling as
well as tempting to perform a competent survey of fetal anatomy for
whatever an insurance company sees fit to reimburse ( when they get
around to it) while seeing your neighbor down the block rake in the cash
for cute baby pictures.
my take here is that by performing "limited medical scans" ( the old
level one's), i get the feeling that they have opened the door to those
lurking attorneys itching to file an action. they would make a rather
convincing case suggesting that any machine so sophisticated as to
produce the startlingly real photos would certainly see the presence of
anomalies X, Y, and Z.
just my opinion - i could be wrong.
art
At Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Terry J. DuBose wrote:
>
>Karen, you are correct: "
>>I think that you've been running on both sides of the issue.
>"
>
>and I could not agree more: "The smart thing to do would be to shut them down entirely, until a plan can be put into place. "
>
>However, the reality is that the FDA seems to be frozen on this issue... and the current USA administration is under the control of a corporate culture that hates any kind of regulation. Therefore, what are we to do?
>
>I hate what is happening, but at the same time, I am not going to tell the educated and certified sonographers (RDMS) that they have to sit on their hands while these folks run free. Perhaps that approach will get the FDA, AIUM, SDMS, et al moving.
>
>peace, Terry J DuBose, RDMS
>
>ultrasound@obgyn.net writes:
>>At Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Terry J. DuBose wrote:
>>>
>>>Folks, have any of you seen this Web site? One of my students found it.
>>>
>>>First Look Sonogram
>>>210 Avenue I. Ste C. [ http://www.firstlooksonogram.com/directions.html ]Map
>>>Redondo Beach, CA 90277
>>>
>>>http://www.firstlooksonogram.com/pricing.asp
>> < break >
>>>My students are asking about the ethics of this, and "Why are they allowed to do it?". This is very difficult because the students can see the pricing, the fact that they only schedule 5 days a week, no call back, and, most importantly, they don't have to answer to an irascible or surly physician! This type of business is very attractive to many sonographers.
>>>
>>>Is the FDA doing nothing about this? If they do not, I fear we will see sonographers leaving the ranks of mainstream medicine in droves so that they can simply control their own working hours, if not for the money.
>>>
>>>This particular site even posts the fetal images, by name! Take that HIPAA!!!
>>
>>Terry,
>>
>>These people have paid $25 for their images to be listed on the website.
>>I doubt there's any confidentiality violation there.
>>
>>Also, I think that you've been running on both sides of the issue. You
>>have recently taken the "if you can't beat them, let's join them"
>>argument in that you've advocated that only REGISTERED sonographers be
>>allowed to perform these entertainment sonograms. In doing so, you have
>>indeed raised the issue of sonographers attending DMS school and passing
>>the registry only to venture out into the entertainment sonography
>>business. Why should they work at the hard stuff when they can have fun
>>and make lots of money at the same time?
>>
>>Personally, I think it would be a big mistake to allow only RDMSers to
>>open such a business. Registry does not ensure quality or patient
>>safety. Neither does having a physician on board, because there is no
>>system in place to check for qualifications IN SONOGRAPHY there, either.
>>The smart thing to do would be to shut them down entirely, until a plan
>>can be put into place. Diagnostic ultrasound should clean its own
>>house, as well. The registry requirements could be tightened up and
>>interpreting physicians should have to show proficiency in ultrasound,
>>but that's another argument for another thread.
>>
>>Look at what's going on in other areas of medicine. Botox parties are
>>being held in peoples' homes ala Tupperware parties! Obstetricians are
>>opening "Women's Aesthetics Centers" and performing microdermabrasion,
>>laser hair removal, etc. Scary, because most people would never
>>consider going to a dermatologist for delivery of a baby. You can get
>>laser hair removal done by someone who has had only one day of
>>in-service just about anywhere! And patients have to be careful that
>>they use a board-certified plastic surgeon, not a cosmetic surgeon,
>>because any doctor can claim to do cosmetic surgery, but there's only
>>one certifying group, and it's the plastic surgery board.
>>
>>Yes, the FDA has their hands full, and Pandora's box is open. But the
>>FDA has to listen if the complaints keep rolling in. And those
>>complaints should be backed up with facts, especially about bioeffects
>>and safety.
>>
>>Also frustrated,
>>Karen Roersma, RDMS
>>
>Peace, Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS
>Assistant 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/dmshome.htm
>http://www.obgyn.net/us/panel/panel.htm
--
art fougner, md
ich bin ein New Yorker
