The fight is being lost...

From: Marveen Craig (Cramar25@earthlink.net)
Mon Sep 27 10:02:29 2004


Thirty years ago we made jokes about buying a Honda motorcycle with a side car, and making sonographic house calls!

Now there's an idea....low overhead, good bottom line profits and you don't even have to pay for the electricity.

How ironic that the FDA for shut down sonographer owned businesses in the 80s, but didn't touch those owned by doctors (and now lawyers!). What good is a law if it has no "teeth" and isn't uniformly enforced?

As a previous respondent pointed out, it IS all about money. Not only for the entrepreneur, either! When hospital/clinic practices didn't make it mandatory for sonographers to push patients through in 10 to 15 minutes, there was time to share the scanning experience with the parents and families. Now, in too many places, sonographers work in an assembly line fashion.

--
Marveen Craig

========================

Dave Berck wrote:

>The sonographer in the manhattan fetal foto is RDMS >registered. > >--- "art fougner, md" <evsono@pipeline.com> wrote: > >>How many of these FotoMats either employ or are >>operated by Registered >>Sonographers? Any idea? >> >>art >> >>At Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Terry J DuBose wrote: >> >>>I also suspect that the Insurance Corps actually >>> >>welcome anyone doing >> >>>nonmedical sonography, it reduces the pressure from >>> >>their customers to >> >>>have exams that are covered. It is just increasing >>> >>their bottom line by >> >>>reducing the expenses... they really aren't about >>> >>good health care. >> >>>-- >>>Terry J DuBose >>> >>>On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 19:35:29 -0500 Dave Berck >>> >><djberck@yahoo.com> writes: >> >>>>That may be true, but I don't think that too many >>>>insurance companies take this seriously, >>>> >>certainly a >> >>>>small minority. And ACOG has kept the bar pretty >>>> >>low >> >>>>in terms of what they consider acceptible >>>> >>ultrasound >> >>>>credentials, e.g. and ob/gyn residency. >>>> >>>>--- "art fougner, md" <evsono@pipeline.com> >>>> >>wrote: >> >>>>>Some insurance companies are taking care of the >>>>>office ultrasound >>>>>situation by only paying for services offered >>>>> >>by >> >>>>>accredited practices. >>>>> >>>>>art >>>>> >>>>>At Sat, 25 Sep 2004, Dave Berck wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I totally agree! >>>>>> >>>>>>--- "DuBose, Terry" <DuboseTerryJ@uams.edu> >>>>>> >>wrote: >> >>>>>>>" This just doesn't seem like such a big >>>>>>> >>deal >> >>>>>when >>>>> >>>>>>>most ultrasound in >>>>>>>the US is being done by jokers who wouldn't >>>>>>> >>know >> >>>>>a >>>>> >>>>>>>nuchal fold from a >>>>>>>fig newton." >>>>>>> >>>>>>>This is the best argument for mandatory >>>>>>> >>licensure >> >>>>>>>and ARDMS >>>>>>>certification for all using sonography... >>>>>>> >>even >> >>>>>the >>>>> >>>>>>>RNs and MDs. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>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 >>>>>>>Dave Berck >>>>>>>Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 8:48 AM >>>>>>>To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND >>>>>>>Subject: Re: The fight is being lost... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I'm not a big fan of fetal foto, but the >>>>>>> >>only >> >>>>>strong >>>>> >>>>>>>argument against them is that >>>>>>> >>>>>>>1) it's bad for the baby. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But >>>>>>> Does anyone really think that this is >>>>>>> >>true? Is >> >>>>>>>there any ultrasound professional who uses >>>>>>> >>any >> >>>>>>>genuine >>>>>>>restraint in indications for ultrasound in >>>>>>> >>order >> >>>>>to >>>>> >>>>>>>abide by ALARA principles? If not, it's time >>>>>>> >>to >> >>>>>get >>>>> >>>>>>>off the high horse. I don't think the >>>>>>> >>prohibition >> >>>>>>>analogy holds here -- diagnostic u/s isn't >>>>>>> >>bad >> >>>>>for >>>>> >>>>>>>babies. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>2) the techs won't know what to do with an >>>>>>> >>>>>anomaly >>>>> >>>>>>>(e.g. cleft lip or anencephaly). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But >>>>>>> Does anyone familiar with the quality of >>>>>>>ultrasound >>>>>>>in the US (i.e. low) think that the overall >>>>>>> >>>>>quality >>>>> >>>>>>>of >>>>>>>fetal fotos could possible be worse than >>>>>>> >>what >> >>>>>>>general >>>>>>>ob/gyns generate in their offices? Who's >>>>>>> >>done a >> >>>>>>>worse >>>>>>>job -- the radiologist who misses >>>>>>> >>anencephaly at >> >>>>>20 >>>>> >>>>>>>weeks, or the fetal foto tech who misses it >>>>>>> >>at 30 >> >>>>>>>weeks? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This just doesn't seem like such a big >>>>>>> >>deal >> >>>>>when >>>>> >>>>>>>most ultrasound in the US is being done by >>>>>>> >>jokers >> >>>>>>>who >>>>>>>wouldn't know a nuchal fold from a fig >>>>>>> >>newton. >> >>>>>>> -- Dave Berck, MD, MPH, RDMS >>>>>>> >>>>>>>--- Allen Worrall <jworrall@alaska.net> >>>>>>> >>wrote: >> >>>>>>>>I am afraid it is going to be like >>>>>>>> >>Prohibition: >> >>>>>>>>there are some things that the people want >>>>>>>> >>and >> >>>>>you >>>>> >>>>>>>>can pass all the laws you want, but it >>>>>>>> >>will not >> >>>>>>>stop >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>even law-abiding folks from doing whatever >>>>>>>> >>it >> >>>>>is >>>>> >>>>>>>>(drinking alcohol or having prenatal >>>>>>>> >>sonos.). >> >>>>>>>>Of course it could be greatly reduced, by >>>>>>>>considering it something as bad as dealing >>>>>>>> >>>>>drugs, >>>>> >>>>>>>or >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>a similar really bad thing. Then you would >>>>>>>> >>have >> >>>>>>>>underground ultrasound "speakeasies". >>>>>>>> >>Probably >> >>>>>no >>>>> >>>>>>>>one on this forum is old enough to know >>>>>>>> >>what I >> >>>>>am >>>>> >>>>>>>>talking about. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Allen >>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: Dr. Wolfgang Moroder >>>>>>>> To: Multiple recipients of list >>>>>>>> >>ULTRASOUND >> >>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 11:21 >>>>>>>> >>AM >> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: The fight is being lost... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks Terry, well the war ... drags on! >>>>>>>> Wolfgang >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Am 23/set/04 um 21:05 schrieb DuBose, >>>>>>>> >>Terry: >> >>>>>>>> > Wolfgang... no, but it helps. >>>>>>>> >>Basically, >> >>>>>in >>>>> >>>>>>>>the USA there are folks, >>>>>>>> > some untrained in medicine, who are >>>>>>>> >>opening >> >>>>>>>>"Fetal Studios" and >>>>>>>> > charging >>>>>>>> > large fees to provide the parents with >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>pictures >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>and videos. This is >>>>>>>> > without any medical indication or >>>>>>>> >>>>>diagnosis. >>>>> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > There are at least two sides, probably >>>>>>>> >>many >> >>>>>>>>more, and a lot of >>>>>>>> > disagreement in what should be done. >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Hope this helps. >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > 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 >>>>>>>> > Dr. Wolfgang Moroder >>>>>>>> > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 >>>>>>>> >>2:00 PM >> >>>>>>>> > To: Multiple recipients of list >>>>>>>> >>ULTRASOUND >> >>>>>>>> > Subject: Re: The fight is being >>>>>>>> >>lost... >> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Do I have to be a registered user of >>>>>>>> >>NYT to >> >>>>>>>>understand what this is all >>>>>>>> > about? >>>>>>>> > Best regards >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Wolfgang >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Am 23/set/04 um 16:20 schrieb Philippe >>>>>>>> >>>>>Jeanty, >>>>> >>>>>>>>MD, PhD: >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/23/technology/circuits/23ultr.html?th >> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>===== >>>>>>>David J. Berck, MD, MPH >>>>>>> >>>>>>===== >>>>>>David J. Berck, MD, MPH >>>>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>art fougner, md >>>>>ich bin ein New Yorker >>>>> >>>>===== >>>>David J. Berck, MD, MPH >>>> >>________________________________________________________________ >> >>________________________________________________________________ >> >>>Get your name as your email address. >>> >>________________________________________________________________ >> >>________________________________________________________________ >> >>>Includes spam protection, 1GB storage, no ads and >>> >>more >> >>>Only $1.99/ month - visit >>> >>http://www.mysite.com/name today! >> >>-- >>art fougner, md >>ich bin ein New Yorker >> > >===== >David J. Berck, MD, MPH >




recommended search...
Google
OBGYN.net forums endometriosis zone Web

use when must restrict search to only the ultrasound forum...
Enter search keywords:
Returns per screen: Require all keywords:

Return to  Ultrasound Forum Mail a New Message to the Forum: ultrasound@obgyn.net
Forum Administrator: terry.dubose@obgyn.net
Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net
Last Updated: Thu Oct 2 05:19:40 2008

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.