The other day I was talking to my brother. He told me casually in the course of conversation that he had got his physical for the year. He then mentioned that he had had his yearly appointment with the urologist to check his prostate. That got my attention. What's wrong? Nothing. He just sees a urologist once a year to check his prostate. He has no medical history of urinary or reproductive problems. He has never had urological surgery.
I was at a medical meeting and during a break talking with someone about how there isn't enough training in procedures during residency training. The person I was talking to turned out to be a subspecialist. He disagreed with me regarding training primary care doctors-to-be in procedures. He quoted papers that reported better outcomes when these procedures were performed by specialists.
So, should you go to a cardiologist to have a heart exam and evaluation? Should you see a nephrologist to manage your blood pressures? How about an endocrinologist or a diabetes specialist to manage your diabetes? Should a gynecologist manage your post-menopausal symptoms or a rheumatologist manage your osteoporosis or arthritis? Should you see psychiatrist for stress coping with changes in life or depression?
What is the role of the primary care provider? Is he or she to be a triage person, directing the flow of medical traffic to different specialist-destinations?
I am a primary care doctor. I don't treat a single organ or organ system. I don't wear blinders and only want to hear about your medical problems or complaints pertaining to just your heart or just your kidney or skin or mind or bones.
Are we emasculating primary care doctors when we deny them the right to be doctors and treat patients, rather than just refer them to specialists?
Of course, on the other side of the line is the recognition of the limitations of one's scope of practice. I won't do neurosurgery or try to remove your gall bladder or even do an angiogramon your heart. Some things are clear. But what about managing blood pressure in a diabetic, or abdominal pain in a pregnant, depressed young woman? Is that outside the scope of my practice? Who decides that? Me? The specialist? Some regulatory body? The public?
Of course, I have my own answers to these questions. And of course, as Einstein pointed out, the observer affects the observed phenomena. I am biased.
Fortunately, on a personal level, I am not legally limited in my scope of practice in any but the broadest ways.
Saturday, October 03, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment