Newsgroups: sci.med Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!noc.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!emory!rsiatl!jgd From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) Subject: Re: Do we need a Radiologist to read an Ultrasound? Message-ID: <6kpvqj@dixie.com> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 93 02:53:26 GMT Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access. The Mouth of the South. References: <1r3l18INNg0o@oac4.hsc.uth.tmc.edu> Lines: 28 E.J. Draper writes: >If it were my wife, I would insist that a radiologist be involved in the >process. Radiologist are intensively trained in the process of >interpreting diagnostic imaging data and are aware of many things that >other physicians aren't aware of. Maybe, maybe not. A new graduate would obviously be well trained (but perhaps without sufficient experience). A radiologist trained 10 or 15 years ago who has not kept his continuing education current is a whole 'nuther matter. A OB who HAS trained in modern radiology technology is certainly more qualified than the latter and at least equal to the former. >Would you want a radiologist to >deliver your baby? If you wouldn't, then why would you want a OB/GYN to >read your ultrasound study? If the radiologist is also trained in OB/GYN, why not? John -- John De Armond, WD4OQC |Interested in high performance mobility? Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | Interested in high tech and computers? Marietta, Ga | Send ur snail-mail address to jgd@dixie.com | perform@dixie.com for a free sample mag Lee Harvey Oswald: Where are ya when we need ya?