Health Policy
For Plastic Surgery – seek Board Certified Plastic Surgeons.
1
Board Certified Plastic Surgeon
Scottsdale – Renowned research strategists Penn, Schoen & Berland conducted a survey of 750 individuals considering plastic surgery within the next year. The research asked questions relating to a variety of categories including consultation, who can legally perform plastic surgery, and qualifications of plastic surgeons when compared to other medical professionals.
The study found that those seriously considering plastic surgery are no more knowledgeable about which doctors can legally perform plastic surgery than the general public. Despite all of their research nearly 90 percent of individuals did not know that any doctor with a medical license can perform plastic surgery.
Most people seeking plastic surgery or “cosmetic” surgery are aware to look for “board certification” among the credentials of their surgeon. It is unfortunate that most people are not aware of exactly what this means, and what is involved when a physician becomes – Board Certified.
Many patients are surprised to learn that any licensed medical doctor, regardless of training, can legally perform plastic surgery. However, only board certified plastic surgeons can be called – plastic surgeons. Ethically, non-plastic surgeons cannot call themselves – plastic surgeons, as this would be false-advertisement. However, some physicians have figured out a way to circumvent this situation by simply saying they are “board certified”.
The recent trend is for non-plastic surgeons who wish to perform plastic surgery to say they are “board certified” without elaborating on which board has certified their diploma. There are 24 boards in America, which certify physicians to practice a certain sub-specialty. For instance, if your doctor trained in Allergy and Immunology by completing medical and specialty training, once they pass their exams, they then become Board Certified in Allergy and Immunology.
If that same physician later decides to perform liposuction, he cannot tell his patients he is board certified in plastic surgery, but may simply announce that he is “board certified”. He may not elaborate that his certification is in allergy and immunology unless the patient asks for clarification.
In the U.S., the medical boards are regulated by a governing body named, the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS), a national agency, whose function is to oversee the 24 recognized sub-specialty boards.
Here is the list of recognized sub-specialties in America:
Allergy and Immunology
Anesthesiology
Dermatology
Colon and Rectal Surgery
Emergency Medicine
Family Practice
Internal Medicine
Medical Genetics
Neurology
Neurological Surgery
Nuclear Medicine
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Ophthalmology
Orthopedic surgery
Otolaryngology (ENT)
Pathology
Pediatrics
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Plastic Surgery
Preventive Medicine
Psychiatry
Surgery
Thoracic Surgery
Urology
More than 100 boards have submitted applications to the ABMS for certification, but only the 24 above have met the strict educational and examination criteria. This means that only these boards provide the appropriate education and correct amount of training for a physician to become board certified in one of the recognized sub-specialties. Of these, the American Board of Plastic Surgery is the only one of the 24 boards that can certify physicians to perform plastic surgery of the face and body in the United States. This is the only board that provides residency training in plastic surgery of the body and face. In order to become certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery, a physician must complete an approved residency in plastic surgery, then pass a written qualifying examination, and then an oral certifying examination.
Other boards can provide “board certification” for non-plastic surgeons who perform “cosmetic” surgery. None of these are recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties. Lack of recognition occurs primarily because these other boards do not provide strict training and certification guidelines for their physicians that meet ABMS standards.
The results of the survey mentioned earlier clearly indicate that more public education is required so that the process of surgeon selection for patients seeking plastic surgery becomes more transparent. Simply being “board certified” can have a variety of meanings. By knowing exactly which board has certified your physician, and whether or not the ABMS recognizes that board, you will better understand their training and qualifications.
I recommend that if you are seeking plastic surgery, then you should have plastic surgery performed only by a Board Certified Plastic Surgeon.
Most Doctors Oppose Healthcare Reform, consider Quitting.
3
Doctors oppose health care reform.
Scottsdale – If you are a patient, you have to wonder why so many doctors oppose health care reform. An article in Investors.com reports the result of a recent poll of physicians and the results are not good for the future of medicine. In fact, the poll indicates that two out of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Congress. An even greater concern is that hundreds of thousands of physicians would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if the legislation is approved.
This poll contradicts the claims the White House and the American Medical Association — both which suggest the medical profession is behind the proposed overhaul.
In my opinion, there are several reasons why physicians oppose this reform. Most doctors have their patients best interest in mind. Physicians believe that they and their patients are the best people to make decisions about an individual person’s health care options. If a government plan is created, there is no doubt that a significant portion of the decisions will be made by the bureaucratic machinery designed to manage such a system. Those critical medical decisions will have a huge impact on individual patients life and potentially their doctors too. After looking at the current 2,000 page bill before Congress, you can be sure that the bureaucratic machine that has been conjured up is of colossal proportions. The most significant goal of the current legislation is to lower the costs of health care. Most likely, the bureaucrats will opt to provide the least costly options for patients while avoiding the expensive ones. The costs will matter and it will not matter to the bureaucrats whether the procedure they approve is the best indicated medical treatment for the patient.
Physicians fear that non-medical personnel in charge of managing decisions will force their patients to accept less costly therapy that, in some cases, may be less than optimal and even worse, could be below the standard of care. The proponents of the reform would argue that the system is not designed to provide less than standard care. However, it is inevitable that in such a large health care bureaucracy, whether intentional or not, some patients are not going to be diagnosed or treated in a timely manner as they attempt to access health care through all the “natural red tape” that is typically associated with government-run programs. Delays in diagnosis or treatment is what I and others have predicted will be the number one cause of morbidity and mortality in the population if this bill is enacted. If this occurs, physicians will be left out of the decision making process and will be powerless to protect their patients, but will likely be blamed for poor outcomes. This chain of events will increase the likelihood of malpractice suits and increase the costs of practicing medicine in America.
Another reason for opposing this current legislative reform is the significant lower rates of reimbursement for hospitals and physicians. For instance, the Senate Bill requires physicians to accept below Medicare reimbursements for services in the later years of the plan. This is required in order to keep the overall costs of the bill around 900 Billion. Expenses for doctors and hospitals, on the other hand, are going to continue to rise as much as 40 percent while reimbursements drop. The most likely outcome is that physician practices and hospitals will not be solvent under this plan and many will have no other choice than to close their doors. Already hundreds of hospitals have shut down during this economic downturn. If this continues, then a crisis the likes of which has not been seen in this country will occur with regards to access for specialty care and possibly even for general medical care that will devastate the population.
Diminishing reimbursements will also contribute to the access crisis by lowering the number of doctors graduating medical schools. This will lead to less and less physicians available in the future to replace retiring physicians and the crisis will get worse as we get older. The fact is that medical school is expensive and a lower reimbursement will cause many new graduates not to be able to pay loans back for a lot longer period that previous generations. This and other financial pressures will make medicine even less attractive to future generations.
There is no significant tort reform in the legislation. This compounds the problem tremendously. Physicians already fear that they will not be able to influence the bureaucratic decision-making process, that they will no longer be able to advocate the best treatments for their patients, and that they will not be able to protect their patients once a decision on how to proceed with care is made by the managing personnel. As the new medical environment evolves under this plan it will likely become more dangerous to practice medicine for the average physician. As other doctors retire or move on, the remaining physicians will have to see more patients in less time, receive less reimbursement for more work, and take more risks with less rewards. Eventually, this will leave doctors in a vulnerable position of being overworked, underpaid and unhappy. Physicians already live in fear of litigation and without the ability to protect their medical practice and life-long investments many will be pushed out of the business.
More than 800,000 doctors were practicing in 2006, according to government statistics. Projecting the poll’s finding onto that population, 360,000 doctors would consider quitting if the legislation goes through as planned.
Tort Reform numbers for healthcare don't lie.
0Scottsdale – as the health debate heats up in D.C. , I found some interesting numbers we should all keep in mind about what makes health care so expensive! I think that if we fall asleep on this one, we’ll all suffer in the end. This information can be found in the online journal, Politico.
- According to a study by the Harvard School of Public Health, 40% of medical malpractice suits are without merit.
- The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) estimates unlimited excessive damages adds between $70 billion and $126 billion to health care costs every year.
- According to HHS, doctors order $60 billion worth of unnecessary tests, procedures and other forms of defensive medicine – in large part to protect themselves from abusive lawsuits – per year.
- The Congressional Budget Office estimates that limiting non-economic damages – awards for “pain and suffering” – would reduce medical liability insurance rates by 25% to 30%. Lower liability premiums mean lower health care costs.
- The Congressional Budget Office completed an analysis of the effects of Tort Reform proposals on the costs to our health-care system which could save the country $54 billion over 10 years.
Americancourthouse.com commented on this article: “Trial lawyers lobby is desperate to scare Americans into believing the medical liability reform will limit their access to the courts in the event of a true medical mistake. But the only thing it will limit is the ability of trial lawyers to walk away with Powerball-sized legal fees”.
I can assert that during my training in surgery about 50 percent of the actions taken , in terms of ordering tests and other labs, were to cover against some uncommon causes in the differential of the disease. In some cases we ruled out even very rare conditions just to close the door against potential liability. It is unlikely that health care costs will go down without tort reform.
Public option healthcare – bad medicine for America!
1
Bad Medicine.
Scottsdale – It’s time to get tough with Congress. They are planning to force this new public option down America’s throat. I have serious concerns about these plans. I hope the folks out there do not get the impression that I am trying to be political. On the contrary, I am just concerned for my patients and patients in general! After practicing medicine now for 8 years, I feel I have to speak up!
Patients should know that the program proposed by Congress is too expensive and just as UNSUSTAINABLE (even faster) as the current programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. The whole premise of these measures is to cut national health care spending – and they will do it – no matter the costs (in pain and suffering) to patients! I implore you to send a note or call your representative in order to stop the passage of this health care reform bill.
The plan is bad for America because – it is designed to cut costs, and therefore and inevitably, this will lead to a reduction in the quality of health care. Current government officials will tell you that this is not the case and that they believe that quality will remain the same. This is all in theory! In practice all you have to do is look at other countries where this type of health care already exists. Please go to www.cprights.org to listen on your own to what patients and doctors currently in government run programs say about the quality of health care in their countries.
This whole month my blog will feature segments on the current state of the healthcare debate. Please stay tuned – this affects all of us!
WHO – seeks vaccine for poorer nations
0SCOTTSDALE – The World Health Organization is seeking swine flu vaccine for poor countries, but received few offers as experts disclosed that an effective flu shot is still months away. Swine flu has been confirmed in more than 9,830 people in at least 40 countries. Most of the cases in Mexico and the U.S. The global death toll was at least 83 — 74 in Mexico, seven in the U.S., one in Canada and one in Costa Rica (Source: Yahoo News).
The U.N. head Ban Ki-moon and WHO chief Margaret Chan appealed to drugmakers on Tuesday to save some of their vaccines for poor nations. The only major drugmaker so far to publicly agree with the WHO request on Tuesday was GlaxoSmithKline, which said it would donate 50 million doses in a pandemic. They offered that WHO could buy at a discount for poor countries.
“I can reassure you I have received very serious commitments,” WHO Director-General Dr. Margaret Chan told reporters after meeting with the drugmakers. Smaller vaccine makers in developing countries also offered to share some of their vaccines, although current productivity is limited.





