6
602521
I've been reading SDN for a while, so I feel it necessary to say this before I elaborate on the question ... I am not trying to pick a surgical specialty. I have so much time before that question might even come up. I just find medical histories and surgeon memoirs really interesting. It's a fun hobby to read books like Walk on Water and Hot Lights, Cold Steel. The question: based on your experiences, to what extent are the following first impressions of some major surgical specialties accurate?
Neurosurgery: Sure, their residencies are some of the most selective and brutal but when it comes down to it ... all they're doing is cutting stuff out. They don't truly fix anything. And doesn't it get frustrating when their patient slips into a coma and becomes brain dead and they aren't even sure exactly why? And how do they tell a family that their loved one might wake up in a few days ... or months ... or never?
Cardiothoracic surgery: Their golden age has come and gone. There was a time when CT surgeons did the most innovative research and constantly developed new techniques but now, they spend the majority of their time doing the same few operations over and over again. Peds is a bit more exciting with a greater variety of cases, and they really do fix stuff creatively. But the major problems have all been addressed. Overall, there isn't much room left for growth, if any.
Orthopedics: These surgeons have a lot to be happy about. They do more fixing than destroying, and they're consistently met with positive results. An x-ray of a patient's leg reveals a mangled mess.They go to the operating room. Another x-ray ... the bone is exactly the way it should be. Another patient is in extreme pain. They do a hip replacement. Some physical therapy ... their patient tells them they're pain-free. Immediate satisfaction. But it seems they never directly save a life. To be fair, a severely damaged leg that isn't amputated can lead to a life-threatening infection. An open book pelvic fracture can lead to devastating blood loss. But it's nothing like knowing you opened a patient's heart, fixed something in it, and as a direct result of your actions, your patient continues to live.
General surgery: Who does this willingly? There seems to be a lot more destroying than fixing. How often do you quickly see a patient get better because of what you've done? While orthopods are hearing, "I'm pain-free, doctor," your patient has to wear a colostomy bag for the rest of his life? And how often are you not doing appendectomies or cholecystectomy?
Plastics: It's clear this field is important. They reconstruct patients horribly disfigured by aggressive disease or trauma. Not only do they restore normal appearance (or get close to it), but they also restore function. But how many plastic surgeons actually do this kind of work? How do the rest convince themselves that they're having a positive impact on the life of a patient who is coming in for his fifth rhinoplasty?
I hope I haven't offended any health care professionals in these fields or those aspiring to be. I wanted to capture how one might first perceive these specialties without in-depth knowledge. That's why I'm asking. For those of you who know more, are any of these first impressions fair? If not, how does the field actually work? And if you'd like to give some insight on a field I haven't included, either to confirm naive suspicions or disprove them, please do. Thanks!
Neurosurgery: Sure, their residencies are some of the most selective and brutal but when it comes down to it ... all they're doing is cutting stuff out. They don't truly fix anything. And doesn't it get frustrating when their patient slips into a coma and becomes brain dead and they aren't even sure exactly why? And how do they tell a family that their loved one might wake up in a few days ... or months ... or never?
Cardiothoracic surgery: Their golden age has come and gone. There was a time when CT surgeons did the most innovative research and constantly developed new techniques but now, they spend the majority of their time doing the same few operations over and over again. Peds is a bit more exciting with a greater variety of cases, and they really do fix stuff creatively. But the major problems have all been addressed. Overall, there isn't much room left for growth, if any.
Orthopedics: These surgeons have a lot to be happy about. They do more fixing than destroying, and they're consistently met with positive results. An x-ray of a patient's leg reveals a mangled mess.They go to the operating room. Another x-ray ... the bone is exactly the way it should be. Another patient is in extreme pain. They do a hip replacement. Some physical therapy ... their patient tells them they're pain-free. Immediate satisfaction. But it seems they never directly save a life. To be fair, a severely damaged leg that isn't amputated can lead to a life-threatening infection. An open book pelvic fracture can lead to devastating blood loss. But it's nothing like knowing you opened a patient's heart, fixed something in it, and as a direct result of your actions, your patient continues to live.
General surgery: Who does this willingly? There seems to be a lot more destroying than fixing. How often do you quickly see a patient get better because of what you've done? While orthopods are hearing, "I'm pain-free, doctor," your patient has to wear a colostomy bag for the rest of his life? And how often are you not doing appendectomies or cholecystectomy?
Plastics: It's clear this field is important. They reconstruct patients horribly disfigured by aggressive disease or trauma. Not only do they restore normal appearance (or get close to it), but they also restore function. But how many plastic surgeons actually do this kind of work? How do the rest convince themselves that they're having a positive impact on the life of a patient who is coming in for his fifth rhinoplasty?
I hope I haven't offended any health care professionals in these fields or those aspiring to be. I wanted to capture how one might first perceive these specialties without in-depth knowledge. That's why I'm asking. For those of you who know more, are any of these first impressions fair? If not, how does the field actually work? And if you'd like to give some insight on a field I haven't included, either to confirm naive suspicions or disprove them, please do. Thanks!