Quoted: HIV+ and being a surgeon

Status
Not open for further replies.

Doodledog

Escape artist
Moderator Emeritus
15+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2007
Messages
931
Reaction score
49
Posted for a user. I don't know the answer but, there are some SDNers who probably do. Only responses that answer the questions raised will be posted. Also, as always, remember that legal advice should come from lawyers, not anonymous posters on a public website.

I'm currently a 2nd year medical student, and looking at my career options. I wasn't terribly interested in surgery prior to medical school, but now that I've seen some surgery I've become much more interested in pursuing it as a career, particularly neurosurgery, trauma, or orthopedics. The question is, I'm HIV positive. One of the reasons I'm posting on the anonymous forum is because of the ignorance I've encountered among many of my colleagues regarding the ramifications of HIV. I've tried to find some general guidelines which are at opposite ends of the spectrum: the CDC recommendations are from about 1991 (and hence HIV was still a death sentence) which say someone with HIV should basically be treated as a leper, and the American College of Surgeons has a statement that says HIV status "should not be used for any determinations of credentialing or privileging for surgical practice." The UK and Australia don't allow HIV+ healthcare workers to perform exposure prone procedures, such as surgery, and these statements are issued by the department of health. I looked at a couple of individual hospitals and neither of them force disclosure but offer testing, as they assume universal precautions will be followed, but they don't offer any specific guidance to infected individuals. There's one high-profile court case where a surgeon was fired because he's positive and the courts upheld the decision. Does anyone know what the current guidelines are, and what kind of barriers I might encounter should I choose to pursue surgery?

Many thanks!

Members don't see this ad.
 
Also, as always, remember that legal advice should come from lawyers, not anonymous posters on a public website.

How about advice from a non-anonymous poster on a public website??

In most states you will need to get a training medical license to start a residency program. One of the questions you will need to answer is if you have any medical or psychiatric condition that does or could affect your ability to practice medicine. You will need to let the medical licensure board know that you are HIV+, due to the potential motor and cognitive affects of HIV. Irregardless if the question on the licensure form is worded to cover the potential of you infecting a patient, you will need to inform them you are HIV+, and this is one of the areas that the licensure board will consider.

If you lie on the form, you put your license and medical career in danger.


disclaimer: HIV in a student or physician is an issue I have not dealt with before. I am basing this answer on my Internal Medicine and Psychiatric knowledge regarding HIV, as well as my experience in applying for several state medical licenses.
 
One of the questions you will need to answer is if you have any medical or psychiatric condition that does or could affect your ability to practice medicine. You will need to let the medical licensure board know that you are HIV+, due to the potential motor and cognitive affects of HIV. Irregardless if the question on the licensure form is worded to cover the potential of you infecting a patient, you will need to inform them you are HIV+, and this is one of the areas that the licensure board will consider.

If you lie on the form, you put your license and medical career in danger.

What? Hold up. Is this true? Because of the "potential" for "motor and cognitive effects"? Ok, first of all, I don't know the answer. But, second of all, come on, this doesn't sound right to me and I'm gonna call BS until I see citations on this one.

If potential for motor and cognitive impairment is a criteria for disclosure, then everybody needs to disclose that they are cannot stop time and afflicted by something called aging. I'm sorry, but I don't buy this as a reason to disclose OP's status.

To my understanding, paperwork submitted to the State Boards are public record. So, I would consult with a labor lawyer or someone with experience dealing with professional issues before disclosing your status. Maybe one place I would start is to ask your own HIV physician whether he/she knows or has had experience caring for health care workers who are HIV+ or have become HIV+ on the job.

I'd be interested to hear this discussion regarding the OP's question. That court case the OP found, was a state or federal court? Was that surgeon simply HIV+ or did something else happen? Did s/he have a preexisting duty to disclose and didn't? Was the surgeon "fired" as in... s/he had an employed position and the employer fired him with/without cause? Or was s/he working as an independent contractor and his contract not renewed? Or was his privileges revoked from the hospital? I'd be curious to hear if the judges rendered a broad ruling or a narrow ruling (with a lot of case-specific conditions that may not apply to the OP's case).
 
A 2005 review article. Check out Table 4.
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/429821?cookieSet=1

I don't have access to this article right now, but check out the abstract.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0020729202000954

Interesting. I know there are specific guidelines on patient-to-health-care-worker PEP that stratifies risk based on known/unknown status & viral loads and mode of transmission (solid needle vs. hollow needle), but I didn't know that, like the OP said, a lot of the HCW-to-patient issues hasn't really been revisited since the 90's.

The other person to ask is if you have access to an occupational medicine specialist. They generally know a lot of these rules/guidelines. Find out to see if your hospital has one.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
I dont know the answer but admire your strength and resilience in continuing to pursue your dream.

Worst case scenario, you could do Psych/Rads/Path. Those are pretty good lifestyles too!

I think its smart, as you already know, to be cautious about disclosure. Do what is legally allowed. And consult/get a family lawyer before year 3.

Best of luck to you! My heart goes out to you and the millions of others affected by HIV/AIDS. And as you said, with the technologies available today, people are living completely normal lives. HIV/AIDS is now a chronic illness and not the death sentence it once was. Know that there are many people out there who will support you!:love:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with zuperstar.
I honestly don't know what advice to give, except that the OP probably has 2 important questions to consider.
1) Is it safe for my patients for me to become a surgeon?
2) What am I legally required to disclose to the hospital and/or medical board?

I think if someone is on therapy and has a very low viral load, then chance of infecting a patient would be super duper low...even if he stuck himself with a needle, he'd have to then stick the patient, and very unlikely to infect them even if you did. I guess OP needs to consider the doomsday scenario of what if 15 years down the road, the HIV starts to progress and the viral load is higher...if in a noninvasive field like path/psych/rads/even most IM specialties could at least opt to keep practicing and not have to worry about being on shady ethical ground.

I would definitely consult and employment attorney before disclosing ANYTHING to the medical board or to your medical school or any hospital. And personally I would disclose only what is absolutely legally required. In most states, the medical license questions are worded in a way that you only have to disclose things that could reasonably affect patient care. I don't think HIV (that hasn't progressed to AIDS) with a presumably very low viral load would necessarily be required to be disclosed on medical license applications. Some states, like California, have MANY more and more detailed questions about various things, vs. other states which have less. There's a bit of subjectivity in decising what has to be disclosed as well...i.e. does someone have disclose minor depression that responded to an SSRI? how about a mild anxiety disorder, or EtOH problem 15 years ago that is not a current problem?
 
There is no clear answer, as others have stated. Still, a couple of things to think of:

1. Even though the chance of transmission from physician to patient is incredibly small, if it does happen you'll have to live with it.

2. IN the OR, people get poked by sharps frequently. It's not a daily occurance, but it happens to everyone. Often it's someone else being careless, or simply not knowing where your hands are.

Let's say the following happens:
A. Your hands are in the surgical field.
B. You are poked by a sharp in the field, held by someone else.
C. They withdraw the sharp (as expected).

Theoretically, the sharp with ? some of your blood on it was brought through the surgical field, and may have exposed the patient.

Would you need to disclose this to the patient? It's a tough question, but if the answer is yes, then your HIV status is not going to be secret for long.
 
There is no clear answer, as others have stated. Still, a couple of things to think of:

1. Even though the chance of transmission from physician to patient is incredibly small, if it does happen you'll have to live with it.

2. IN the OR, people get poked by sharps frequently. It's not a daily occurance, but it happens to everyone. Often it's someone else being careless, or simply not knowing where your hands are.

Let's say the following happens:
A. Your hands are in the surgical field.
B. You are poked by a sharp in the field, held by someone else.
C. They withdraw the sharp (as expected).

Theoretically, the sharp with ? some of your blood on it was brought through the surgical field, and may have exposed the patient.

Would you need to disclose this to the patient? It's a tough question, but if the answer is yes, then your HIV status is not going to be secret for long.

I have been an MD a grand total of two years, and have been poked twice. Once while putting in a a central line (my own fault), once in the OR (not my fault). I think it's silly to pretend like the risk to patients is low in a situation like this.

One would think that during the informed consent process with the patient, "Transmission of HIV from surgeon to patient" would have to be listed. How could it not be, given that it is intuitively far more likely than many of the other things we put down (like "death" for most elective procedures).

You better believe if I had an HIV+ surgeon, I would expect to be told, and if not, hello lawsuit.
 
To the poster: You may want to defer any commitment to pursue surgery as a career until you've done your 3rd year clerkships, which may solidify or weaken your interest in the field.

Surgery is a very interesting field, but so are many other facets of medicine. Yes, HIV is far from a death sentence and people live very long, healthy, productive lives nowadays. However, the training to become a surgeon is notoriously rigorous both physically and emotionally. The stress could have a profound impact on your body's ability to remain strong againt the disease. Moreover, the life of a surgeon is quite demanding even after residency. This could have grave implications on your longevity.

Also keep in mind that if you are in an immunocompromised state, being exposed to infectious diseases will remain a very dire occupational hazard.

Suppose your health deteriorates at some point in the midst of your career...what if you could no longer operate competently?

If you feel that being a surgeon is necessary to make you feel complete and satisfied in life, so be it. If you can see yourself being a different type of physician, you should really consider it.

If you're open to it, consider psychiatry/pathology/radiology/rad onc.
I am a psychiatry resident and, speaking on behalf of my specialty, you will find the field to be quite conducive to a less strenuous way of life. Also, you don't expose yourself to bodily fluids and have patients coughing on you while you auscultate and ask them to breathe in and out...by which I mean you will have a much lower, but not zero, risk of acquiring infectious diseases.

I commend your dedication to the field of medicine. No doubt, you understand the plight of a patient and have the potential of being a wonderful, empathic physician. But don't overlook your needs and your health when choosing your specialty. Best of luck to you.
 
had to do a project once on this i.e. the ethical dilemma of a HIV positive surgeon, surveys were done among patients and the vast majority of them (87%, out of 5000) said that they would in no circumstances allow a HIV positive Surgeon to operate on them and that if they found out after the fact they would be really anger and in one of their words - would loose all faith in the medical system. As an educated scientist I know that the risk of catching HIV is small but the majority of the public didn't care how small the risk was if it could be removed from the situation i.e. a different surgeon than it should. One of the few stories I could find about HIV positive surgeons was about Dr. William H. Behringer (nytimes article http://www.nytimes.com/1991/04/26/nyregion/new-jersey-judge-rules-surgeon-with-aids-must-tell-patients.html) It from back in 1991 but he was removed from his position and the judge said that a HIV positive surgeon must either inform their patients or stop surgery.
on the other hand recently in Israel allowed a HIV positive surgeon back into the OR and said that as long as he net certain conditions he didn't have to inform his patients (http://www.natap.org/2009/newsUpdates/010909_02.htm)
here is an article on a former surgeon who contracted HIV after he qualified
here is another story based in US (I think) http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2009/12/ccas1-0912.html
US examples
http://www2.aaos.org/aaos/archives/bulletin/oct98/legal.htm
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=4th&navby=case&no=941462P (legal implication)

having talked to surgeons they have said that before performing a surgery you do your best to reduce the risks, to me having a surgeon with HIV would be one of those risks.
Hep B and HIV should be treated the same way - I know if you want to apply for medical school in Ireland you are tested for Hep B and if you test positive you must make a commitment not to do invasive procedures and in many cases all surgery is included in this
It may not be politically correct but it would be my preference to know if the person operating on me had HIV and I would prefer to not have a surgeon with HIV operate on me.
there are however many other specialities to choose from.
good luck
 
OK, here is a question:

if a surgeon (doctor, nurse, etc) is expsoed to blood/tissue/etc from a patient potentially infected with HIV, what is the appropriate procedure for the medical professional? do they receive treatment at that point? I thought they did, but I could be wrong (been a decade since I had an interest in human medicine.)

If so, wouldn't that mean a patient that is ever exposed should also receive treatment? So then, will you reveal your status at that time, to enable the patient to obtain treatment?

I know personally I would be incredibly angry to find out post exposure if I felt it was preventable.
 
I think at this point, the OPs question has been answered adequately so unless the OP asks for more info, I'm not going to post further on this thread. Those who wish to discuss the pros and cons of HIV+ physicians in practice should consider starting a thread about it in the Topics in Healthcare forum.

thanks

Tildy, the SDN dog
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top