Urorads in Bloomberg News

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
good article... none of that is news, obviously
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Nice perspective.... They even discussed the transition to Urology-owned/partnered radiation facilities after the 90s ADT gold rush ended....
 
Agreed... nothing new to the rad onc community, but it's nice to see this starting to gain some traction in the lay media. I heard at ASTRO that Jean Mitchell is revising her manuscript. Hopefully it will be coming out soon in a high profile journal. I've been in DC the past two years for Advocacy Day and the message I kept hearing from my senators' and state rep's offices was "this is a problem, but it's such a small problem in the grand scheme of things that we can't move on it right now." Might forward this article to their offices...
 
That's a great idea, except doctors are the most cowardly people when it comes to shaming/outing their own. We all know doctors that we work with that commit malpractice nearly every time they touch the scalpel or turn on the beam, but have we ever called a meeting to sit down with them and the hospital privileging board? We just talk about how bad other doctors are behind their back and nothing changes. No way ASTRO will out any members for doing anything. Let me through down the gauntlet. This is an anonymous message board for many of you. Anyone name a radiation oncologist working for a urology owned facility. I'll collect the names, make the list and send it to ASTRO and see what they will do with it. But seriously, what about the guys that treat bone mets to 50 Gy/25 Fx? Shouldn't we be outing them? Physicians have a legendary tradition of not self policing and that's why we have all these federal regulators and bureaucrats up in our business in the first place.

Sorry .. In the real world, doctors don't shame doctors. Too much at stake (which typically doesn't include patient care).

And, yeah, I'm being a naysayer and not offering a solution. The legislative solution has no teeth (see Chesapeake Urology just operate away illegally), radiation oncologists that can't pass their boards or are very greedy need jobs and will do anything for one, and the urologists are much stronger and cannier than we are.

If we want to seriously screw them over, my idea would be for large academic centers to in large cities to go in together and put up linacs right next door to the urology facility, and then tell the insurers they will treat prostate patients for 1/2 the cost (somewhere around break even) and break their backs. MDACC/Baylor could do it in Houston. UPMC/Penn could do it in Pennsylvania. That would be fantastic, and the short term loss would be worth the pleasure of watching them go down in flames.

-S
 
I think we as a speciality need to stand up against those of our own who suport these centers. Urorads wouldn't exist if there were no rad oncs to staff such centers. While educating residents on the pitfall of these types of groups, I think ASTRO should take a stronger stand by:

1) Outting those rad oncs who join such groups in some form of publication and therefore letting it be known in our community who is really with us and who is in it only for themselves.

2) Putting out a stronger position statement that challenges urorads

3) working together so that when rad oncs who have staffed urorads centers come looking for new employment that they are not welcomed by groups

Its painfully clear that politicians have not and are unilkely to quickly and aggressively solve this problem. We have to police ourselves and go after those in our specialty who put profits ahead of patients.

What's your feeling on multi-specialty centers, where the rad onc provides professional services or co-owns the machine with urologists, heme/oncs etc.?
 
Top