surg. oncology board certification

[bigkdawg161]

i was just wondering does anybody know if this is in the works? and if so about how far away are we from seeing this? also what has been the specific ideology behind this subspecialty not being officialy recognized by the ABMS?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Winged Scapula]

i was just wondering does anybody know if this is in the works? and if so about how far away are we from seeing this? also what has been the specific ideology behind this subspecialty not being officialy recognized by the ABMS?

Come to Phoenix for the annual SSO conference where we'll be discussing it! There are multiple subspecialties not recognized by the ABMS, Surg Onc is not alone in that regard. It is something that the SSO is working toward but I think any talk of when/dates is premature at this point.

If you are a pre-med interested in being BC in Surg Onc, you have MANY MANY years before even worrying about this.

 

[Pilot Doc]

what has been the specific ideology behind this subspecialty not being officialy recognized by the ABMS?

my guess

1) Many (?Most) trained sugical oncologists work in academic settings where their marketability would not be improved by another piece of paper.

2) Much (?Most) surgical cancer care in the US is performed by non-surg onc trained surgeons who would oppose creating a specialy that would degrade their own credentials

 

[Winged Scapula]

my guess

1) Many (?Most) trained sugical oncologists work in academic settings where their marketability would not be improved by another piece of paper.

2) Much (?Most) surgical cancer care in the US is performed by non-surg onc trained surgeons who would oppose creating a specialy that would degrade their own credentials

The latter of the two explanations is particularly cogent.

The American Board of Surgery is intent on retaining GENERAL Surgery and its training. It is not particularly interested in carving up the specialty any more than it already is, and many of the Surgical Oncology procedures are considered part and parcel of general surgery.

Furthermore, you can better believe there will be resistance from general surgeons around the country who find themselves taking more and more call, as the specialists take less and less. Many hospitals require anyone trained in general surgery, unless BC in another specialty, to take general surgery call. By increasing the number of BC subspecialists, we erode coverage for general surgery ED call. This is a real source of contention in the field.

 

[bigkdawg161]

Thanks a lot for your answers! I will be starting med school in the fall and surgery is a field that i have a definite interest in. An off topic question if you dont mind, how do you as a surgeon keep yourself up to date with the latest innovations both in technology and procedure-wise in your respective fields? As the job of any physician is to always provide the best care possible for his/her patients one definitely has to keep abreast of new developments. I guess this question applies more to those who have already finished a GS residency program and or fellowship. How do you in essence "learn" new techniques and new technology? Is this included in CME, and do you feel it is sufficient?

 

[Pilot Doc]

how do you as a surgeon keep yourself up to date with the latest innovations both in technology and procedure-wise in your respective fields?

If it's a lucrative procedure, you go to a weekend course held by industry. Then you start practicing on your patients so you can make money yourself.

If it's neither lucrative nor popular, you refer people who need it to the university hospital

If it's popular but not lucrative, you make sure that your golf buddies on the medical staff executive committee put up credentialing roadblocks to anybody who comes to town looking to perform said new procedure.

[/cynicism]

 

[droliver]

I'll go out on a limb and say that there will NEVER be a primary certificate for Surgical Oncology. It's more likely to maybe obtain CAQ (certificate of added qualifications)status. Even that may be problematic.

As was pointed out, Surgery has no interest in carving itself into tinier pieces as that does not serve the interests of the members of the Amer. College of Surgeons. IMO there really isn't a new for a board for this as prob. 99% of surg. oncology type cases across the board are treated by non-differentiated General Surgeons as is.