Why so many follow ups PRIOR to treatment?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

RadOncDoc21

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2010
Messages
3,502
Reaction score
6,333
I currently work with a group of Med Oncs who would see a patient 4-5 times for labs, imaging, etc in regards to workup for a known malignancy. Unfortunately, by the time I see them, staging workup is usually not completed 1-2 months out from diagnosis. However, I'm being rushed to start treatment right away. The same for spinal cord compression, why is it an emergency on Friday when the patient was admitted on Sunday?

I promise I am not trying to start trouble but had to ask for my understanding.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Some oncologists (mostly in small private groups where they see a gazillion patients a day) don't spend enough time in the first visit to make good plans and think things through. Any new cancer diagnosis is worth at least a 60 minute initial visit IMHO to know everything about the case, explain things to the patient, make a good plan to obtain all the imaging/biopsies that you need and maybe making some phone calls to get all the consults (radonc, surgery, IR...etc) input before starting treatment.

But if you only spend 5-10 minutes barely looking at the case because you have 35 other patients to see, you will find yourself bringing him/her back and forth for another test/CT scan/ Brain MRI/ let's biopsy that node/oops we didn't order an echo/let's ask pathology to add this stain/oh you haven't seen radonc yet?! let's have them see you/surgery didn't comment on this or that, let's get their input again ....etc

So unless it's an ultra complicated case, bringing the patient back and forth for 1-2 months to complete staging/work up is a work of a lousy oncologist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Members don't see this ad :)
I thought that it went without saying, but 99204+2(99214) >>>99205.

I take a soaking every quarter at bonus time because I think that is bullsh*t.

But feel free to come back and tell us more about how horrible we are when you give up your weekly or semi-weekly "on treatment" visits.
 
I thought that it went without saying, but 99204+2(99214) >>>99205.

I take a soaking every quarter at bonus time because I think that is bullsh*t.

But feel free to come back and tell us more about how horrible we are when you give up your weekly or semi-weekly "on treatment" visits.


If it's about billing, I can compromise... Maybe I can see the patient earlier in the process, recommend or order some of the workup myself. I could even implement some sort of chart rounds where we discuss all the new patients that may require radiation. I just feel bad when I have to "stall" a definitive modality for something that could have been done already if somebody would have just pulled up NCCN guidelines!

I'm in a private group and understand some of the challenges in regards to billing and reimbursements, but I can not accept wasting time on a ticking time bomb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If it's about billing, I can compromise... Maybe I can see the patient earlier in the process, recommend or order some of the workup myself. I could even implement some sort of chart rounds where we discuss all the new patients that may require radiation. I just feel bad when I have to "stall" a definitive modality for something that could have been done already if somebody would have just pulled up NCCN guidelines!
The billing thing was a joke...sort of.

So go ahead and do some of the workup. Nobody's going to get butthurt if you order the PET scan instead of them. Or go to tumor board (or start one). Or call you

I'm in a private group and understand some of the challenges in regards to billing and reimbursements, but I can not accept wasting time on a ticking time bomb.
I hate this type of talk (and I hear it all the time, usually from pulm and surgery). Unless it's cord compression, symptomatic brain mets or SVC syndrome (none of which you need a med onc to help with), there aren't any emergencies that can't wait a couple of days/weeks to get the appropriate workup done.
 
I'm guessing with chemotherapy it doesn't matter if the disease is localized or not. I would like to catch it before it gets to that.
 
I'm guessing with chemotherapy it doesn't matter if the disease is localized or not. I would like to catch it before it gets to that.
Of course it matters. But if a met pops up in 1 week, it was already there, you just didn't know about it.

Again, almost nothing in oncology moves so fast that a 1-2w delay in starting treatment (other than what I mentioned above) will make a difference one way or another.
 
It is very common where I work where it takes several visits before a patient is "squared away", and then finally sees us, and then someone is breathing down my throat to get me start the imrt head and neck plan, while it took 6 weeks to get everything together. For example saw someone today that had weight loss of 40 lbs and jaundice in early February, CT scan showing pancreatic mass in early in February. Bx happened in mid February. Referral to medonc and surgery in late February. Pet ct in early March. Referral to local med onc, who then delayed by ordering an MRI (was already deemed unresectable by CT showing encasement of celiac). Now, I see the patient.

I will easily admit I have more time than my med onc colleagues, and would certainly see the patient asap and do the work up myself, but there is butt hurt - people feel like we are stepping on toes or trying to take over. Not the case. Most of us just complete the NCCN guided work up, and it's typically not done: There are enough lymphomas that I have to send back to med onc for a BM bx (only when indicated), or order an MRI of brain for a stage III NSCLC, because the med onc ordered a CT scan. I get a referral for a gallbladder cancer treated by simple chole, and have to be the one to refer to a surgical oncologist for radical resection/partial hepatic resection. There are enough early stage 3 lung cancer patients and even some stage 2s that see me before seeing a surgeon, and I'm pressed to start chemoRT.

I assure you it's not because the medonc is dumb or lazy. It's the sheer numbers of patients they see. But, the referral typically comes late and incomplete and then I get pressured to start treatment asap.

Gutonc- you're clearly knowledgeable and respected on the board. If you aren't sending folks to us asap, give it a try. The average radonc sees 5-10 consults a week and has a lot more time get everything going.

But, not pinning this on medonc. The surgeon or whoever diagnosed the patient can always consult us early, but they typically go thorough med onc first, and everything then can get delayed, because, honestly, I've seen med onc clinics. So many patients; so little time. These poor guys don't leave the clinic until 7p and still don't have time to get everything done.

RadOnc doc is not pinning this on a particular specialty. We see this constantly. It's a systems problem, not one doctor. I think if the world of oncology could see us as equals rather than a technician, we could really help streamline things, and take a great burden off of the med onc, who does hero's work (no sarcasm, at all)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Gutonc- you're clearly knowledgeable and respected on the board. If you aren't sending folks to us asap, give it a try. The average radonc sees 5-10 consults a week and has a lot more time get everything going.
I'm fortunate enough to work in a system where 90% or more of the consults I get are completely (or nearly so) worked up by the time they get to me, and to you. And we're typically seeing these folks the same day. Maybe the MRI brain or the triple phase CT is pending, but in general the workup is done.

And that 10% of the time? I've got my Rad Oncs on speed dial...or I'll just run downstairs. Waiting more than an hour to talk to one of them means they're on vacation.

Sorry that you and ROD21 work in such s***ty systems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top