CREDENTIALING ISSUES IN EMERGENCY ULTRASONOGRAPHY - 10/09/11
Resumen |
Emergency medicine has incorporated many techniques borrowed from other specialties into its armamentarium. These include the use of paralytic agents for emergency airway management, anesthetic medications for conscious sedation, proctoscopy and sigmoidoscopy, slit-lamp examination, and fiberoptic laryngoscopy. Conflicts over who should perform and bill for procedures have resulted from crossing specialty boundaries. The current debate over the use of ultrasonography by emergency physicians is another example of such a battle.
Few would disagree that patients believed to have an acute pericardial effusion, an abdominal aortic aneurysm, free peritoneal fluid, or an ectopic pregnancy should have access to ultrasonography. This diagnostic modality has the potential to confirm or exclude these diagnoses accurately, rapidly, and inexpensively, regardless of the time of day the patient presents to the emergency department. As the number of ultrasound technologists and radiologists are insufficient to provide widespread availability of ultrasonography 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, there is a strong impetus for emergency physicians to provide this service.8
In 1990, the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) published a position statement supporting the availability of diagnostic ultrasonography 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and that emergency ultrasonography should be performed by appropriately trained physicians, including emergency physicians.1 A similar statement was passed by the Society of Academic Emergency Physicians (SAEM).19
El texto completo de este artículo está disponible en PDF.Esquema
| Address reprint requests to Richard Lanoix, MD, 210 West 107 Street, Apt 4D, New York, NY 10025 |
Vol 15 - N° 4
P. 913-920 - novembre 1997 Regresar al númeroBienvenido a EM-consulte, la referencia de los profesionales de la salud.
El acceso al texto completo de este artículo requiere una suscripción.
¿Ya suscrito a @@106933@@ revista ?
