<p>Oh, my. Frustrating. The colleague of the original referring doctor called me back (finally) and, bottom line, tried to convince me that the first guy was correct, etc. </p>
<p>I’m sure he was correct in terms of his treatment plan for MOST people, but, I’m not MOST people. The entire conversation was a waste of time but I did at least manage to remember to use some of it to confirm that the doctor that I now want to use has a good reputation. </p>
<p>The remaining “but wait” issue in my mind is that the first oncologist’s practice group is bigger, has more resources, etc. </p>
<p>I’m not about to change my mind - just the thought of being this man’s patient is terrifying, considering his atttitude, but, specific to oncologists, does anyone here think that a two-doctor practice is inferior or less capable and competent than a ten-doctor practice?</p>
<p>Good for you. My Dad had a solo practice of 25 years, after he retired from public service. He said he couldn’t work with other doctors because they never gave enough time to their patients. He was a FP. He referred a lot of patients out but rarely got referrals because was he was solo. </p>
<p>LTS: I think the continuity of care you get from a two-Dr. team can be a great plus. I believe large teams lose the nuances one or two Dr.s can pick up. I also believe they spend more of their free time thinking of your case than if you saw someone every 6 or 7 visits. Go with your gut instinct. It appears to have worked for you in the past :)</p>
<p>As an aside, I don’t believe you have any idea of the # of people you have touched in a positve way on this thread. It boggles the mind. You have influenced me, at a difficult time, to be more proactive and champion my own cause and I thank you.</p>
<p>LTS, of course the original referring doctor is invested in defending the correctness of his referral. I’m not saying that he is a bad person, but most people are reluctant to admit a mistake, even to themselves. This large practice lumps you into the “palliative” category based on incomplete information, and at least the doctor you saw was not up-to-date on currently available medication in his field. The guy in the two-person practice passed those two tests, and is treating you as a “go for a cure” patient. Also consider that the two-person practice may be small because they want to be more nimble in tailoring treatments based on individual situations and the most recent advances. The larger practice could very well be driven by what insurance companies want to have done (of course I have no way of knowing this, but it is a possibility). Do not second-guess yourself on this any more.</p>
<p>LTS,
think in general of what happens in any type of practice, medical or legal or any service organization, like a small library vs a large library. As entities get bigger, they get more organized. So, that may be exactly why you got the vibes you did. Those 10 doctors have more partners to answer to… more partners and assistants to help feed…hence the “I have to stop talking to you now as I have more patients to see.” They are scheduled by others…and they have to keep their schedule. The smaller 2 person practice enables the 2 doctors to pass a baton more easily to one another. Perhaps it allows them the latitude to explore their medical interests and hence stay more current because they are not feeding a bigger staffing system? </p>
<p>Remember, you also do not have to view this decision as one that is final for all time. Choosing this smaller practice now will help to address your current needs. At some point, if you need the resources of a larger office, then you will seek or get referred to those skills. That is my gut reaction to this new decision point.</p>
<p>Sax, on my desk is a photograph, personally signed by the four star general who is standing beside me in the pose. We are shaking hands and smiling for the photographers, and he is thanking me for a business matter I executed that significantly helped his operation, which is mostly in conflict areas around the world. There is a huge, beautiful American flag in the background, and we are standing in a facility that very few civilians will ever see. </p>
<p>In this picture I am dressed in one of my best suits; I am smiling; I am standing tall and proud, my hair is long - not this hair I wear today that once grew on someone else’s head, but MY hair. In this photograph, I am at the top of my game in career and in life; I am winning, I am very, very happy. I can even remember the thoughts that went through my head as the cameras flashed: this is just the beginning. There is so much more to come; how endlessly interesting and excited. I am so lucky. </p>
<p>Can you imagine that within ten business days of this photograph I was diagnosed. </p>
<p>I want very badly to again be the person in the photograph. I want to again shake hands with four star generals and know that my body of work is impactive and significant in the world, and that there is a future. I keep this photograph on my desk so that I never, ever forget how it felt to stand on the summit, if only for a few days…</p>
<p>This thread is a two way street in that it is a huge part of what supports me and helps me fight to get back to being that winning person in the photograph. This is a very, very difficult thing to endure - far harder than I ever could have imagined - and requires enormous energy, spirit and willpower to fight. It is requiring every resource I have. Thank heavens the moderators continue to permit this thread, considering it has nothing to do with college. The links from Epistrophy help a great deal, and all of your posts, survivor stories, stories of hope and human triumph and - especially the prayers - help me more than I can ever express.</p>
<p>I am so lucky to have all of you; I worry greatly for the too many people who lack the resources to fight this and other serious diseases.</p>
<p>Also remember that principle of accountability being divided amongs those involved… I’d rather have 2 MDs who both feel 50% accountability for me and 10, each of whom has 10% accountability. When I gave birth I specifically picked a solo practitioner trying to avoid delivery day personnel surprises.</p>
<p>That’s just instinct on my part, so there may be other reasons that override this that those with more experience can name…</p>
<p>LTS, you <em>are</em> that person, this minute, and it shines from everything you say. You may not <em>feel</em> like her, but you ARE her. We can hold that vision of you until you recapture it for yourself.</p>
<p>Honest to goodness LTS, after almost ten years of short hair, I am growing it long again inspired in many ways by your stories and statements. Of course, there are my own personal complexity and life issues behind it too:), but I swear the picture of you that I have seen often here in this thread and your pre-diagnosis threads has been part of my decision.</p>
<p>Seems small maybe, but in fact given my story it is significant. You are having an impact on all of us in many ways.</p>
<p>LTS,
You, too are a general. Marshalling your resources, commanding the troops, boosting OUR morale when the days are tough. Photoshop some stars on your shoulders in the picture. You have earned them. <3</p>
Not at all. My own oncologist’s practice (and my oncologist is one of the named “best of” in the particular field in my large metropolitan area) is a two-doctor practice and over the past year I have never even seen the other doctor (other than in the waiting area when he comes in to escort a patient back to his office), always my own. I guess I would only see the other doctor if some crisis came up while my own oncologist was out of town. So IMO it is the particular doctor that matters, not the size of the practice.</p>
<p>P.S. I also prefer the small size of the practice and office – even the office staff seems to take a personal interest in each patient. This is a minor point – confidence in and compatibility with your doctor are most important, IMO, but it is something that has factored into the whole experience for me.</p>
<p>In any event, LTS, I say go with your “gut” judgment, which is certainly backed up by your very competent and detailed research. There is no need to doubt yourself now IMO. I am so impressed by how you have been able to proactively pursue alternatives following frustrating debacles without missing a beat.</p>
<p>LTS: Thank you for sharing your moment in time and your hopes for your future. ( I have written about 12 different paragraphs for this spot but cannot seem to post one as none of them come close to describing what I want to convey to you.I am sure this is the same for many posters.)</p>
<p>I love what SBmom had to say and I can only add that you are in all of our prayers every single day…and believe me those are fighting prayers!</p>
<p>When my SIL had a cerebral aneurysm, she had to shave her hair. Post-op, she took the opportunity to try different wigs, in different styles and in different colors, too, until her natural auburn hair grew back. So, think of this time as an experimental time–not just in terms of treatment but hair fashion :)</p>
<p>Oh, my. This just couldn’t get any more frustrating. You’re going to think I’m making this up just for drama but - I have on my desk reports from healthglades. com that say the newest doctor has three separate disciplinary actions against him. There appear to be two separate incidents of allowing unlicensed staff to issue chemotherapy, failing to have a safe and sterile area to administer chemotherapy, and, one incident of failing report the disciplinary action to a medical board (???). These are in 2005, 2006, 2007. Very recent, not good. It looks as if it says the Board has (sequentially) issued a censure, a reprimand, and then a public reprimand. Is there a physician here who can tell me what these things are, and, (even though it should be obvious), how serious these things are? </p>
<p>I’m confused though because it shows three different license numbers for him, and, it doesn’t say who is the accusing entity. I’ve sent inquiry back to the reporting service, asking for explanation. I’m willing this not to be so…of course, the oncologist I cannot stand the sight of has a spotless record… </p>
<p>Oh well, at least I got ONE good night’s sleep.</p>
<p>Well…maybe, but if so, it’s inappropriate, allowing unlicensed individuals to administer chemotherapy, that’s very bad…that’s a little different than examining documented research and saying yes let’s try this chemo…of course, I do not have to worry about THIS part of it as my chemo will happen in the local hospital’s oncology infusion center, but still…this is troubling…</p>
<p>hang on, hang on. Try to wait until you hear back from the reporting service. I can only imagine that a medical professional who seeks to push out the boundaries of what can be done will encounter difficulties. I don’t know what’s up with the “unlicensed individuals” to administer treatment, but maybe there’s some technicality that we are missing here?? I hate for you to let these unknowns (at this point) get in the way…</p>
<p>Ask the Dr. directly face to face. You are a successul business woman w/sharp people skills. I would think you could pick out a bull *****ter in a heartbeat. Then see how his answers look when you find out more outside info.</p>
<p>An MD should have only one license number from a given state. Are there multiple MD’s with the same name? Can you find any useful information on this site? (If his practice is in Maryland. Virginia and DC should have similar sites):</p>