<p>FWIW, I’ll add my anecdotal tidbit. I was put on BCPs as a freshman in high school because of ovarian cysts. Had surgery a couple of years later (lather, rinse, repeat off and on for the next two decades.) Went on HRT after a hyst/ooph. in my 30s. Only had abdominal ultrasounds when the doctor suspected something was amiss. Never had an ultrasound of my legs until a recent DVT scare. This sounds too much like someone trying to pay off debt on some expensive equipment.</p>
<p>I had the same thoughts as dietz. The long-term mess this improper (fraudulent?) coding can create could be quite deep.</p>
<p>I have been an OB/Gyn Nurse Practitioner for 26 years. I have never heard of either as routine standard care!</p>
<p>I’m in strong agreement with others who’ve suggested this this procedure is being ‘required’ because it’s paying off the cost of this very expensive equipment.</p>
<p>Anecdotal comment: my midwife strongly encouraged her clients to visit a center that focused on sonograms instead of going to a doctor’s office. The reason for this is that a center that only goes sonograms will have the best equipment. A doctor’s office will have either new equipment that he had charge top dollar for to cover his (very high) cost or it’s old (but paid for) equipment. </p>
<p>My 2 cents: find another doctor.</p>
<p>If looking for ovarian cancer, there is a blood test that would be cheaper.</p>
<p>Please note, though, that there is NO early screening test for ovarian cancer that is considered standard. Not at this time. See the National Cancer Institute’s website for more information.</p>
<p>^^ agreeing with absweeetmarie. I have a family history of ovarian cancer, and can tell you that a simple ovarian ultrasound is not a reliable diagnostic tool for ovca. It needs to be paired with a CA-125 test (which I believe is the test ThatMom suggests, which isn’t necessarily cheaper and is notoriously unreliable), and even that combination isn’t terribly reliable. Frankly, if there were a good test for ovarian cancer the death rate would drop dramatically. Found early (Stage 1) it’s 90% “curable.” Found at stage 3 or later, the odds go well below 50%. And since it has very few symptoms in the early stages, and the symptoms it does have are usually digestive, it is only diagnosed at stage 1 or 2 about 20% of the time.</p>
<p>Both I and my D have been on the pill at various times in our lives and have never had an ultrasound of the legs.</p>
<p>I think this has a lot more to do with your doctor owning her own ultrasound machine and making some $$$ than it does with good preventative medicine.</p>
<p>never had either of those procedures done or even mentioned by my gyn .</p>
<p>Reminds me of that doctor who tried to make my dad get two stomach probe thingies (only know the name in chinese… but they stick a camera down your throat and you are knocked out with anesthetics) within one month… We switched doctors immediately…</p>
<p>Those procedures sound really pricey… prolly a fraud trying to cheat insurance companies.</p>
<p>I’ve been on birth control since I was about 14 (I’m 21). This has never been standard procedure. Sadly, sounds like it’s all about the money.</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>Perhaps if there is a history of some sort of issue…but what insurance company would pay for this type of testing “just because”?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The only thing along those lines I’ve had done ‘over 40’ (it was done last spring when I was WELL over 40) was a transvaginal ultrasound to measure the uterine lining (but not the ovaries) My gyne ordered it for baseline purposes as she was considering starting me on BHRT.</p>
<p>I have an absolute nervous nellie of an OB/GYN (twice-weekly ultrasounds and stress tests and lots of other tests for my last pregnancy starting at 26 weeks, but it was high risk). At my annuals before and since then, she has NEVER suggested these and the practice has a pretty good ultrasound, so if it was standard, you can bet she would do it. High dollar area here too…</p>
<p>My daughteR had the ultra sound. It wasn’t expensive and it was to give a baseline of what is her normal</p>
<p>That “baseline of what is her normal” seems to me to be a bunch of hooey in some cases. Especially when it involves something like x-ray exposure. </p>
<p>Last time I heard that phrase was when D1 was a couple of weeks old and we had to take her into the local children’s hospital for “hip clicks”. The hospital where she was born heard them, and had us take her in when she was a couple of weeks old for a check. The doctor at the children’s hospital didn’t hear any clicks, but he was insistent on taking an x-ray right through her hip/genital area “for a baseline” in case she had to come back for something later. We said no, and got a note in our chart as “obstructionist parents”. My first act of helicoptoring, now that I think about it. :D</p>
<p>1.no
2.no
seriously this is very odd</p>
<p>I asked my H, a physician and he said this procedure is not indicated.
He also said BCP decreases the incidence of ovarian cancer so there’s no reason for pelvic ultrasound.</p>
<p>Another younger female on birth control, and definitely no ultrasounds here. They just require the normal annual checkup sort of stuff, and strongly encourage a chlamydia test.</p>
<p>As an RN (and also female over 40 on BCP) …I have never heard of this practice and know for certain that is is not “standard procedure”.<br>
My biggest concern at this point would be what several others have mentioned…if your insurance is covering these tests on an annual basis, your MD is obviously coding a diagnosis that you and your daughter do not have (per your report of no health problems or family histories) In this day and age of insurance reform and denials I would be very concerned about future “pre-existing condition” issues or increased insurance premiums…Request a copy of all your records from that MD so you can see what is being recorded in your chart…and I would find a new MD for future visits/care.</p>
<p>No and no.</p>