Do you think Doctors should be required to post a success/ fail report on their proceedures? Crap on Practice

Question

I think there should be a way to check these guys out. Quack Quack. I am referring to any and all proceedures to any and all ailments.

Answer 1

There are websites you can go to find out a particular doctor's track record. How many time he has been sued, sanctions leveled against him by the medical board. etc. Type in this subject matter in to your search engine, "doctor's credential/background information". There is one website who can provide info on all practicing physicians in the U.S. The cost I believe is $ 19.95/inquiry.

Answer 2

I don't think physicians should be required to report this. There are many reasons that procedures can fail or ailments cannot be cured or put into remission, and many of them have nothing to do with the competence of the physician. If all data pertinent to what you classify as "failure rates" were published, there may be a negative impact on public health. Some of the people reading the statistics may never go to any physician again, and therefore pass contagious disease that otherwise would be nipped in the bud by a visit to a physician. That being said, however, I do believe that the criteria for determining the revocation of a medical license due to true malpractice, unethical behavior, etc. is too loose and should be more stringent. There are too many serious cases where a license has not been revoked or a slap on the wrist has been given. I think at this point it would be best to encourage individuals to report all complaints to their local medical board AND to one of the independent locations accessible to the public, such as the Better Business Bureau. Also, there are a number of sites available on the Internet to log violations: Quackwatch.com seems to be the most utilized and has a section on how to obtain credentials and check for disciplinary actions on physicians. Also, you can contact your state medical board for information on disciplinary actions on physicians or the BBB in your area for complaints.

Answer 3

No because not all proceedures that succeed or fail are because of the doctors. A lot of operations fail because the patients' body rejects what is being done to it.

Because of this, a success/fail report wouldn't give an accurate acount of how good or how bad a doctor is.

Answer 4

Well, most docotrs do not have the time to be checked out. Three years of residency, 3 years of fellowship. After that, they work 5 days a week, hours depending on the hospital. Who would do these reports? Doctors have a hard enough time of it already!

Answer 5

If a center for heart operations gets referred the sickest and the oldest, because few others will try to help these people who are frail but but must have surgery -their statistics will look bad, but they may be one of the best. Try to ask as many as possible about a future doctor. Especially nurses or others who may have "inside" knowledge.

Answer 6

Of course not, and it's foolish to think that a doctor's expertise is the only thing that factors into the "success" of a surgery/operation--most of which the full realization of said "success" is not known until far down the road.

Answer 7

No, but I think they should be graded and evaluated by independent sources and thrown out if there work was not reliable. The only way that they could come back would be if they took more courses in the field and past another test.

Answer 8

You cannot check individual tests but you can check the doctors overall record on line.

Answer 9

Yes---they should--too many quack docs out there as it is.

Answer 10

Yes I do when you choose that doctor you are putting your life in his hands.