Home Contact

<< BACK

Residency Rap

Standard of Care ?

by Jarrod Shapiro, DPM
PRESENT Resident Editor
Botsford General Hospital
Farmington Hills, MI

Good day again fellow residents. I hope everyone is doing well, especially you seniors with your job search. A quick reminder to the chief residents to send in your responses for the Chief Resident Round Table. I’ll give you another two weeks to respond. As a reminder the questions are as follows:

  • What is it like to be a chief resident at your program?

  • What are some of the dynamics of the residents and attendings you work with?

  • How many residents are in your program?

  • How do you stay organized while balancing your personal time and work?

  • What’s your educational/didactic program like?

  • Do you think being chief offers an advantage when looking for jobs?

  • Do you receive any extra financial or other compensations?

  • What do you like and dislike about the position?

  • What hints or tips do have for future chief residents?

It’s finally starting to warm up here in Michigan, which puts me in a spring mood after returning from the ACFAS conference in Las Vegas. Speaking of the conference, I noticed an underlying theme that ran through the lectures. It started with the debates I mentioned in the prior Rap issue and continued during the conference, insinuating itself into my thoughts during workshops and later lectures. This isn’t a new idea. Indeed, during our residencies this topic comes up every day when we discuss both conservative and surgical treatments. This underlying current is standard of care.

I know; you’re thinking, “So what? This isn’t new. What bug got up Shapiro’s butt?” Here’s my bug: there just is NO true standard of care. I’d say this is pretty important concept in medicine considering the current litigious state of our society, and all of us (not only the seniors) will be dealing with it soon enough.

You might argue standard of care does exist, and it is based on what the average doc in the community performs. Or is it the state? Or perhaps the current trends in the specialty? But who decides these “current trends?” Is it local? Is it national? Some of our best national speakers are doing edge-of-the-envelope work, outside of what the average podiatrist does. Should this be standard of care? Performing a McBride for just about all bunions was standard of care before our “current trend” of metatarsal osteotomies and structural correction. Within your own communities, even your own residency programs, I’ll bet you can find many different ways of approaching the same pathologies or procedures, with little consensus. As residents we have a unique perspective on this, seeing many ways to approach the same problem. Take Stage II PTTD, for instance. How many ways are there to skin this cat? Does anyone agree how to treat this?

And what about the lawyers out there, just waiting to demolish the “rich doctor.” God forbid you perform outside of the “standard of care,” and you have a complication. How do we protect ourselves from these vultures? And where do the ACFAS clinical practice guidelines fit in to all this? In my opinion these guidelines are a good start, but they’re so vague they don’t really say anything.

I’m generating more questions than I can answer, but here’s my take on this. The current evidence based medicine movement will, in the future, assist in providing somewhat standardized treatments, borne out through effective research. This will take some time, though, because our research, especially the surgical side, is not where it needs to be. Once this is established, then the clinical practice guidelines will have some teeth. For now we have to do what’s best for our patients using our superior training, experience, and continued education. However, I actually think “standard of care” is a fallacy because there are often many legitimate ways to treat the same problem. If you get 10 podiatrists in a room and ask them what procedure is best for bunions you’ll probably get 11 different answers!

What’s your opinion? Is standard of care real, a pipe dream, or fodder for the lawyers? Write in with your views.

As with all PRESENT publications, all issues of Residency Rap will be stored on the PRESENT  website, so if you miss an issue or you want to refer back to a prior issue, it'll be at:

http://www.podiatricresidency.com/residencyrap/

Talk to me,

Jarrod Shapiro, DPM
PRESENT Resident Editor
jarrod@podiatry.com


From:         Philip Wrotslavsky DPM
                     North General Hospital
                     New York

Subject:    ACFAS Award for Case Study

It would be interesting for you to discuss the fact that as a scientific organization the award for best poster was given to a case study.  Where's the scientific method that we are looking for?  I saw 7 posters that had studies involving over 75 patients.  Also, my friends and I found that the abstract winners were rewarded more for their names than their content. I recall quite clearly that with two winners their studies were not even surgically oriented.  I thought I was at an ACFAS conference, not the APMA. If we want respect from other fields in science we must hold ours to the highest standards, especially when it comes to scientific studies (let’s see how many of these posters and abstracts are published in JFAS in the next year or so).

Philip Wrotslavsky DPM
drphilipw@msn.com
North General Hospital
New York


Editor's Response

Unfortunately I can’t comment too much on your accusations. As I didn’t contribute a poster or manuscript I don’t think it would be appropriate for me to comment. However, I can say that I was very impressed at the overall quality of the posters. Case presentations do tend to be the most common type of research submitted to journals, regardless of medical specialty. Of course, that doesn’t preclude us from doing other high quality work. I would argue, though, that from the resident standpoint there is a ceiling on the level of work. In a three year program you can’t possibly perform a prospective randomized controlled study with a legitimate follow-up period. Additionally, some of our procedures aren’t performed often enough to have large cohorts within a resident’s time frame. As far as surgical orientation: if they’re good studies, why can’t they win? Being part of ACFAS doesn’t mean we cut on every patient that walks through the door. I’d like to hear what other attendees at the conference thought. Do you agree with Philip? Did you see an unfair trend in the winners? Write in.

- Jarrod

 

GRAND SPONSOR

This program is supported by an
educational grant from
Ameripath/Dermpath Diagnostics

MAJOR SPONSORS
 
 
Online Demo

PRESENT gives you the opportunity to see our system in action in this online demo.

 

Sign up now and receive the latest news and info from PRESENT. Perfect for all doctors that offer a residency program.

Testimonial

PRESENT has given me the help I need to run my practice AND a residency program!

Dr. Robert Smith, DPM
© 2005 PRESENT. All rights reserved.