Healing well.com
Aug. 16, 2014
"I always wonder why they take pictures during colonoscopy but don't record on cd/DVD? If they do then if we go for second opinion, we won't have to go through colonoscopy again. May be something to ask."
The colonoscopy video is recorded on the hard drive. They don't want to give you a copy, so they claim it isn't recorded
v.
But your point is excellent. It's also obvious that they would need the recording to defend themselves in court if the patient develops colon cancer.
Apparently most patients don't think this through, so the medics get away with telling this silly story about colonoscopy videos not being recorded.
I think most doctors would give the video recording to another doctor; they just won't give it to you.
Showing posts with label souvenir DVD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label souvenir DVD. Show all posts
Saturday, August 16, 2014
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
Unconscious patient's cell phone captures doctors mocking him during colonoscopy
See all posts on colonoscopies.
Unconscious patient's cell phone captures doctors mocking him during colonoscopy.
Sarah Fruchtnicht
Opposingviews.com
22 Apr 2014
A Virginia man is suing after his cell phone captured audio of doctors allegedly mocking him while he was under anesthesia for a colonoscopy.
The plaintiff, D.B., says doctors joked about firing a gun up his rectum and accused him of having STDs during his medical procedure.
"On April 18, 2013, during a colonoscopy, plaintiff was verbally brutalized and defamed by the very doctors to whom he entrusted his life while under anesthesia," the complaint says.
D.B. sued Safe Sedation LLC and Safe Sedation Management in Fairfax County Court for defamation, infliction of emotional distress and illegally disclosing his health records.
The patient said he left his phone on and recorded everything on accident. When he later drove home with his wife, they discovered the recording.
The doctors, Tiffany Ingham and Soloman Shah, are not named as defendants but are accused of mocking D.B. as soon as the anesthetic knocked him out.
"Tiffany Ingham, M.D. started to mock, and then continued to mock, the amount of medicine required to anesthetize plaintiffs," the complaint states. "Referring to plaintiff, Soloman Shah, M.D. commented that a teaching physician known to both him and Tiffany Ingham, M.D. 'would eat him for lunch.'
"Tiffany Ingham, M.D. agreed that plaintiff would be 'eaten alive' and also jokingly discussed a hypothetical of firing a gun up a rectum," it says.
"And really, after five minutes of talking to you in pre-op I wanted to punch you in the face and man you up a little bit," Ingham allegedly said to the patient while he was under.
Doctors allegedly discussed D.B.'s prescription medication and an irritation he had on his penis. v "A medical assistant at GMA touched plaintiff's penis during the colonoscopy," the complaint states. "Although plaintiff's penis is not involved in a colonoscopy, the medical assistant noted there was not 'much of a penile rash.' Tiffany Ingham, M.D. responded, 'No, you'll accidentally rub up against it. Some syphilis on your arm or something.' Solomon Shah, M.D. responded, 'That would be bad. That would be real bad.'"
"Tiffany Ingham, M.D. then stated to all present in the operating suite that, 'It's probably tuberculosis in the penis, so you'll be all right.'"
The lawsuit notes that the plaintiff has neither disease.
In a final remark on tape, Ingham allegedly said she would make a note in D.B.'s file that he had hemorrhoids even though he didn't.
He's seeking $1 million in compensatory damages and $350,000 in punitive damages. COMMENTS
No need to anesthetize everyone
By: Publicgood
I did just fine during my colonoscopy with no anesthesia at all. I think doctors who anesthetize all patients are doing it for the same reason that they refuse to allow patients to have a DVD of the procedure: they don't want to listen to patient's questions either during the procedure or later on.
Colonoscopy souvenir DVDs
By: Publicgood
I am shocked that doctors across the US have stopped providing DVDs of colonoscopies in response to medical records requests. It's okay that they don't automatically give souvenir DVDs, but it's not okay to violate the law regarding patient's rights to access to their medical records. Doctors even claim that it's a cost-cutting measure; this is obviously false since digital memory is getting cheaper by the month and has always been cheaper and more compact than the VHS tapes on which colonoscopies used to be saved.
Unconscious patient's cell phone captures doctors mocking him during colonoscopy.
Sarah Fruchtnicht
Opposingviews.com
22 Apr 2014
A Virginia man is suing after his cell phone captured audio of doctors allegedly mocking him while he was under anesthesia for a colonoscopy.
The plaintiff, D.B., says doctors joked about firing a gun up his rectum and accused him of having STDs during his medical procedure.
"On April 18, 2013, during a colonoscopy, plaintiff was verbally brutalized and defamed by the very doctors to whom he entrusted his life while under anesthesia," the complaint says.
D.B. sued Safe Sedation LLC and Safe Sedation Management in Fairfax County Court for defamation, infliction of emotional distress and illegally disclosing his health records.
The patient said he left his phone on and recorded everything on accident. When he later drove home with his wife, they discovered the recording.
The doctors, Tiffany Ingham and Soloman Shah, are not named as defendants but are accused of mocking D.B. as soon as the anesthetic knocked him out.
"Tiffany Ingham, M.D. started to mock, and then continued to mock, the amount of medicine required to anesthetize plaintiffs," the complaint states. "Referring to plaintiff, Soloman Shah, M.D. commented that a teaching physician known to both him and Tiffany Ingham, M.D. 'would eat him for lunch.'
"Tiffany Ingham, M.D. agreed that plaintiff would be 'eaten alive' and also jokingly discussed a hypothetical of firing a gun up a rectum," it says.
"And really, after five minutes of talking to you in pre-op I wanted to punch you in the face and man you up a little bit," Ingham allegedly said to the patient while he was under.
Doctors allegedly discussed D.B.'s prescription medication and an irritation he had on his penis. v "A medical assistant at GMA touched plaintiff's penis during the colonoscopy," the complaint states. "Although plaintiff's penis is not involved in a colonoscopy, the medical assistant noted there was not 'much of a penile rash.' Tiffany Ingham, M.D. responded, 'No, you'll accidentally rub up against it. Some syphilis on your arm or something.' Solomon Shah, M.D. responded, 'That would be bad. That would be real bad.'"
"Tiffany Ingham, M.D. then stated to all present in the operating suite that, 'It's probably tuberculosis in the penis, so you'll be all right.'"
The lawsuit notes that the plaintiff has neither disease.
In a final remark on tape, Ingham allegedly said she would make a note in D.B.'s file that he had hemorrhoids even though he didn't.
He's seeking $1 million in compensatory damages and $350,000 in punitive damages. COMMENTS
No need to anesthetize everyone
By: Publicgood
I did just fine during my colonoscopy with no anesthesia at all. I think doctors who anesthetize all patients are doing it for the same reason that they refuse to allow patients to have a DVD of the procedure: they don't want to listen to patient's questions either during the procedure or later on.
Colonoscopy souvenir DVDs
By: Publicgood
I am shocked that doctors across the US have stopped providing DVDs of colonoscopies in response to medical records requests. It's okay that they don't automatically give souvenir DVDs, but it's not okay to violate the law regarding patient's rights to access to their medical records. Doctors even claim that it's a cost-cutting measure; this is obviously false since digital memory is getting cheaper by the month and has always been cheaper and more compact than the VHS tapes on which colonoscopies used to be saved.
Want a souvenir DVD of your colonoscopy? So did I.
Update June 13, 2014 : If UCSD were telling the truth about not having enough room on its hard disk to save digital colonoscopies, then it would have all the more reason to provide DVDs of the procedure. UCSD wouldn't allow me to pay extra to get my colonoscopy saved.
When I got my colonoscopy yesterday (at somewhere other than UCSD), the doctor showed me the small device for recording DVDs that attaches to the colonoscopy machine.
"How much did that cost?" I asked.
"Two hundred dollars," he said. "But you can get it for $150 on E-bay."
Ahem, UCSD? Do you want to stick to your story that prohibitive cost is the reason you (allegedly) don't save digital colonoscopies?
See all posts re UCSD.
I was scheduled for a routine colonoscopy at UCSD last month. Nothing controversial about that, right?
I had had a bizarre experience at Kaiser three years ago when I paid Kaiser $10 for a DVD of the digital video of my VUCG (or "VCUG"). Then suddenly the radiology imaging department claimed that there were no digital images of the procedure--even though the X-rays were done at the brand new Garfield Specialty Center advertised as having all-digital X-rays. Kaiser said that it only had a few odd thermal paper images of the June 15, 2011 procedure.
So naturally I wanted to make sure that the same thing wouldn't happen at UCSD. A couple of days before my colonoscopy I called to make sure that I would be able to get a DVD of the procedure.
UCSD's gastroenterology department told me that they don't save any of the digital data generated during colonoscopies.
This is what UCSD claims:
1. The patient can't get a second opinion from any doctor who wasn't watching the computer monitor during the procedure.
2. UCSD is very vulnerable to lawsuits; it can't prove that it wasn't negligent if the patient develops colon cancer that was missed.
3. UCSD can't learn from its mistakes. It can't go back and see what it was they missed so they can do a better job in the future.
4. A few seconds after the patient leaves, the doctor (and patient) are out of luck if the doctor suddenly thinks, "Hey, what was that I was looking at? Maybe that was something important. I'd like to see that again." Nope. No chance. According to UCSD, the images have been flushed from its computers.
5. UCSD says they don't save the images because it takes up too much space on the hard drive.
Yeah, right. Digital memory is getting cheaper by the month, so why would UCSD have suddenly stopped saving digital data recently? They used to give patients DVDs, and before that they gave VHS tapes of colonoscopies. Those tapes were a lot more expensive and bulky than digital memory.
I asked if I could pay extra to get my procedure saved, but they said NO. The procedure costs $1300 minimum. You'd think that would cover a bit of space on the hard drive, wouldn't you? Well, of course it does. They just don't want patients to see the images.
These days many doctors in the US are so dead set against patients seeing the images that they sedate everybody, even people who've had colonoscopies before without sedation and didn't have any problem. They'd rather take the risk of a bad reaction to drugs than to let patients see the video. I watched doctors on You Tube showing the whole process, and the first thing they asked patients when they woke up was, "Do you remember anything?" The patients all said NO.
When I suggested that I didn't believe that UCSD flushed the digital data, UCSD suggested that I go somewhere else if I wanted a DVD.
So I found a doctor who would give me a DVD of my colonoscopy.
The new doctor wants me to get some lab work done, so I went to UCSD today to get blood drawn.
The nurse who drew my blood was very sweet, but it quickly became clear that she had been tasked with finding out who had agreed to give me a DVD of a colonoscopy. Why would UCSD want to know that?
"Where are you going for your colonoscopy?" she asked.
I didn't want UCSD calling up the doctor and demanding that he not give me a DVD.
"I don't think I should say, since UCSD doesn't approve of patients getting DVDs," I told her.
"Oh, no," she said. "It's not that. It's just that we don't do DVDs."
Fine, I thought. So we're all happy and relaxed about this situation. I sat back in my chair and the nurse put a pillow on my lap.
"So are you getting it done at a hospital?" she asked. It seemed that my nurse was not so happy and relaxed about the situation after all.
I didn't want to say YES and I didn't want to say NO. I didn't want to tell the truth or tell a lie. So I didn't say anything.
I was afraid she'd be mad at me and poke me painfully with the needle, but she was very careful. I only felt a tiny pinch. And then we said friendly good byes.
Message to UCSD: she tried. She really did try. But I had planned ahead of time that I wouldn't spill the beans. So don't blame the very sweet girl who couldn't get the information out of me.
When I got my colonoscopy yesterday (at somewhere other than UCSD), the doctor showed me the small device for recording DVDs that attaches to the colonoscopy machine.
"How much did that cost?" I asked.
"Two hundred dollars," he said. "But you can get it for $150 on E-bay."
Ahem, UCSD? Do you want to stick to your story that prohibitive cost is the reason you (allegedly) don't save digital colonoscopies?
See all posts re UCSD.
I was scheduled for a routine colonoscopy at UCSD last month. Nothing controversial about that, right?
I had had a bizarre experience at Kaiser three years ago when I paid Kaiser $10 for a DVD of the digital video of my VUCG (or "VCUG"). Then suddenly the radiology imaging department claimed that there were no digital images of the procedure--even though the X-rays were done at the brand new Garfield Specialty Center advertised as having all-digital X-rays. Kaiser said that it only had a few odd thermal paper images of the June 15, 2011 procedure.
So naturally I wanted to make sure that the same thing wouldn't happen at UCSD. A couple of days before my colonoscopy I called to make sure that I would be able to get a DVD of the procedure.
UCSD's gastroenterology department told me that they don't save any of the digital data generated during colonoscopies.
This is what UCSD claims:
1. The patient can't get a second opinion from any doctor who wasn't watching the computer monitor during the procedure.
2. UCSD is very vulnerable to lawsuits; it can't prove that it wasn't negligent if the patient develops colon cancer that was missed.
3. UCSD can't learn from its mistakes. It can't go back and see what it was they missed so they can do a better job in the future.
4. A few seconds after the patient leaves, the doctor (and patient) are out of luck if the doctor suddenly thinks, "Hey, what was that I was looking at? Maybe that was something important. I'd like to see that again." Nope. No chance. According to UCSD, the images have been flushed from its computers.
5. UCSD says they don't save the images because it takes up too much space on the hard drive.
Yeah, right. Digital memory is getting cheaper by the month, so why would UCSD have suddenly stopped saving digital data recently? They used to give patients DVDs, and before that they gave VHS tapes of colonoscopies. Those tapes were a lot more expensive and bulky than digital memory.
I asked if I could pay extra to get my procedure saved, but they said NO. The procedure costs $1300 minimum. You'd think that would cover a bit of space on the hard drive, wouldn't you? Well, of course it does. They just don't want patients to see the images.
These days many doctors in the US are so dead set against patients seeing the images that they sedate everybody, even people who've had colonoscopies before without sedation and didn't have any problem. They'd rather take the risk of a bad reaction to drugs than to let patients see the video. I watched doctors on You Tube showing the whole process, and the first thing they asked patients when they woke up was, "Do you remember anything?" The patients all said NO.
When I suggested that I didn't believe that UCSD flushed the digital data, UCSD suggested that I go somewhere else if I wanted a DVD.
So I found a doctor who would give me a DVD of my colonoscopy.
The new doctor wants me to get some lab work done, so I went to UCSD today to get blood drawn.
The nurse who drew my blood was very sweet, but it quickly became clear that she had been tasked with finding out who had agreed to give me a DVD of a colonoscopy. Why would UCSD want to know that?
"Where are you going for your colonoscopy?" she asked.
I didn't want UCSD calling up the doctor and demanding that he not give me a DVD.
"I don't think I should say, since UCSD doesn't approve of patients getting DVDs," I told her.
"Oh, no," she said. "It's not that. It's just that we don't do DVDs."
Fine, I thought. So we're all happy and relaxed about this situation. I sat back in my chair and the nurse put a pillow on my lap.
"So are you getting it done at a hospital?" she asked. It seemed that my nurse was not so happy and relaxed about the situation after all.
I didn't want to say YES and I didn't want to say NO. I didn't want to tell the truth or tell a lie. So I didn't say anything.
I was afraid she'd be mad at me and poke me painfully with the needle, but she was very careful. I only felt a tiny pinch. And then we said friendly good byes.
Message to UCSD: she tried. She really did try. But I had planned ahead of time that I wouldn't spill the beans. So don't blame the very sweet girl who couldn't get the information out of me.
Tuesday, June 10, 2014
Want a souvenir DVD of your colonoscopy? So did I.
See all posts re UCSD.
I was scheduled for a routine colonoscopy at UCSD last month. Nothing controversial about that, right?
I had had a bizarre experience at Kaiser three years ago when I paid Kaiser $10 for a DVD of the digital video of my VUCG (or "VCUG"). Then suddenly the radiology imaging department claimed that there were no digital images of the procedure--even though the X-rays were done at the brand new Garfield Specialty Center advertised as having all-digital X-rays. Kaiser said that it only had a few odd thermal paper images of the June 15, 2011 procedure.
So naturally I wanted to make sure that the same thing wouldn't happen at UCSD. A couple of days before my colonoscopy I called to make sure that I would be able to get a DVD of the procedure.
UCSD's gastroenterology department told me that they don't save any of the digital data generated during colonoscopies.
This is what UCSD claims:
1. The patient can't get a second opinion from any doctor who wasn't watching the computer monitor during the procedure.
2. UCSD is very vulnerable to lawsuits; it can't prove that it wasn't negligent if the patient develops colon cancer that was missed.
3. UCSD can't learn from its mistakes. It can't go back and see what it was they missed so they can do a better job in the future.
4. A few seconds after the patient leaves, the doctor (and patient) are out of luck if the doctor suddenly thinks, "Hey, what was that I was looking at? Maybe that was something important. I'd like to see that again." Nope. No chance. According to UCSD, the images have been flushed from its computers.
5. UCSD says they don't save the images because it takes up too much space on the hard drive.
Yeah, right. Digital memory is getting cheaper by the month, so why would UCSD have suddenly stopped saving digital data recently? They used to give patients DVDs, and before that they gave VHS tapes of colonoscopies. Those tapes were a lot more expensive and bulky than digital memory.
I asked if I could pay extra to get my procedure saved, but they said NO. The procedure costs $1300 minimum. You'd think that would cover a bit of space on the hard drive, wouldn't you? Well, of course it does. They just don't want patients to see the images.
These days many doctors in the US are so dead set against patients seeing the images that they sedate everybody, even people who've had colonoscopies before without sedation and didn't have any problem. They'd rather take the risk of a bad reaction to drugs than to let patients see the video. I watched doctors on You Tube showing the whole process, and the first thing they asked patients when they woke up was, "Do you remember anything?" The patients all said NO.
When I suggested that I didn't believe that UCSD flushed the digital data, UCSD suggested that I go somewhere else if I wanted a DVD.
So I found a doctor who would give me a DVD of my colonoscopy...
This story has been moved to HERE.
I was scheduled for a routine colonoscopy at UCSD last month. Nothing controversial about that, right?
I had had a bizarre experience at Kaiser three years ago when I paid Kaiser $10 for a DVD of the digital video of my VUCG (or "VCUG"). Then suddenly the radiology imaging department claimed that there were no digital images of the procedure--even though the X-rays were done at the brand new Garfield Specialty Center advertised as having all-digital X-rays. Kaiser said that it only had a few odd thermal paper images of the June 15, 2011 procedure.
So naturally I wanted to make sure that the same thing wouldn't happen at UCSD. A couple of days before my colonoscopy I called to make sure that I would be able to get a DVD of the procedure.
UCSD's gastroenterology department told me that they don't save any of the digital data generated during colonoscopies.
This is what UCSD claims:
1. The patient can't get a second opinion from any doctor who wasn't watching the computer monitor during the procedure.
2. UCSD is very vulnerable to lawsuits; it can't prove that it wasn't negligent if the patient develops colon cancer that was missed.
3. UCSD can't learn from its mistakes. It can't go back and see what it was they missed so they can do a better job in the future.
4. A few seconds after the patient leaves, the doctor (and patient) are out of luck if the doctor suddenly thinks, "Hey, what was that I was looking at? Maybe that was something important. I'd like to see that again." Nope. No chance. According to UCSD, the images have been flushed from its computers.
5. UCSD says they don't save the images because it takes up too much space on the hard drive.
Yeah, right. Digital memory is getting cheaper by the month, so why would UCSD have suddenly stopped saving digital data recently? They used to give patients DVDs, and before that they gave VHS tapes of colonoscopies. Those tapes were a lot more expensive and bulky than digital memory.
I asked if I could pay extra to get my procedure saved, but they said NO. The procedure costs $1300 minimum. You'd think that would cover a bit of space on the hard drive, wouldn't you? Well, of course it does. They just don't want patients to see the images.
These days many doctors in the US are so dead set against patients seeing the images that they sedate everybody, even people who've had colonoscopies before without sedation and didn't have any problem. They'd rather take the risk of a bad reaction to drugs than to let patients see the video. I watched doctors on You Tube showing the whole process, and the first thing they asked patients when they woke up was, "Do you remember anything?" The patients all said NO.
When I suggested that I didn't believe that UCSD flushed the digital data, UCSD suggested that I go somewhere else if I wanted a DVD.
So I found a doctor who would give me a DVD of my colonoscopy...
This story has been moved to HERE.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)