Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 27 Nov 2002 15:13:35 EST |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
John,
I too worked in a dedicated vascular laboratory, however, it was in a
physician's office (Cardiology/Cardiovascular Surgery). I took it upon
myself to ask to learn echo since it was so close by. I have never regretted
it. I went to one of our regional offices to start their vascular services
and to teach their echo tech and their cardiologists how to do vascular. It
was a win win situation.
I now am employed by a different cardiologists office and we have one
vascular sonographer. Myself and a coworker (both from the previous office)
provide cover for the vascular sonographer when he gets overloaded or when
he is off. I think it has been a wonderful experience knowing and performing
both modalities. It has been very enlightening. One of the things I enjoyed
was helping the cardiologist learn to read vascular. He of course had other
training than just me, but I felt that it was important for him to realize,
and he did, just how much input we have in the quality of the final outcome
of the examination and the diagnosis. I believe that I have an even better
understanding of vascular technology now that I have learned echocardiography
and the echocardiographer that I trained has the same insight as I do
concerning her echo experience after learning vascular.
It is my understanding that you are the manager or technical director? If so,
or if you have input, just try to make it clear to the powers that be that
the cross training will take about a year if that ever comes into play. That
goes either way, vascular to echo or echo to vascular.
Good luck to you,
Kelly Estes RDMS, RDCS, RVT
To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to:
http://list.uvm.edu/archives/uvmflownet.html
|
|
|