UVMFLOWNET Archives

May 2010

UVMFLOWNET@LIST.UVM.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Bill Wilson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
UVM Flownet <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 27 May 2010 12:25:15 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
I concur, tech workroom-chair-time does should not substitute for probe-gel-
patient contact time, however it often times does, sometimes due to the student, 
sometimes due to the staff, lab operations.  Unfortunately most programs (in the 
US) do not objectively measure probe time, instead only clinical time (which often 
times mostly consists of chair-time).


On Wed, 26 May 2010 12:07:56 -0400, Connie McCoy <[log in to unmask]> 
wrote:

>Clinical time and probe time is not the same amount of time.  Some clinical sites 
are better at allowing students probe time.  And, during lab time, most students 
have to share equipment time.
>So, I don't think students really get as much probe time as  you would expect.
>Connie McCoy, RVT
>
>To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to:
>http://list.uvm.edu/archives/uvmflownet.html

To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to:
http://list.uvm.edu/archives/uvmflownet.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2