Print

Print


Go Nancy!
D

Doug Marcum
RDMS,RDCS,RVT(APS),RPhS
*Advanced Ultrasound Consultants
*Global Vein Solutions
www.advancedusconsultants.com
[log in to unmask]
321-231-2191
Sent from my iPhone

On May 19, 2010, at 1:26 PM, Nancy Hohn <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> My 2 cents:
> 1. Is there any doubt we already have government run healthcare?   
> ARDMS asked for our comments, we mostly agreed that this would be  
> useless.  ARDMS proceeded to do what the IAC demanded of them.  I  
> don't know for sure but I'd bet there's some government involvement  
> in the IAC.
> 2. I would be in favor of anything that is going to make  
> sonographers better across the board.  But from comments from ARDMS/ 
> SVU members have indicated that the exam will be open book and quite  
> easy to pass.  How does that make us better at getting quality  
> images.  I would pay $1000 for registry exams if they included  
> scanning actual patients so "someone" could actually evaluate the  
> skill of the person applying to be a sonographer.
> 3. So how about nuclear techs, x-ray techs, etc.  OK, so a  
> radiologist has to recertify.  I am not a physician.  I have a  
> physician that signs off on my work.  If I am now going to be  
> compared to what a physician requirements are, then I should hold a  
> post graduate degree and starting salaries should be in the 6 figures.
> Guess that was 3 cents.
> Nancy
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:    UVM Flownet on behalf of Lisa Mekenas
> Sent:    Wed 5/19/2010 12:08 PM
> To:    [log in to unmask]
> Cc:
> Subject:    Re: recertification
>
> And who is THEIR cerifying agency? What international agency are we  
> talking. In Europe the MD's do most ultrasounds. I am very  
> interested in these
> other agencies whose standards of compliance are being imposed.  
> Where on the ARDMS web site is this listed?
> I like to follow this "trickle flow" , after all I'm just a vascular  
> tech in the ARDMS.
> I might add, that we have no real powers of diagnosis, as in the  
> MD,ect.
>
> ________________________________
> From: UVM Flownet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of  
> Audrey Fleming
> Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 9:50 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: recertification
>
> This change has nothing to do with the DOL. It has to do with ARDMS  
> being in compliance with their certifying agency.
>
> The recert is being required by the ARDMS by the agency that  
> certifies the ARDMS. This is a trickle down effect. If the ARDMS  
> wants to keep it's international certification then it has to abide  
> by the rules set forth. That means having some type of  
> recertification in place for the credentials it gives. Does this  
> make sense?
>
> Vascular Technologists are not classifies as sonographers.  
> Individual facilities may choose to use the sonographer designation  
> but by the ARDMS they are technologists and according to the DOL  
> they are technologists, not sonographers. The ARRT gives the  
> vascular sonography designation and CCI uses the vascular specialist  
> designation. The ARDMS uses techologist.
>
> Vascular technologists are not classified as sonographers by the  
> United States Department of Labor. They are classicified as  
> cardiovascular technicians and technlogists that also includes  
> invasive cardiology, echo, and ekg technicians.
>
> My point was that if someone wanted to do the work and have vascular  
> taken out of the ekg technician category within the DOL then having  
> recert wuld be a good thing.
>
> The thing is that this is a done deal. It means that every ten years  
> peple will have to show they can pass a hopefully rigorous open book  
> test for free. Outrage won't help, it will just get in the way of  
> moving foward and learning to deal with the new realities of holding  
> the ARDMS credential.
>
> Audrey
>
> --- On Wed, 5/19/10, Lisa Mekenas <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Lisa Mekenas <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: recertification
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2010, 11:26 AM
> Sorry Audrey, using this change in DOL as a reason for recert is not  
> right.
> We have been classified as Sonographers for years and most get the  
> pay that comes with sonographers.
> This is overwhelmingly unwanted by the vast majority of ARDMS  
> Sonographers and the ARDMS chooses to
> ignore this-is the office in or near D.C.?
> I did a conference once called "Up in Arms"- this is fitting for today
> L
> 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
>
> To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to:
> http://list.uvm.edu/archives/uvmflownet.html
>
>
>
>
> NOTE: This electronic message and attachment(s), if any, contains  
> information which is intended solely for the designated recipient 
> (s). Unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution, or other use of  
> the contents of this message or attachment(s), in whole or in part,  
> is prohibited without the express authorization of the author of  
> this message.
>
>
> 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