Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"General Neurologist vs one specializing in MS

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by kingrex View Post
    Is there an actual board certification which distinguishes "general" neurologists from those who call themselves MS "specialists"?


    rex
    Well, I'm guessing not, although I do see that there is an MS certification for nurses.

    As always, there's both a sunny and a darker side to this. At some point, many doctors decide to narrow the focus of their practices to some kind of sub-specialty, such as electrocardiology (for the general cardiologist) or, for a general neurologist, multiple sclerosis and other demyelinating diseases. Some do this because they have an abiding interest in that area of specialization, while others' primary motivation is the greater income derived from performing highly-reimbursed special procedures or treatments.

    I think it's important to understand that a great doctor will pursue the knowledge necessary to successfully treat his or her patients, whether or not he's a "specialist." Regarding MS - my sense is that, unless a neurologist is working in a densely-populated area, there aren't going to be enough MS patients to make a lucrative practice in that relatively narrow sub-specialty - unless part of that practice is completely working up everyone who walks in the door. As a group (if this site is a fair indication), MS patients are a persistent lot, anxious to be diagnosed and open to any and all diagnostic tests, so I can see where a neurologist might see a future in MS as a sub-specialty. But I also think the same neurologist would be happy to see general neuro patients to fill-out his practice.

    Absent true board certification, it not uncommon for less-than-qualified physicians to annoint themselves "specialists"...I've known several young doctors who did so after only a couple of years in a general practice.

    The character of a physician, to my mind, is more important than what he calls himself.


    rex

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by kingrex View Post
      The character of a physician, to my mind, is more important than what he calls himself.
      I agree Rex.

      The Neurology practice I have used for 26 years does not list any of the Drs. as "MS Specialists." This practice cares for all types of Neurological problems and has an in-office infusion center. The care I have recieved all of these years has been excellent.

      My Neurologist is a wonderful caring Doctor who listens to his patients. He has been dealing with MS patients long before I was diagnosed. His Professor (Labe C. Scheinberg) wrote one of the first books on Multiple Sclerosis.

      There is one, if not more, involved with the National Multiple Sclerosis Society who also had Labe C. Scheinberg as a Professor as well as the associate editor (Nancy J. Holland) of his book being involved in other MS books/publications.

      In my opinion: Some get too caught up in the title of MS Specialists.
      Diagnosed 1984
      “Lightworkers aren’t here to avoid the darkness…they are here to transform the darkness through the illuminating power of love.” Muses from a mystic

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by kingrex View Post
        I think it's important to understand that a great doctor will pursue the knowledge necessary to successfully treat his or her patients, whether or not he's a "specialist." [...]

        The character of a physician, to my mind, is more important than what he calls himself.
        So true! And there are certainly docs out there who choose their specialty for financial reasons. In my experience you can spot them pretty quickly, by how much time they (don't) spend with you...

        A great primary doc will usually send you to a good specialist when you're out of his league. When I had lung cancer (1996) my 1st symptom was an ear ache(!). On initial dx (after nothing at ENT & eventually chest x-ray) he sent me straight to an oncologist who had just left a teaching position at Stanford U. for private practice. He turned out to be the best doc I've had to this day.

        Since then I've been biased toward university treatment for chronic & life-threatening issues (MS & stoke, these days). There are down sides, but knowing that I'm being treated by the people who are the best informed makes up for the occasional long wait for an appointment (and the RN at the MS clinic is always available and quickly answers my emails).

        I know I'm particularly lucky to live within 20 miles of both Stanford and UCSF, but I would drive a couple of hours if I had to, for that kind of care...
        1st sx 11/26/09; Copaxone from 12/1/11 to 7/13/18
        NOT ALL SX ARE MS!

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by MarkLavelle View Post
          Since then I've been biased toward university treatment for chronic & life-threatening issues (MS & stroke, these days). There are down sides, but knowing that I'm being treated by the people who are the best informed makes up for the occasional long wait for an appointment (and the RN at the MS clinic is always available and quickly answers my emails).
          But keep in mind that there are a lot of really good doctors who leave university medical centers for private practice, and not just for the money. Many are sick of the politics that are rampant at university-based medical centers; I've had many years of experience with that, and it's real. A lot of doctors just want to practice medicine, and private practice frees them of not only the politics but the constraints placed upon them by departmental structure.

          Also, leaving the university doesn't mean the doctor will be less well-informed than his university-based counterparts. Every doctor is responsible for reading the journals, attending the important conferences, etc. FWIW, in radiology the difference between university-based practice and private practice is that in private practice the radiologist works a lot harder.


          rex

          Comment


            #20
            I see both. The general neuro that I see (male) has been my doctor for 20 yrs. now. He's wonderful, and actually specializes in treating Parkinsons disease. He has a lot of MS patients, though.

            The MS specialist that I recently started seeing (female) is head of the department of neurology at the hospital where I see her. They have a whole floor dedicated to multiple sclerosis. It's pretty impressive, although they don't know any more then my non-specialist does.

            MS is, to this day, still a difficult disease to treat as they know more than they ever did, but are still just shooting in the dark when it comes to finding a cure.

            I've had MS for over 3 decades and fully expect to die with the disease.
            “The world breaks everyone, and afterward, some are strong at the broken places.” Ernest Hemingway
            Diagnosed 1979

            Comment

            Working...
            X