- Joined
- Jun 3, 2002
- Messages
- 291
- Reaction score
- 0
I agree with the problem as you identify it. I guess where I differ is the notion that a federally concocted "one size fits all" approach will meaningfully address these issues without a massive backlash of unintended consequences. Even solutions on a state level would be preferable, as different states will necessarily be facing different situations in this arena.
More specific to the discipline of radiation oncology (and back to the topic of the thread), some of the commendable first steps being taken are 1) consideration of making facility ACR accreditation mandatory, and 2) the initiation of an investigation into self-referral practices in free-standing radiation facilities by the GAO. The first of these will only scare those practices that are grossly out of compliance, and many of those are likely to the the "problem children" you allude to. The second is aimed squarely at urorads.
More specific to the discipline of radiation oncology (and back to the topic of the thread), some of the commendable first steps being taken are 1) consideration of making facility ACR accreditation mandatory, and 2) the initiation of an investigation into self-referral practices in free-standing radiation facilities by the GAO. The first of these will only scare those practices that are grossly out of compliance, and many of those are likely to the the "problem children" you allude to. The second is aimed squarely at urorads.