Originally Posted by Dorothy

Ophthalmologist, not retinologist. Ophthalmologist with a subspecialty in retinal diseases (I was an ophthalmic technician for 20 odd years)

Yes, 2-3 minutes each. The first room would likely have been his assistant/technician who did a history and vision check and possibly a pressure check then dilated your pupils. You would have had to wait 20-30 minutes for the mydriacyl to take affect before he could see you again. No sense in you sitting in his exam room for 30 minutes waiting for the drops to work, is there? What would you have liked for the doctor to be doing while you waited?

And I think you are being very silly for not returning for the fluorescein angiogram. You go on about "preventative medicine" yet because you don't like waiting for a doctor you forego a very important diagnostic tool that could save your eyesight.

Originally Posted by BEVS

As someone with damaged eyesight in one eyeball due to an RTA 40 years ago , I have to agree with all of the above. I care a huge amount about the quality of my eyesight .

The process is exactly as you state Dorothy in both the UK and NZ , so that leads me to think for Canada also.
I've had a fluorescein angiogram a couple of times and will be having another in a year or so. I'm sensitive for some reason so always barf afterward Delicate princess that I am.

Originally Posted by scilly

I wasn't "put out" for either gastroscopies or colonoscopies ............. but they did give some sort of relaxant for the gastroscopies, and I went out like a light.

I too watched the camera for the coloscopy!


I've been lucky ..... I've only had two really bad doctors in all the years we've been over here

Both were specialists.

The first was the pediatrician called in for my unexpected caesarean ......... he was real old school. Women are stupid, do not understand, do not need to be told anything. He told my husband what he'd done, why the baby was in Intensive Care for 24 hours, etc. But not me!

He found out the next day just how mistaken he was!

I'm sorry ............ but I don't keep quiet under those circumstances!

I refused to take the baby back to him after we were released .......... told my GP why, and he agreed with me.


The second was just last year. I was referred to a retinologist for check-up ........... something that happens regularly as I have some strange structure at the back of my eye. This one was the partner of the guy I had seen the year before.

First, I was told the appointment was at the Eye Care Clinic, but when I got there, Dr xxxx was "at his other office". Luckily only 2 blocks away, but still ......

It was a real conveyor belt operation he was running. The waiting room was full, about 25-30 people. People would be called into the back, then return in 1 or 2 minutes. Then called again, return in 2-3 minutes and leave.

Yes ............. he saw each patient only for that last 2-3 minutes!

Add a wet fish hand shake to it.

He said he wanted another exam done, with a dye that would show under the retina. It would turn my skin and eyeballs yellow for 3 - 4 days. The appointment was made at a desk near the examination room. I later ciancelled those appointments ......... my sis-i-law died, and my daughter went into hospital in NS the very same day and wanted us over there for when she was released.

I did not re-make the appointments for the exam and follow-up, nor will I go back to that doctor.

I had not one iota of feeling of trust in him



I've had more bad nurses than doctors!!

Originally Posted by caretaker

The one I had for a colonoscopy while not a surgery he was a surgeon was miserable grump who could have at least waited until the medication kicked in. I was concious and watching the screen for the whole thing, wasn't until he was done the medication he gave kicked in and I went out like a light bulb.
If anything I now know what a polyp looks like.
Vets seem to always be nice, animal doctors.

Originally Posted by Dorothy

I used to scream at the TV when House was on "DIAGNOSTICIAN?! WTF is a diagnostician?" My ex would pat me on the head and say "you're going to give yourself a stroke"

Originally Posted by Tirytory

I'm not sure if it's the quality of the endoscopists over here or whether practice hasn't "caught up" yet but sedation now for Gastroscopy is probably at about 30% in the UK, so just throat spray given.

For colonoscopy, we ran the bowel screening programme and consultants who wanted to become a screening colonoscopist had to be vigorously scrutinised by specific peers from everything from consent, iv cannulation, sedation to every part of the actual procedure and handling of the scope etc etc. It wasn't easy to pass and actually had a few consultants fail. However my point was that the UK has very much moved away to colonoscopy without sedation and analgesia. The best of the best and we had one such doctor would make it seem an absolute breeze for the patients. Even still for the ones who are sedated the "evidence based guidelines" state that sedation should be so minimal that in my mind it renders it pointless for most people to have it. Having seen the good and the bad, the ones who give the most were not so good at their job.

For patients having a colonoscopy under bowel screening the sedation rates were probably only 20% and with very high satisfaction scores for that 80% who didn't require it.

Originally Posted by Jsmth321

You don't have to be unconsious for that; complacent is close enough. I watched both my colonoscopies and a gastroscope and I know what he snipped and was able to ask questions while he did it. The most unpleasant bit (except for the fasting in preperation :-() is the bitter freezing they spray in your throat for the gastroscope. I've met some nasty vets, experiences vary.
My gastro-intestinal surgeon is an Englishman btw, seems very nice. I get treated to another gastroscope end of this month, oh boy!

Originally Posted by Tirytory

I'm not sure if it's the quality of the endoscopists over here or whether practice hasn't "caught up" yet but sedation now for Gastroscopy is probably at about 30% in the UK, so just throat spray given.

For colonoscopy, we ran the bowel screening programme and consultants who wanted to become a screening colonoscopist had to be vigorously scrutinised by specific peers from everything from consent, iv cannulation, sedation to every part of the actual procedure and handling of the scope etc etc. It wasn't easy to pass and actually had a few consultants fail. However my point was that the UK has very much moved away to colonoscopy without sedation and analgesia. The best of the best and we had one such doctor would make it seem an absolute breeze for the patients. Even still for the ones who are sedated the "evidence based guidelines" state that sedation should be so minimal that in my mind it renders it pointless for most people to have it. Having seen the good and the bad, the ones who give the most were not so good at their job.

For patients having a colonoscopy under bowel screening the sedation rates were probably only 20% and with very high satisfaction scores for that 80% who didn't require it.

Originally Posted by bats

GA is not uncommon here for colonoscopy which surprised me considerably.

Originally Posted by Tirytory

Mm way to perf easily..

Originally Posted by Dorothy

If you tell the ophthalmologist that you always vomit he/she can prescribe a Maxalon injection to be given to prevent that.

Originally Posted by Stinkypup

GA for colonoscopy - wow!!
It reminds me in my past life as a Maxillofacial cut and slasher the stories of Harley street dentists using hypnovel to sedate patients for say wisdom teeth removal and then allowing them to drive home afterwards having reversed it with annexate which has a shorter half life than hypnovel so they then became sedated again whilst driving. A recipe for trouble!!