Originally Posted by caretaker

I've had 6 surgeries in the last 5 years as well as several other procedures and a few months from referral to appointment is normal and surgery wait times vary but mine have typically been a few months unless they were under worker's compensation in which case it took about 6 weeks. I think I tore a tendon or something in my hand early last October and even though I showed my doc the same day (and about 4 times since) she only ordered x-ray and referred me to a surgeon a month ago so I probably won't even get assessed until July. I'm a little miffed but I'm working in pain from everything else anyway (including arthritis) and I like her so I'm not too indignant. She's the only doctor in a busy clinic in a poor neighbourhood and I think she's doing an admirable job.

Originally Posted by scilly

Thank you for your vote of confidence in me ......... and your obvious dislike of what I post.



For what it is worth ..... I have posted that there are changes to be made

............... but all I see are you lot harping back to what happens in the UK and how that is better


If the NHS is so much better, why did you all leave? Some of you are obviously not happy with what you have found in Canada.



Not all my stories are from the dinosaur years, as you so charmingly put it ................


I taught the resident how to tell a patient about breast cancer just 3 years ago

Originally Posted by Oink

Maybe she could help the cause and the treat the symptoms.

Originally Posted by scilly

The PSA test is covered if your doctor ticks the box that says there is a reason for the test to be carried out .............. that doctor believed that men should be tested regularly. My OH had it every year, even after we moved to the Clinic, until 2005 ........... when he had one operation that led to a problem that meant his prostate had to be reamed out (literally!). Now, they do the test about every 2 or 3 years.

Originally Posted by bats

Patients seem to praise the doctors who order the most tests and dismiss the ones who make an accurate diagnosis from a through clinical examination and then order fewer exams.
I've heard tests described as placebos and it giving the patient faith in their care. Still, as a venerable old doctor once told me, patients are happier to die in the care of bad doctor that they have faith in than be cured by one they dislike.

The implementation of both the NHS and Healthcare in Saskatchewan was opposed by the physicians. In Saskatchewan the physicians went on strike, in Britain Bevan "stuffed their mouths with gold".

Originally Posted by Tirytory

A blood test is an invasive unnecessary test just for the sake of it which carries risks. Every little test a doctor orders should come with a clinical reason why it was necessary. To do that to children for no good reason borders on assault..

And yes you are expected to just be well.. Unless symptoms present that you might not be... That's what the doctor is there for to examine, diagnose, order tests etc but not to waste valuable resources trying to find something which is rarely there once a year. I wish they had NICE over here...

Originally Posted by Steve_

I think one of the major differences in Canada that is hardly ever mentioned is that Canadian doctors and nurses can work in the US quite easily, they have to get their qualifications recognized but it's pretty easy for them to enter the US on TN-1.

I remember talking to a consultant who had 14 TN-1s because he consulted at 14 different US hospitals! I remember also I had a doctor when I lived in the US who was a Canadian on TN-1 as well.

So you have to play somewhat nice with them if you're the Canadian govt. because your healthcare staff can quite easily bugger off if they're inclined to.

Originally Posted by Dorothy

Those referrals were presumably triaged as being non-urgent or semi-urgent and therefore the waits.

I work in a very large teaching hospital's critical care department. We receive hundreds of referrals every week for patients and all of these must be triaged by doctors according to clinical urgency and clinical need before an appointment or procedure can be booked - sometimes the referral is rejected if the consultant feels the patient doesn't need specialist services. Appointments are usually within 3 months, but sometimes if something is just a follow up or not urgent it can go up to 120 days.

I can only comment on the heart thingie (actually it's called an echocardiogram) because I remember when you posted about it. An echo is an ultrasound of your heart that looks at the structure of the heart and the valves. If you were not exhibiting overt symptoms of structural heart disease or your doctor did not have reason to believe you had a life threatening illness then your referral would have been prioritised as either non urgent or semi urgent. I do know that in our hospital outpatient non urgent echoes are booked about 6 months away. Semi urgent within 3 months and urgent usually either go private (and are billed through Medicare as an arrangement exists between some of the private clinics and our department) or we can usually squeeze them in within a couple of weeks.

As for your other referrals, I can again only speak from experience working for ophthalmology practices in Ontario before moving to Australia. Too many patients wanting "routine" appointments for things either their optometrist or GP could handle and not enough time to see them all. New glasses, prescription for eye drops for dry eyes, routine pressure checks for people (like me) who have higher than normal intraocular pressures without any other signs of glaucoma, etc. These are things that the GP or optometrist should be taking care of, not the specialist whose job it is to treat more complex issues.

Anyway, I'm not trying to have a go at you and I apologise if it comes across that way.

Originally Posted by Jsmth321

To be fair, sometimes these tests do show something that is not causing symptoms but could still be something serious down the road. Had it not been for the doctor randomly doing some blood work, I'd have no clue my liver function was abnormal, I had no symptoms, and we caught it and got it under control before it could cause major issues.

There is a place for preventive care, and preventive care is the norm south of the border, but the doctors down there will decide if blood is needed or not, but an annual physical exam is the norm, and from that exam the doctor will decide if tests are needed or not.

Of course doctors down there are not as restricted time wise as they are up this way.


I have not asked for tests just because, its always the doctor doing it, I'd prefer not to get stuck with a needle every few months, and he knows this as I have made it clear, but blood work is standard with him as it has been with every doctor I have had in Canada.

Not sure why, but blood work seems to have replaced physical exams in Canada.

Originally Posted by caretaker

The strongest thing she'll prescribe is tramadol (we are in the hood after all) and the max is 300mg but I'm up most of every night anyway, usually due to other pains but tonight it's my hand. Financial constraints have precluded organic self-medication for a few months but that only helps to a certain degree anyway. She's ethically opposed but I might see if she'll refer me to a Dr Feelgood anyway.

Originally Posted by scilly

Thank you for your vote of confidence in me ......... and your obvious dislike of what I post.



For what it is worth ..... I have posted that there are changes to be made

............... but all I see are you lot harping back to what happens in the UK and how that is better


If the NHS is so much better, why did you all leave? Some of you are obviously not happy with what you have found in Canada.



Not all my stories are from the dinosaur years, as you so charmingly put it ................


I taught the resident how to tell a patient about breast cancer just 3 years ago

Originally Posted by BristolUK

I'm not sure if you missed what was behind Oink's wickedly humorous post or your response was a brilliantly constructed use of a misspelled orgasmic.

Originally Posted by Jsmth321

To be fair, sometimes these tests do show something that is not causing symptoms but could still be something serious down the road. ....

Originally Posted by BristolUK

For all sorts of reasons, my wife was having regular and additional "as and when" blood-work done.

Had this included a test for Ammonia levels the advanced stage of her Cirrhosis may have been picked up sooner.

Of course one could probably say similar things for other conditions and other tests and I don't want to go down that road of wondering what could have been done differently for her. But from what I know now, I think there was a case for that test to have been included since January. Certainly there were aggravating elements in her health since then that might have been better treated had advanced Cirrhosis been confirmed earlier.