Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Bad podiatric surgeons

Discussion in 'Foot Surgery' started by Cameron, Jul 3, 2012.

  1. bob

    bob Active Member

    It's always surprised me that members of our own profession can often be the most negative bunch towards us (podiatric surgeons). I can understand to an extent why some orthopods feel animosity towards podiatric surgery, but I find it hard to understand why there are elements of the podiatry profession that seem keen to vocalise their opposition against other members of their profession.

    I am not pointing this comment at Simon, by the way, as his comment is relatively neutral and I have no idea whether he has any dislike for podiatric surgery or otherwise.

    I have known several specialists in biomechanics (and a small number of specialists in 'diabetes') who work closely with orthopaedic surgeons in the NHS and private practice who have gone out of the way to attack me and several colleagues for a reason that has bypassed me completely. I have no objection to the work they do and positively encourage expansion of any podiatrist's practice in what ever direct they are interested in.

    Regarding the lasting effects of the mail's article on podiatry - I hope that all of our profession (surgeons and non-surgeons) give it as much concern as it deserves (not much). My practice is wholly surgical and apart from some of my patients mentioning last week (or the week before, I can not recall exactly now) it has not affected my day - yet. I await some positive response from my profession/ SCP, but I'm impressed that someone was given the opportunity to put the side across on the BBC's article from the Institute (although their response was also inaccurate sadly).
     
  2. Ian Linane

    Ian Linane Well-Known Member

    Hi Simon
    Not sure if you're wanting me to define surgery, in which case I'll respectfully decline.
     
  3. Not really you Ian, just wondered if those who remove toe nails or perform needling on VP's were "surgeons" or "surgical podiatrists" when they are performing those procedures? When is a procedure a "surgical procedure"?:drinks
     
  4. N.Knight

    N.Knight Active Member

    There are good podiatric surgeons there are bad ones there are good orthopods there are bad ones.

    Everyone knows 'good' news to read is always bad, you will never here the success stories just the ones that didn't go to plan, and you will never here the orthopod bad stories as they are very good protecting each other and podiatric surgery is new to a lot of patients so as soon as it goes wrong lets jump on the band wagon.

    I am good friends with some young orthopod registers whose views of podiatric surgeon is 'as long as they what they are doing, I do not have a issue' So will the hype die down when the old boy orthopods retire or is it the consultant status that changes them.

    I just have a couple of questions for some podiatric surgeons raised by some medical friends.

    1) Do podiatric surgeons that work in the NHS have orthopaedic surgical trainees working with them as part of there training.
    2) Who provides the post op care for say an medially unwell patient who requires an amputation if the lead surgeon is not a doctor for say if the patient goes into acute kidney failure post op?

    This is not a dig at podiatric surgeons just a question that I was asked, and as I am not a surgeon I felt I could not answer accurately, so said I would find out?

    Thanks,

    Nick
     
  5. bob

    bob Active Member

    Answers:
    1) No, not currently but I have in the past and would do in the future. This is currently blocked by politics from 'the other side' (woooooo!)
    2) Same people who provide care if an elective orthopaedic case goes wrong - medics. I do not manage kidney failure and neither does the local orthopod. As far as post-op management of an amputation goes, it would depend on the level of amputation and depend over which period and in what way - for example, in any case an amputee would be part managed by an orthotist (who is not me or the local orthopod). Really, I'm trying to say that all patients will receive appropriate care from appropriate people at the appropriate time.

    There will always be sections of professions that do not like the idea of other people encroaching on what they see as their 'turf'. I doubt it will die with the current orthopod consultants. It might get less common, but only time will tell. Podiatric surgery is not the only victim of this. I know interventional radiologists who are dislike by orthopods as a small example. It happens across medical specialities, nursing and AHPs.
     
  6. N.Knight

    N.Knight Active Member

    Hi Bob,
    Thanks for reply, to extend question number 2, sorry I should have put it across better.

    If in the NHS you have a young doctor seeing the orthopod patients in a post of ward round and a patient become unwell, the junior doctor will treat the problem, however is something goes wrong it is ultimately the orthopod as they are a medic is held responsible, now would this apply for the podiatric surgeon who is not a medic? As the junior doctor may want some medical advice which due Podiatric surgeons currently unable to prescribe will not be able to treat. Just want to make may answer clear before I can back with my answers.

    Thanks,

    Nick
     
  7. bob

    bob Active Member

    Hi Nick,

    It depends how the service is set up. Responsibility for a patient's care does not equate to having prescribing rights. Rest assured that the podiatric surgeon who operates on the patient will be brought to task for their input into a patient's care if their element of that patient's care is found wanting in any case. The junior doctor in your example would also be responsible for their element of the patient's care. If a patient becomes systemically unwell, you will not see orthopaedic surgeons medically managing that patient - this is left to proper medics who know what they are doing, not bone setters who can piece you back together if you fall off your bike (this sounds more harsh than I intend it to really, but it makes my point).

    Independent prescribing for podiatrists is going to happen. When we get prescribing rights, we will be responsible for any complications we create, just like I am responsible if I make a mess of a bunion operation, or if I create a problem when using the drugs that are available to us on our current exemptions.

    Hope this helps,
    Bob
     
  8. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    The past, present and future attacks on Podiatric Surgery by a section of the Orthopaedic community knows no bounds; there are no degrees of hate.

    Why ? Maybe an experience I had will clarify. After gaining admitting rights in a private hospital and starting to do nicely, thank you; I was approached by the Chairman of the MAC, a Consultant Anaesthetist, who told me that the Orthopods objected to me and had threatened to stop using him unless he dealt with me. I told him what they could do, he immediately came up with a proposal; the Orthopods would withdraw their objection if I would pass my 'big cases' to them and I could keep lesser toes and nails !

    On the other hand I was consulted by a Head of Orthopaedics with a bi-lateral problem, why have you not consulted one of your colleagues I asked, this was answered with a laugh and mmmmm. His ops were successful as were the other medics I treated.

    The biggest problem we have in this situation is the magic surrounding being a doctor. Laymen do not like the idea that others can do the work as well or better, it weakens their comfort zone. The sooner that it can be generally accepted that we, dentists, medics etc study the same subjects (with appropriate emphasis) and after qualifying gain skills in our resective areas, the better. It's hard for many to accept that healthcare is just a job, there's no magic involved; some do it well, others.........
     
  9. neilnev

    neilnev Active Member

    "Define: "chiropodist"; "Podiatrist"; "podiatric surgeon"

    Sorry Simon but we pay fees to the society to do things like that, although, perhaps it would be better if we got the Daily Mail to do the definitions.
     
  10. N.Knight

    N.Knight Active Member

    Thanks Bob. I think rosherville hit the nail on the head
     
  11. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member


    Hi Nick

    Whilst agreeing with Bob and Rosherville, perhaps I can add a little clarification to working in hospitals.

    I think that we, as a profession as a whole, tend to work in mental,as well as physical isolation. This is probably simply historical. However, it is commonplace to ask fellow consultants to see a patient; not just in situations of adverse reactions but in pre-operative situations if a surgeon has concerns about a specific element of the health of a patient. For example, if a patient who has a heart condition requiring anticoagulation is suffering a foot condition which needs non-elective surgery - even a severely infected onychocryptosis will do as an example - then should the pod surgeon or orthopaedic surgeon find that the INR is high continue to work alone? It is possible, but in my view unwise. The normal procedure would be to work with the Consultant Physician who is dealing with that patient, have his team deal with the INR and then the pod surgeon deals with the surgery and return them to the physician. This is absolutely normal procedure and is seen as responsible interaction with no hint of 'you can/can't do that'. On a couple of occasions I have been asked 'what level do you want us to bring the INR down to?' There are many other examples but this sort of thing goes on all the time.

    I think that your question re: 'what happens when something goes wrong' is valid. It is best answered by 'the appropriate person does the appropriate job'. If it is a foot problem then the podiatric surgeon takes care of it. If it is something that a physician would take care of then a physician does so. Naturally, whatever is the case then one 'keeps an eye' on one's own patient and is welcomed on the ward to do so.


    All the best

    Bill
     
  12. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member


    Hello Bob

    Like yourself, it distresses me considerably that members of the profession seem to find it impossible to achieve mutual support. Accordingly, I'll be grateful if you will point out what was inaccurate about the Institute's response to the BBC. When you reply, please do remember that it is not unusual to find that sources are frequently misquoted in the media and that this is not necessarily an inaccuracy by the source, as you claim.
    Naturally, if the Institute has inadvertently responded inaccurately then I will be glad for your comment so that the error is not repeated.

    All the best

    Bill Liggins
     
  13. But then the profession is clearly not united, is it?
     
  14. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member

    So the question to be answered is clearly, why? Protectionism, narcissism or pure ignorance? Or something else entirely?
     
  15. All of the above and probably then some from all sides. The reality is that we do not even have a single united professional body here in the UK.
     
  16. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member

    The latter comment is, in my view, actually an obfuscation of the real problem. The medical profession do not have a single united professional body. In fact neither do certain specialisms, Anaesthetists for example. Again, in my view, an incredible chance was lost to create an independent profession with tiered levels of care, when the Society withdrew from agreements made between themselves and the other bodies representing chiropody/podiatry just prior to the HPC being enacted. Still, at least the Institute and the Society meet regularly to agree common approaches on matters of mutual concern and enjoy a cordial relationship.

    I think that the rot is deep, is founded on our independence as practitioners (which is positive) and the consequent suspicion of others (which is not). The situation is unlikely to change until the individuals within the profession become mature and embrace the concept of the fasces, as did the medical profession a century ago.

    Bill Liggins
     
  17. The real problem is, in my view, actually the obfuscation of the profession which results from the fragmentation by association and group, rather than a united representation.
     
  18. Spot the difference that the definite article makes:

    "The British Dental Association is the professional association and trade union for dentists in the UK."

    "The Chartered Society of Physiotherapy (CSP), is the professional body and trade union for physiotherapists in the United Kingdom."

    "The British Association of Prosthetists and Orthotists (BAPO) is the only UK body that represents the interests of prosthetic and orthotic professionals and associate members to their employers, colleague Allied Health Professionals and all groups that are involved in the field of prosthetics and orthotics."

    "The Royal College of Radiologists is the professional body responsible for the specialty of clinical oncology and clinical radiology throughout the United Kingdom."

    "The British Association of Occupational Therapists is the professional body for all occupational therapy staff in the United Kingdom."

    "The Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (RCSLT) is the professional body for speech and language therapists in the UK; providing leadership and setting professional standards."

    etc etc.

    Then spot the difference:
    The society of chiropodists and podiatrist is a professional body; the institute of chiropodists and podiatrists is yet another... etc.

    I have a dream....

    "The British Podiatry Association is the professional body and trade union for podiatrists in the United Kingdom."
     
  19. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member


    I don't think that we are very far away from each other in some areas. The missed opportunity was promoted as 'The General Podiatric Council' which would have encapsulated -and controlled - all persons delivering any form of foot care beyond pedicure. Whether it would be a good thing to have a professional body and trade union in one body is another, but valid, argument. However, call it what you will, manipulate how you care to, it will not change personal philosophies and that is, in my view, the root cause of the problem.
     
  20. Too entrenched, thats the problem.

    Ten trenches deep- the wonderstuff

    "Someone direct me please
    I cant see the woods for the trees
    God, I've been praying "please"
    I ache from my heart and my knees

    Think of me overseas
    The natives and me thick as thieves
    God, I could use some sleep
    So I'll dig down the ten trenches deep

    Please leave a gap for my head to poke through
    I will leave a space in my diary for you

    Jerry, Pierre and me
    We're just kicking around in the leaves
    There not all what they seem
    In fact we're getting along famously

    But my life is out of my hands
    In fact we'd like to go out with a bang
    And yessir we're really keen
    So we'll dig down the ten trenches deep

    Please leave a gap for my head to poke through
    I will leave a space in my diary for you"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN73n-WOk7E

    I wonder what would happen if we polled the entire profession within the UK as to whether they wanted a single united professional body? Now, wouldn't that be democratic...
     
  21. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    Havn't we got a single united regulatory body, the HCPC ?

    The other professional bodies you listed Simon were specific job related. Medicine (Surgery) is regulated by the GMC but the various jobs within have their own professional bodies; would not Podiatry be better separated from Podiatric Surgery ?

    The doctor's professional body is the BMA with about 65% of the profession members; sensibly they have quite separate indemnity organisations.
     
  22. The HPC are the regulatory body. They are not the professional body for podiatry per se. They regulate the professions allied to medicine, like podiatry. All of the professions I listed are regulated by the HPC, yet have single professional body's within the UK.

    How many medical doctors are there in the UK? How many surgeons who are doctors are there in the UK? How many podiatric surgeons are there in the UK?

    We are not medical doctors. We are aligned with the allied health professions: dentistry, physiotherapy etc. these probably have greater numbers in the UK than podiatry, yet still resolve to a single, united professional body. I'd venture that it is the notion of "separatism" advocated by many UK podiatric surgeons that I have met over the years that has helped to create some of the division within the profession and moreover, some of the lack of support from the profession as a whole that they might find when faced with situations such as described in this thread.
     
  23. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    Simon, I think we're talking about different things.

    When you said 'a poll to see if the profession wanted a single regulatory body' I took it as that; presumably you ment a single professional body !
    If so, membership of a professional body is not mandatory, so a poll would be pointless. Those that wanted to join would, those that didn't wouldn't....
     
  24. Yep, my bad; now fixed. I am interested to hear your thoughts on why podiatry might be better separated from podiatric surgery in terms of both it's regulation and professional representation.
     
  25. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    Regarding professional bodies, probably for the same reason there's a Royal College of Physicians and a Royal College of Surgeons. They have a common grounding but the actual jobs are quite different, they seem to attract different personalities as well.

    As for regulation, a General Podiatric Council would do for both.
     
  26. This could indeed be a better state of affairs. Maybe the lead should be taken from dentistry then and have a specialist register for podiatric surgeons analogous to the register for maxillofacial surgeons: "To gain entrance to the Specialist Register for the Speciality of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, a surgeon must have qualifications in dentistry and surgery - be a registered dentist and registered medical practitioner, according to the European Specialist Medical Qualification Order 1995. This recognition comes from both the General Medical Council and General Dental Council. Oral surgeons don't need to be dentists though"


    So, the way forward should be that in order to enter the specialist register for the speciality of podiatric surgery, a surgeon must have qualifications in podiatry and surgery- be a registered podiatrist and registered medical practitioner. Foot surgeons don't need to be podiatrists though. I believe this would resolve the current issues and problems with podiatric surgeons perceived by some orthopaedic surgeons, journalists and members of the public.

    How many podiatric surgeons in the UK would currently meet such a criteria? And how would those that don't currently meet this criteria feel about going to medical school to gain the required qualifications to become a registered medical practitioner?

    I'd support your contention that podiatric surgery attracts a certain "personality type" at present in the UK. I don't believe that this is necessarily a good thing though. Perhaps, this "personality type" might be a stumbling block for some of those that didn't meet the criteria suggested above, if they had to apply to medical school to gain registration as a medical practitioner. Funnily enough, I have not noted this same trait in podiatric surgeons elsewhere in the world.

    How would you describe the "personality type" of podiatric surgeons within the UK?
     
  27. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    'How would you describe the personality type of surgeons in the UK' ?

    Much the same as anyone whose job involves invasive insult to the human body, with all its potential sequela.....
     
  28. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    Hello Simon
    I have a thought about the dual med qualification I'd like to add, although I'm sure its probably unnecessary:

    I can see why Max-fax surgeons have the dual qualification. Max-fax as I understand is probably one of the most serious/mental specialisms out there. This story may illustrate: I once worked with a recently graduated dentist, and he had done an observational placement in a max-fax dept during his training, during one procedure lasting 7 or 8 hours, the patient had his tongue removed right from his head and pinned to a table while two Max-fax surgeons proceeded to remove strings of enlarged cancerous lymph nodes from his throat, the dentist nearly hurled. He saw other procedures like stapling peoples skulls back together ect too.

    I personally think Podiatric surgery by comparison - is probably less mental. I would put money on max-fax pts having poorer odds than pod surgery pts in terms of post op survival. Thats just my opinion. But based on that, I kind of imagine the med qualification may be less important to a pod surgeon, I imagine they have everything covered at sufficient level.

    I really hope I'm not miss interpreted there, pod surgeons I've spoken to have really impressed me and I do look up to them, and I hope pod surgery only grows, and I dont think foot surgery is unimportant or minor, its just less mental than max-fax. Perhaps it would be better if medics had to be dual qualified in podiatry if they wanted to do foot surgery! But yea, if pod surgeons were dual qualified then there would be a bit less for the newspapers to moan about wouldn't there...

    Max
     
  29. bob

    bob Active Member

    Hi Bill,

    No offence was intended and thank you for reminding everyone about the 'Chinese whisper' nature of media reporting. The bbc article states:

    "He said they develop "highly skilled and meticulous surgical techniques", and had to undergo six years of podiatric medicine training before completing a masters in podiatric surgery in order to qualify for the title."

    The paragraph prior to this was accurate, but this one is not entirely accurate. These days, our young surgeons in training must complete a 3 year podiatry degree. The MPodA and part 5 and the subsequent part A & B have been replaced by the MSc in theory of podiatric surgery which is 2-3 years part time. The candidate then needs to get through the OAPS/ passport system before being able to apply for a pupillage. During the pupillage they prepare for their part 1 exam (similar to the old part C), then the part 2 (similar to the old part D, 6 or FPodA) after minimum of 3 years in their pupillage. Once past the part 2, they must then be elected to fellowship to use the FCPodS/ podiatric surgeon title and apply for a registrar job. The registrar period is a minimum of 3 years before application for the certificate of completion of podiatric surgery training. Once completed, they may then apply for a job as a Consultant Podiatric Surgeon.

    I would be amazed if a journalist in the land would print that, but the reality is that it would be more accurate to quote a minimum of 5 years, rather than 6 years before completion of the masters. Then it is more accurate to say that you can only qualify to use the title 'podiatric surgeon' after a minimum of 8 years training (even then you need a further 3 years before Consultancy). I suspect there may have been an element of journalistic license that has slightly distorted these facts and I apologise if my original post seemed in any way negative towards the statement, perhaps I should have used 'not entirely accurate' rather than 'inaccurate'?

    Kind regards,
    Bob
     
  30. bob

    bob Active Member

    Hello Simon.

    With regards to the first quoted paragraph, you could be right, but there would no doubt be some other profession that would take umbrage with/ encroach upon some element of your work at some point. Sometimes I wonder if having orthopods and pod surgeons in competition is such a bad thing? It is possible that competition between the 2 disciplines could be healthy and spur each other on to constantly improve. An example of this is the formation of BOFSS/BOFAS as a response to the development of podiatric surgery in the UK. At least some orthopods are doing one year foot fellowships as opposed to 'having a go' at foot surgery these days. Regardless, the Daily Mail would still print rubbish about how bunion surgery causes super-hyper-mega-aids or something similar and orthopods would probably still bitch and moan and use patients as pawns in their private practice games (as I have seen them do to their own). I am sure this is not exclusive to orthopaedic surgery by the way, I suspect there are truly horrible people in nearly every job.

    You said "...a surgeon must have qualifications in podiatry and surgery- be a registered podiatrist and registered medical practitioner." Being a registered medical practitioner does not make you a surgeon. I am unsure as to how much better I would be at foot and ankle surgery if I went back to medical school for 5 years so I could call myself a doctor and prescribe drugs independently. I am willing to bet that it would have a negative impact on my personal outcomes if I stop operating for 5 years. Apart from reducing attacks from outside the profession, I am unsure how useful this could be. If you look at some of the published attempts at comparing podiatric surgery with orthopaedic, I have yet to see one that favours orthopaedics. Ideally, an entirely independent study of outcomes of both disciplines could be performed to assess the true value of each and help us to understand who really is best placed to do this sort of work.

    In answer to your first question in paragraph 2 - sort of none. There was a podiatric surgeon who went to medical school (I am not sure if he is active as a podiatric surgeon currently but he was somewhere around south west London last time I heard). As far as the second question goes, I probably answered that in my last paragraph. I'm not sure how useful it would be, but if it were proven to improve outcomes for patients then we should do it. It would need to be done for the right reasons though - not just so I could call myself 'doctor bob' to make me feel like a big man.

    Regarding attempts at personality typing podiatric surgeons (or others groups in the profession) - I think it is lazy. I recall expressing an interest in podiatric surgery many years ago before I headed down the path and was told at the time by a respected university lecturer about it being an old boys network filled with arrogant, jumped-up, self-important, not particularly nice people and not to bother. Thankfully they were proved wrong when I got off my behind and went to spend some time actually meeting some of the surgeons and watching them operate. I would be lying if I said that everyone I have met along the way has welcomed me with open arms and a big smile, but every rose garden has its pricks. I would appeal to all potential podiatric surgeons (and anyone who has any interest in it at all) in the profession to visit your local department and make your own mind up. If you do not like the person you meet but you are interested in surgery, move on to the next unit. Do you (Simon) believe that podiatric surgeons in the UK have a personality type? I do not. They are just people - like you and I. :drinks
     
  31. The "invasive insult" personality type, your description probably sums it up nicely. Thanks. Certainly, some have this personalty type.
     
  32. I didn't say it did, I said a surgeon and a registered medical practitioner.


    We don't know how useful it wold be because it seems no-one has done it. As you note:

    I think medical training has more to offer than the ability to call oneself Dr. As an aside, going back many years it was pointed out to me that a podiatric surgeon who's first names were David Robert used to write his name as DR .....:D

    I wonder where on earth they got that impression from?
     
  33. bob

    bob Active Member

    Thanks for the reply Simon.
    With regard to the first 3 paragraphs - we do not know what advantages being a medical doctor has to offer the podiatric surgeon. Independent prescribing rights is on its way and the surgical scope of podiatric surgeons seems to be on a par with any other podiatrists' across the world (local facilities permitting). We do not know if being a medical doctor would open more doors to us and I suspect you would still have a perceived divide between podiatric and orthopaedic surgeons in the model you describe. As I stated before - there are very similar issues across all aspects of medicine.

    Regarding the aside - I heard the same rumour you mentioned too. Since then, I met the person in question and can only take him on face value and I can vouch that he is a thoroughly nice person who is dedicated to podiatric surgery and the future training of podiatric surgeons so I can not say a bad thing about the guy. I presume the person that I heard the rumour from has a similar outlook on life to the university lecturer that I mentioned before. That person probably got the ideas about podiatric surgeons that I mentioned from the same place that he gets his other insecurities and prejudices from. Incidentally, years later I heard rumours about that lecturer and what might have motivated his views of podiatric surgeons but it is not helpful to perpetuate these stories. As I mentioned earlier, there are some not particularly nice people in many aspects of life and I believe it would be a folly to think that all podiatric surgeons are bad guys (or even all orthopods).

    I do not know if the current or previous faculty of podiatric surgery have seriously looked into what benefits (or otherwise) there may be to having a medical degree. As I said somewhere else on here, I am not personally that involved in that part of the profession so I am not best placed to comment on the efforts that have gone before. It would be worthwhile looking into this in a serious way I am sure, but purely to explore how it could augment practice and training of podiatric surgeons and obviously not for less positive reasons (eg. to get the daily mail off our backs). Having spoken and worked with many medical colleagues over the years I can see some advantages of a more structured learning experience for the student (this refers to my training and I can not comment on the MSc/part 1/ 2 route that our trainees do today) but I still do not know if it would make me a better surgeon. Other surgeons (including some orthopods) are surprised to learn about the depth of current and past training in podiatric surgery when they actually find out the reality. An orthopaedic colleague of mine a few years ago commented that his trainees do not get examined on their practical skills that they have been learning at all and perform nowhere near the numbers that we expect of our trainees. Of course this is just a small example and there are many issues that hopefully have been explored by someone who is better placed than me.

    Gotta go. Have a nice day,
    Bob
     
  34. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    Surgeon's personalities - I didn't and wouldn't suggest that surgeons, of whatever specialty, fitted a 'personality type'. However, certain characteristics have been shown to be stronger in surgeons than non surgeons; particularly decisiveness and extrovertiveness.
    This confirms the old humourous description that physicians get the best results from 'don't just do something, stand there'; the opposite for surgeons !
     
  35. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member

    Thanks Bob

    You did actually say in your submission that the statement from the Institute was inaccurate. In fact it was misreported by the media, as I suggested to you. You can see the full statement which was supplied to the BBC and others on the Institute web site, and once again, I will be happy to stand corrected if anything in that statement is inaccurate. I am fully aware that podiatric surgery education has changed since the time that I qualified and I think that you will find this covered by the Institute.

    I would just gently point out that since certain universities require a 4 year course for the basic BSc(Hons) in podiatry, my statement of 'up to 6 years podiatry training before undertaking an MSc in the theory of podiatric surgery' was correct, although I made it clear that 2 of those years was post graduate CPD and 3-4 years was the basic course.

    The moral of the story is, beware of the media; they will broadcast/print what they want and we do not have the financial wherewithal to obtain judicial correction. However, in my view, it is still important to put up a fight rather than roll over and surrender to the first bully that comes along.

    All the best

    Bill
     
  36. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member

    Quoted by Bob

    "Thanks for the reply Simon.
    With regard to the first 3 paragraphs - we do not know what advantages being a medical doctor has to offer the podiatric surgeon. Independent prescribing rights is on its way and the surgical scope of podiatric surgeons seems to be on a par with any other podiatrists' across the world (local facilities permitting). We do not know if being a medical doctor would open more doors to us and I suspect you would still have a perceived divide between podiatric and orthopaedic surgeons in the model you describe. As I stated before - there are very similar issues across all aspects of medicine."

    I am sure that you are correct in this. The whole 'game' is based on control and the fact that the orthopods are nettled by the independence of our profession. If pod surgeons did undertake a medical degree then they would fit into the medical mould and how long would it be before the orthpods scuppered pod surgery and allowed only their BOFFS types to carry out foot surgery?

    Just out of interest, a few years ago at my NHS hospital I asked the Max-Fax chap how many of his colleagues remained in Max-Fax having undertaken the medical degree and was told the figure was 40% - in other words a 60% loss. Also out of interest, one of my assistants (pod, not pod surgeon) who was a bright lad, was put on the fast track at Leicester medical school and he did not return to podiatric surgery. Thus, in addition to Bob's acute observations, there are 'political' elements to discourage podiatric surgeons undertaking a medical degree.

    All the best

    Bill
     
Loading...

Share This Page