Is every technologist the same in scanning?

No, because every technologist that scans is not performing the same type of scanning. If you are a doctor, then how many of all of you feel that quality is better than quantity. Just because somebody scans and gets a study done really fast doesn’t mean it is the best quality study ever. Many technologists in the field ask each other how many tests we do a day. I talk to some people that say they could do up to 50 studies a day, but if they are doing 50 studies a day, are they really quality studies or just a number to brag about. When I do a study, I perform it in a way to get the best quality images for the doctor with the machine I have. Not all the machines are the same which means that some are better than others, but whichever machine you are using you must be able to work with to get the best quality image. There are some machines that have many limitations to get the best quality image so you do the best job you can do with what you got.

So far up to date, there are many different companies out there like ZONARE, PHILIPS, GE, SIEMANS which are the big companies. Basically there used to be many more companies, but most of them merged with these companies. There are still smaller ultrasound companies out there trying to make it.

This is big business especially since imaging is the forefront in medicine before surgeries.

That is why quality counts over the amount of studies being done a day.

I spoke yesterday about how if licensure matters. If there were licensure in the ultrasound community I hope that it could be a National licensure where if I moved to different state I would not have to get relicensed for that state. ARDMS, American Registry for Diagnostic Medial Sonography is the recognized all over as the credentialing organization that most people know about. CCI, Cardiovascular Credentialing International is the other organization that technologists get credentialed in as well.

Ultrasound scanning is about quality first!

out, J

Related Posts:

2 thoughts on “Is every technologist the same in scanning?”

  2. Club 166

    First of all, in regards to licensing, be careful what you wish for.

    Licensing would not be national (neither physicians or nurses have national licenses, neither would U/S technologists). I voted NO on your poll, and here are a couple of other reasons why:

    1) Having a recognized society or board that sets training and competency standards, and then tests and credentials people, serves many of the same functions as licensing. It usually leads to better compensation for those who have passed the test, as well as serving to uphold uniform standards of quality and training.

    2) Licensure boards do some good things, but they are bureaucracies, and become bogged down over time, valuing process and certain benchmarks (like number of hours of continuing education) over regulating any sort of quality. Also, as U/S is evolving, state bureaucracies tend to react slower than the various field’s own organizations. And don’t forget the money that would be involved in getting your license every year (multiplied by the number of states that you wanted to keep an active license in).

    Now, in terms of quality vs. quality, you are absolutely correct. The doctors reading the scans get to know who consistently is able to get the best scans, and who isn’t. Your reputation rests much more on your quality, than how many scans you can churn out in a day. The technology of the scanners is getting much better, but a quality technologist is still key to getting all the information out of a scan that you can.

    Joe