Poll:Number of doctors you see regularly

[Paracelsus]

I go to an ophthalmologist about 4 times a year for eye pressure checks - I have glaucoma.
I go to an orthopedist for my arthritic joints to get cortisone injections 2-3 times a year.
I rarely go see a regular doctor for annual physicals - maybe once every 3-5 years.

I'm on no prescription drugs.

Currently looking at insurance plans for 2017 - hate the classification questions of how many visits I need a year - I'm very healthy but need regular maintenance checks. Also hate that I can't find a plan that has these three doctors on it that I have a 18 year history with them...

 

[brett]

Had a physical when I started a new job in 1980. Had another physical when I started a new job in 1986. Had the next physical in 2013 because I promised DW (a former RN) that I would. The MD actually asked me why I came. Full work up, no issues other than some weight to loose.

Had a physical this past June. All the usual blood tests. Full work up. No issues. Next one is scheduled for 2018. Hopefully I will have no reason to venture into the clinic prior to then!

We have universal health coverage so there is no direct cost involved.

I consider myself very fortunate. Vision get checked every two years depending on whether my reading glasses still let me read.

 

[6miths]

I made the point to see mine at least once a year. One year, I skipped and he had my file put away in storage (I could have moved, or died). Had him for a long time, and hate to lose him for 2017 because he's not on the new insurer's list.

PS. By the way, even when I feel healthy, it's good to have a blood test to see if anything's amiss. High blood glucose, triglyceride, or kidney malfunction may not have any symptom until it is too late.

One may feel reassured seeing a doctor on a periodic basis or getting blood work but the truth is that there is no good evidence that this is beneficial and there are reasons to believe that it may be harmful even above and beyond the time, costs and potential pain involved. If you have specific risk factors then there may be some benefits but if you are a healthy weight and feel well then it is unlikely that there is more benefit than risk. Most (All?) professional organizations do not recommend routine, periodic MD visits or blood work for most people.

 

[outdoorgirl02]

I have quite a few "ologists" due to an autoimmune disease that affects various body systems. The ones I see most often are the rheumatologist and ENT. I recently acquired a dermatologist after having my first skin checkup and getting a basal cell carcinoma removed that the derm found. I hope I don't need any new specialists in 2017.

 

[Just_Steve]

One may feel reassured seeing a doctor on a periodic basis or getting blood work but the truth is that there is no good evidence that this is beneficial and there are reasons to believe that it may be harmful even above and beyond the time, costs and potential pain involved. If you have specific risk factors then there may be some benefits but if you are a healthy weight and feel well then it is unlikely that there is more benefit than risk. Most (All?) professional organizations do not recommend routine, periodic MD visits or blood work for most people.

Yeah I believe that.........Oh wait, no I don't.
My cancer was found from a routine blood test and I had no risk factors.
But hey, YMMV.

 

[redduck]

1. Cardiologist
2. Ophthalmologist
3. Urologist
4. Dermatologist
5. GI doc
6. ENT

I see them as needed, which turns out to be about once a year for each. I think I get blood work yearly. I make sure I see the dermatologist yearly. I'd like to see the Urologist on a bi-weekly basis because he's hired this blond PA chick who does a prostate exam like you wouldn't believe. However, it seems as if Medicare has deemed a bi-weekly prostate exam as entertainment and not as a medical necessity. Go figure.

 

[6miths]

Yeah I believe that.........Oh wait, no I don't.
My cancer was found from a routine blood test and I had no risk factors.
But hey, YMMV.

Lucky for you. Possibly. Not so lucky for others who had false positive tests or who had a true positive for a cancer that was never going to cause them significant harm and went through extensive treatment nonetheless. The lets do more tests and give more drugs and do more treatments crowd has billions of dollars in their corner, the folks who espouse that things should be beneficial and cost-effective not so much.

 

[panacea]

Just a PCP that I see biannually for check-ups. Recently changed to a younger doc who's closer to where I live and also has more expertise in sports medicine. Just increased my health insurance deductible so I'm counting on good health for another year!

 

[Lakedog]

One may feel reassured seeing a doctor on a periodic basis or getting blood work but the truth is that there is no good evidence that this is beneficial and there are reasons to believe that it may be harmful even above and beyond the time, costs and potential pain involved. If you have specific risk factors then there may be some benefits but if you are a healthy weight and feel well then it is unlikely that there is more benefit than risk. Most (All?) professional organizations do not recommend routine, periodic MD visits or blood work for most people.

+1

I hit 60 this year and do not typically go for routine checkups. I exercise regularly (weights/run) and eat what I consider a healthy diet (low carb). I take no prescription drugs or even over the counter meds. I did have a colonoscopy about 4 years ago and have had blood work done very sporadically in the past. I plan to go to a doc when I have an issue but not likely otherwise.

 

[Danmar]

Splitting our time between 4 homes, makes health care a little more complicated. Have 3 dentists, 2 PCP's ( personal care physician? We call them GP's). Various specialists in Canada, Cleveland Clinic for big immediate things, emergency walk in clinic in Arizona, concierge type service in Toronto. So far no major health issues.

 

[NW-Bound]

PCP stands for Primary Care Physician. My doctor has thousands of patients, and he forgets about me immediately as he walks out the exam room. So, it is hardly "personal care".

One may feel reassured seeing a doctor on a periodic basis or getting blood work but the truth is that there is no good evidence that this is beneficial and there are reasons to believe that it may be harmful even above and beyond the time, costs and potential pain involved. If you have specific risk factors then there may be some benefits but if you are a healthy weight and feel well then it is unlikely that there is more benefit than risk. Most (All?) professional organizations do not recommend routine, periodic MD visits or blood work for most people.

While I agree that a casual doctor visit is not likely to uncover problems (you have to notice any change or symptom yourself), I have to disagree on the blood test. Many people feel plenty healthy, but may have high blood pressure or high blood glucose without knowing it.

One may not need a complete blood test, but hey, for $83 a year, it is pretty cheap to be a bit surer. When you and your government are paying tens of thousand a year, not using $83 worth of blood test is not going to make any dent in the total cost.

 

[eytonxav]

One may feel reassured seeing a doctor on a periodic basis or getting blood work but the truth is that there is no good evidence that this is beneficial and there are reasons to believe that it may be harmful even above and beyond the time, costs and potential pain involved. If you have specific risk factors then there may be some benefits but if you are a healthy weight and feel well then it is unlikely that there is more benefit than risk. Most (All?) professional organizations do not recommend routine, periodic MD visits or blood work for most people.

It seems to me that there are several things that could be revealed via most std blood tests, and while you may feel perfectly fine, could become problems if left untreated.

 

[Just_Steve]

Lucky for you. Possibly. Not so lucky for others who had false positive tests or who had a true positive for a cancer that was never going to cause them significant harm and went through extensive treatment nonetheless. The lets do more tests and give more drugs and do more treatments crowd has billions of dollars in their corner, the folks who espouse that things should be beneficial and cost-effective not so much.

Are you aligned with those that think women shouldn't have mammograms and men shouldn't have a PSA test?

 

[NW-Bound]

I already told the story of my "invincible" younger brother who never had an annual checkup or blood test until he felt dizzy at work one morning: hypoglycemia and onset of diabetes. He was in the mid 50s, and felt fine until that wakeup call.

 

[NW-Bound]

At the other extreme, there are indeed hypochondriacs who rush to their doctor for any sniffle. For example, my mother who is of course on Medicare once said she wanted her doctor to refer her to a neurologist to get an MRI. Why? She had been having headaches, and wanted to be sure she had no brain cancer.

Another time, she complained of her weak bladder, and instead of accepting it as just a result of old age, she went to a urologist. Of course, he wanted to do all kinds of tests and monitoring. She finally got scared of these procedures, and quit.

My sister once accompanied my mother to one of her doctor visits, and saw many elderly patients there. She said quite a few appeared to be lonely, and wanted to see their doctor more for a human touch, a personal connection, someone to talk to, than for real treatments. Oh man!

 

[athena53]

My sister once accompanied my mother to one of her doctor visits, and saw many elderly patients there. She said quite a few appeared to be lonely, and wanted to see their doctor more for a human touch, a personal connection, someone to talk to, than for real treatments. Oh man!

Yeah, my paternal grandmother was like that, and she also had at least one brain scan to make sure her headaches weren't brain cancer. (They weren't.) She also insisted on seeing her podiatrist regularly even though I'm unaware of any ongoing conditions that would have required it. We think she liked the attention.

My mother, OTOH, said you should never let them do a scan of anything because they'll find all kinds of problems you never knew existed. When DH hurt his back they found a lesion on his lung that's probably Stage I non-small cell lung cancer. His PCP was really adamant that they should do a biopsy and get it treated if necessary even though DH had already been diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia. His oncologist (for the leukemia) said not to even bother unless the leukemia achieved remission, which it has not. It was almost laughable at that point. Even if it's lung cancer, treating it wouldn't accomplish much.

Me? Never had a PET scan/CAT scan or MRI yet. Hoping I never do.

 

[NW-Bound]

These scans carry some cancer risks, so that's another reason to not do it unless there's a real cause, even if the cost is low, which it isn't.

What I have read is that the CTScan is so cheap in Japan, and the people there like to get a scan for minor diagnostics. Interesting!

 

[Meadbh]

When you and your government are paying tens of thousand a year, not using $83 worth of blood test is not going to make any dent in the total cost.

Actually, that is not true.

1. Total healthcare spending in Canada was estimated to reach $6105 per capita in 2015. Danmar may spend more than average because of his nomadic lifestyle, but he is not typical.
https://www.cihi.ca/en/spending-and-health-workforce/spending

2. "Using $83 worth of blood test...."
The argument is fallacious, because there are many possible blood tests. For example, if you choose an A1C to outrule diabetes, and eschew a CBC (complete blood count), you will miss anemia and leukemia. Tests aimed at the wrong problem are wasteful and harmful, because they lead to a false sense of security. Tests that give false positive results are harmful because they lead to unnecessary further investigation and treatment, with the risk of side effects. And those unnecessary tests and treatments cost money and add to waiting lists. A good screening test fulfills four criteria: high sensitivity (it has a high probability of being abnormal when you have the relevant disease); specificity (not too many false positives); cost effective (on a population basis*); and there is an effective treatment.

* A test might have a high probability of detecting a problem in an individual, but be completely useless in improving the health of the population. Total body CT is one example. Most people who have a whole body scan will discover something abnormal, usually what doctors call an incidentaloma.

OTOH, screening newborn babies for thyroid insufficiency (which is not rare) is cheap, accurate and facilitates early and simple treatment that prevents a lifetime of disability. That's a highly effective screening test.

When deciding what tests to pay for, funders look to research. When taxpayers are paying for population healthcare, decisions are based on cost effectiveness from a population point of view.

If an individual wants to pay out of pocket for other tests, fine, but not on my tax dollar!

 

[Meadbh]

I already told the story of my "invincible" younger brother who never had an annual checkup or blood test until he felt dizzy at work one morning: hypoglycemia and onset of diabetes. He was in the mid 50s, and felt fine until that wakeup call.

Your brother went to his doctor with symptoms. That is different from screening tests, which are carried out on people without symptoms.

 

[NW-Bound]

2. "Using $83 worth of blood test...."
The argument is fallacious, because there are many possible blood tests...

When deciding what tests to pay for, funders look to research. When taxpayers are paying for population healthcare, decisions are based on cost effectiveness from a population point of view.

If an individual wants to pay out of pocket for other tests, fine, but not on my tax dollar!

It is the following "Complete Health Profile" blood test I was talking about.

Gee, even after paying tens of thousand for my health insurance, in addition to the Medicare tax I have paid all my life, I don't even get the $83 annual blood test?

Fine! I can just skip the doctor visit for the annual exam which really does not achieve much, and keep the $83 blood test which actually gives me some measurements of my health.

Interesting to see all the tests that they offer, and also what they charge.

Comprehensive Metabolic Panel (CMP): $17
Expanded Health Profile, CMP + Lipid Panel: $37
Complete Health Profile: $83

Dirt cheap, I'll say. No need to get insurance involved, as that is about the same rate I get through them, IIRC.

See: https://www.sonoraquest.com/uploads/docs/MyLabReQuestRequisition-Final-Interactive_101016.pdf.

Your brother went to his doctor with symptoms. That is different from screening tests, which are carried out on people without symptoms.

So, you do not believe in any blood test then, and people have to have some kind of symptoms before they go to the doctor? Or can doctors just feel my pulse and know about my health without a metabolic panel? Wow!

I understand that Chinese "doctors" claim to diagnose people just from feeling the pulse, and can tell if the person's liver or kidney is "weak", and they have been doing that since a couple of thousand years ago. That, acupuncture, and herbal medicine will certainly reduce the cost of healthcare.

I was thinking that if my brother had regular annual exams and blood test, he would not have to pass out to discover his pre-diabetic condition (he has excellent healthcare from his work, but would not use it). Wow, what a fool I am! It is a sensitive issue with my brother (I learned this through his wife), and I do not know how to ask if he has any irreversible damage.

And why do women get mammogram and pap smear? Any symptom? What a waste of money! Perhaps these cost a lot less than my $83 test.

Interesting to hear this from a doctor. Or do you practice traditional Chinese medicine?


PS. In post #24, you said you see your GP once a year. I guess there's no blood test there, but what are the symptoms for your visit?

 

[Meadbh]

It is the following "Complete Health Profile" blood test I was talking about.

Gee, even after paying tens of thousand for my health insurance, in addition to the Medicare tax I have paid all my life, I don't even get the $83 annual blood test?

Fine! I can just skip the doctor visit for the annual exam which really does not achieve much, and keep the $83 blood test which actually gives me some measurements of my health.

Not a bad idea. You might want to read this article.
MMS: Error

So, you do not believe in any blood test then, and people have to have some kind of symptoms before they go to the doctor? I did not say that.

Or can doctors just feel my pulse and know about my health without a metabolic panel? Wow!

I understand that Chinese "doctors" claim to diagnose people just from feeling the pulse, and can tell if the person's liver or kidney is "weak", and they have been doing that since a couple of thousand years ago. That, acupuncture, and herbal medicine will certainly reduce the cost of healthcare.

I was thinking that if my brother had regular annual exams and blood test, he would not have to pass out to discover his pre-diabetic condition (he has excellent healthcare from his work, but would not use it). Wow, what a fool I am! It is a sensitive issue with my brother (I learned this through his wife), and I do not know how to ask if he has any irreversible damage.

And why do women get mammogram and pap smear? Any symptom? What a waste of money! Perhaps these cost a lot less than my $83 test. Some tests are worthwhile doing, some are not. I have no plans to intention research and discuss the pros and cons of every common test here. That's too much like work.

Interesting to hear this from a doctor. Or do you practice traditional Chinese medicine?

No, I'm retired. I practiced Western medicine. Evidence based medicine whenever possible.

PS. In post #24, you said you see your GP once a year. I guess there's no blood test there, but what are the symptoms for your visit?

I have high blood pressure. I have a lipid profile annually. FOB every two years. Other screening tests as required. I'm low maintenance.

....

 

[meierlde]

Actually for blood pressure you can monitor it in stores with blood pressure machines, or buy a cuff monitor for about $60. Also if done a number of times eliminates the white coat syndrome (when in the presence of a white coated person bp goes up)

 

[Meadbh]

Actually for blood pressure you can monitor it in stores with blood pressure machines, or buy a cuff monitor for about $60. Also if done a number of times eliminates the white coat syndrome (when in the presence of a white coated person bp goes up)

I'm quite aware of that. I have a home BP monitor.

 

[NW-Bound]

Some tests are worthwhile doing, some are not.

So, perhaps if you read my earlier post, you might agree that my brother's health would be much improved if he took the annual exam and its customary blood test as recommended.

No, I'm retired. I practiced Western medicine.

I know. Just teasing.

I have high blood pressure. I have a lipid profile annually. FOB every two years. Other screening tests as required. I'm low maintenance.

I take it that it is not customary in Canada to at least have the comprehensive kidney and liver metabolic panel (CMP).

That is surprising, considering that the CMP plus the lipid panel is only $37 here, if one orders it himself and pay cash. The price negotiated by the insurance may be even less (I thought it was about the same, but am not sure).

Also, it is customary for women to have annual pap smear and mammogram here. Apparently not in Canada.

 

[NW-Bound]

Actually for blood pressure you can monitor it in stores with blood pressure machines, or buy a cuff monitor for about $60. Also if done a number of times eliminates the white coat syndrome (when in the presence of a white coated person bp goes up)

Meadh is (was) a white coat. She was a pediatrician.