it can be treated by radiofrequency ablation or epidural also chiropractic is an option because the doctor does adjustments on you. I had both above done in the past and they last a year. By laser I wouldn't be able to tell you. However the epidurals I needed to repeat before I got relief again.
I did targeted cortisone shots, ablation and PT. None worked so I went ahead with surgery to help correct the problem. I had discotomies on two levels a cervical fusion on two levels. My neurosurgeon told to not to expect more than a 70% success rate because it went in for so long. He was correct It’s about 70% but even at 70% it’s much better than before the surgery.
I'm interested in hearing if anyone else has had medical specialists who say they can't read imaging CD's that other healthcare systems have created. Like we all can just cough up for new CT the same as what was just done somewhere else? If I can open it in my home PC, why can't they open and see what's there, too?
Why does the Mayo Clinic list opioids as one treatment option when we all know no one can just go into see a new provider and then ask for opioids? They list it like it's an option for care of painful cervical stenosis. That makes no sense. To ask any provider for pain medication is a sure way to get neglected so badly one has to go find a new one.
I'm interested in hearing if anyone else has had medical specialists who say they can't read imaging CD's that other healthcare systems have created. Like we all can just cough up for new CT the same as what was just done somewhere else? If I can open it in my home PC, why can't they open and see what's there, too?
I've been told that same thing by many healthcare specialists, over and over again. Like you said, if I can open it at home, on my own PC, which isn't even the latest version, then why can't they? One Podiatrist told me it was their healthcare system that couldn't do it. Then, when they "got it" that I wasn't going to be able to redo them, they said they had opened them and looked at them all. And told me I had nothing wrong with my foot. When I know for sure there's necrosis in there. It's like they can't even read the Radiologists reports on paper, either. What it does do that's good for the patient is tell us which provider's we do Not want treating us.
Why does the Mayo Clinic list opioids as one treatment option when we all know no one can just go into see a new provider and then ask for opioids? They list it like it's an option for care of painful cervical stenosis. That makes no sense. To ask any provider for pain medication is a sure way to get neglected so badly one has to go find a new one.
Unfortunately, true. What they actually mean is that if you have a PCP there, and get along with them for 6 months or more, continuoully, then you may have the discussion about chronic pain and needing pain management from them. Or the referral to PM specialists. In some locations, 6 months wait is way too soon. It's like they haven't even had to live it. Because waiting 6 months for PM is just not reasonable. Because that's cruel and inhumane. Someone needs to make the FDA understand that one. We all can't qualify as terminally ill, in order to get relief of pain. Nor should we. Likewise, most PCP's do not do all they can without opioids before jumping to the conclusion that's what we mean when we say we need help for chronic pain. Gabapentin usually works well on nerve pain and isn't a controlled substance, at all.
I'm interested in hearing if anyone else has had medical specialists who say they can't read imaging CD's that other healthcare systems have created. Like we all can just cough up for new CT the same as what was just done somewhere else? If I can open it in my home PC, why can't they open and see what's there, too?
@thenazareneshul - I do understand your wanting to avoid additional costs. I have the same concerns for unnecessary procedures. I think some of the reasons may have to do with HIPAA, data security, additional costs and not too many hospitals and providers use CDs anymore. It also may depend on how long ago the CDs were created since imaging technology has improved over time. Here's just a few of many articles on the topic.
@thenazareneshul - I do understand your wanting to avoid additional costs. I have the same concerns for unnecessary procedures. I think some of the reasons may have to do with HIPAA, data security, additional costs and not too many hospitals and providers use CDs anymore. It also may depend on how long ago the CDs were created since imaging technology has improved over time. Here's just a few of many articles on the topic.
John and @thenazareneshul , great, logical information. It made me look at my laptop and notice for the first time that it indeed has no disk drive. I took a hard copy of an older EMG report to a neurologist to make sure he had it to compare to his new (necessary) test for changes, as he said he never received the medical tests from my previous providers from another state. Well, I watched him do the physical comparisons of the reports. He had to do it manually. Some of the ranges and even units of measure were different because the reports were from different types of packages with different preferences and tolerances set up. I can believe it wholeheartedly that there not only are technology advances today making some old systems and processes too hard to maintain today, but also many software package incompatibility in the past making automated comparison of reports impossible for even simple things that may just need quantitative comparison vs qualitative. They can’t even integrate my weight and blood lab histories with their own data for easy observation, everything has to be done manually by them (though I have a “hobby” of collecting and tracking certain historical data myself). So I can see that each transition to our ever changing improvements in technology has hiccups in transferring historical information, and hope they are working toward a workable solution that helps avoid repeating unnecessary tests to establish new baselines in the new systems. In the end, all costs come back to patients, so I know finding the best solution is a big financial puzzle to put together while also trying to give us the best care.
@thenazareneshul - I do understand your wanting to avoid additional costs. I have the same concerns for unnecessary procedures. I think some of the reasons may have to do with HIPAA, data security, additional costs and not too many hospitals and providers use CDs anymore. It also may depend on how long ago the CDs were created since imaging technology has improved over time. Here's just a few of many articles on the topic.
Your right. I forget that images can be "pushed" from one healthcare system to another. In my last CT however, the doctor left orders I was not to get even the radiologists report. So, I did get a CD of it, along with the paper report via their ROI. I've seen a lot of monkey business with my healthcare, some that took me years to set straight. So, if the reports are on paper, that may be all I really need as long as some doctor can't keep it from being released to another legitimate healthcare provider that I chose. I also know about having to pay for extra copies and that's one of the first things I pay in full each time I get paid. It won't do to have the companies that keep them for each system aggravated too. I think you're right.
Connect
Connect
Like
Helpful
Hug
it can be treated by radiofrequency ablation or epidural also chiropractic is an option because the doctor does adjustments on you. I had both above done in the past and they last a year. By laser I wouldn't be able to tell you. However the epidurals I needed to repeat before I got relief again.
I did targeted cortisone shots, ablation and PT. None worked so I went ahead with surgery to help correct the problem. I had discotomies on two levels a cervical fusion on two levels. My neurosurgeon told to not to expect more than a 70% success rate because it went in for so long. He was correct It’s about 70% but even at 70% it’s much better than before the surgery.
-
Like -
Helpful -
Hug
1 ReactionHello @carrollwhipple and welcome to Mayo Clinic Connect.
Here is some information on how Mayo Clinic treats stenosis, in case you find it helpful:
- Spinal Stenosis: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/spinal-stenosis/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20352966
What intrigues you about laser treatment?
-
Like -
Helpful -
Hug
2 ReactionsI'm interested in hearing if anyone else has had medical specialists who say they can't read imaging CD's that other healthcare systems have created. Like we all can just cough up for new CT the same as what was just done somewhere else? If I can open it in my home PC, why can't they open and see what's there, too?
Why does the Mayo Clinic list opioids as one treatment option when we all know no one can just go into see a new provider and then ask for opioids? They list it like it's an option for care of painful cervical stenosis. That makes no sense. To ask any provider for pain medication is a sure way to get neglected so badly one has to go find a new one.
I've been told that same thing by many healthcare specialists, over and over again. Like you said, if I can open it at home, on my own PC, which isn't even the latest version, then why can't they? One Podiatrist told me it was their healthcare system that couldn't do it. Then, when they "got it" that I wasn't going to be able to redo them, they said they had opened them and looked at them all. And told me I had nothing wrong with my foot. When I know for sure there's necrosis in there. It's like they can't even read the Radiologists reports on paper, either. What it does do that's good for the patient is tell us which provider's we do Not want treating us.
Unfortunately, true. What they actually mean is that if you have a PCP there, and get along with them for 6 months or more, continuoully, then you may have the discussion about chronic pain and needing pain management from them. Or the referral to PM specialists. In some locations, 6 months wait is way too soon. It's like they haven't even had to live it. Because waiting 6 months for PM is just not reasonable. Because that's cruel and inhumane. Someone needs to make the FDA understand that one. We all can't qualify as terminally ill, in order to get relief of pain. Nor should we. Likewise, most PCP's do not do all they can without opioids before jumping to the conclusion that's what we mean when we say we need help for chronic pain. Gabapentin usually works well on nerve pain and isn't a controlled substance, at all.
@thenazareneshul - I do understand your wanting to avoid additional costs. I have the same concerns for unnecessary procedures. I think some of the reasons may have to do with HIPAA, data security, additional costs and not too many hospitals and providers use CDs anymore. It also may depend on how long ago the CDs were created since imaging technology has improved over time. Here's just a few of many articles on the topic.
-- 3 Reasons Why CDs are Obsolete in Medical Imaging: https://www.purview.net/blog/3-reasons-why-cds-are-obsolete-for-medical-imaging
-- Why You Should Not Use CDs To Transfer Patient Images: https://www.itnonline.com/content/blogs/greg-freiherr-industry-consultant/blog-why-you-should-not-use-cds-transfer-patient
-
Like -
Helpful -
Hug
6 ReactionsJohn and @thenazareneshul , great, logical information. It made me look at my laptop and notice for the first time that it indeed has no disk drive. I took a hard copy of an older EMG report to a neurologist to make sure he had it to compare to his new (necessary) test for changes, as he said he never received the medical tests from my previous providers from another state. Well, I watched him do the physical comparisons of the reports. He had to do it manually. Some of the ranges and even units of measure were different because the reports were from different types of packages with different preferences and tolerances set up. I can believe it wholeheartedly that there not only are technology advances today making some old systems and processes too hard to maintain today, but also many software package incompatibility in the past making automated comparison of reports impossible for even simple things that may just need quantitative comparison vs qualitative. They can’t even integrate my weight and blood lab histories with their own data for easy observation, everything has to be done manually by them (though I have a “hobby” of collecting and tracking certain historical data myself). So I can see that each transition to our ever changing improvements in technology has hiccups in transferring historical information, and hope they are working toward a workable solution that helps avoid repeating unnecessary tests to establish new baselines in the new systems. In the end, all costs come back to patients, so I know finding the best solution is a big financial puzzle to put together while also trying to give us the best care.
-
Like -
Helpful -
Hug
2 ReactionsYour right. I forget that images can be "pushed" from one healthcare system to another. In my last CT however, the doctor left orders I was not to get even the radiologists report. So, I did get a CD of it, along with the paper report via their ROI. I've seen a lot of monkey business with my healthcare, some that took me years to set straight. So, if the reports are on paper, that may be all I really need as long as some doctor can't keep it from being released to another legitimate healthcare provider that I chose. I also know about having to pay for extra copies and that's one of the first things I pay in full each time I get paid. It won't do to have the companies that keep them for each system aggravated too. I think you're right.
-
Like -
Helpful -
Hug
1 Reaction