Indeed, andour GP has clearly chosen to deal with children herself and explains to all why there is no need to specialist peadiatrician for common colds and minor issues. Same with obstetrics and gyneacology. She likes seeing a patient as a whole, rather than just bits and pieces- and her skill is to know when to ask a specialist to take over. Same attitude as retired GP OH, and the reason why we chose her.

Depending on your problem I would highly recommend a QEEG

This, exactly. Many hospitals train staff. Some are university hospitals which combine training and research. For the first intake, one may very well be seen not even by a GP but by a doctor-in-training.

Such trainee doctors have their academic qualifications as a doctor, (their big advantage, for a patient, is that, although they are inexperiences, they're fresh with the latest up-to-date knowledge) but are working their way around several modules of practical experience: 6 months in one hospital and then 6 months in another. They may change their field of work, or may focus on one field, and aim to become a specialist in that.

This can feel scary, and give the impression that this junior doesn't have a clue. Regrettably, that is also sometimes the case. However, the hospital junior doctor will not take serious decisions alone, and is involved, daily, in conversations with senior doctors about the current cases.

The senior doctors, typically specialists (in your case neurologists) are constantly inspecting, correcting, augmenting or confirming the junior's views. In this way the young doctor is trained. That's good for society, thhat we can count on there still being doctors in 10 and 30 years' time.

Right away, though, this system means the patients have the advantage of at least two, sometimes several, doctors (with a range of qualifications and experience) assessing their needs. This is doubled if one has any radiology examinations (x-rays, CT scans, MRI), because the radiologist will assess the images and write a report to the referring doctor (a doctor-in-training, or a GP, or a neurologist), who will then typically look at the images again, and perhaps discuss them with the radiologist.

So he passed it higher up for those with more expertise to check it out. Seems normal to me.

I was referred to a neuro not to see another gp

when i rang for him I assumed he was a neuro then found out it wasn't

but i was sent to see a neuro by a GP. Now I have another GP who doesn't understand the results.

If he's passed it up to people with more experience, what's the issue?

You went for an MRI. You called up and asked to speak to the doc, who turned out to be a GP not a neurologist. OK, I can understand being a bit non plussed. He says he's passed it on to higher ups, because he doesn't know what to do, and you'll hear wednesday. Come wednesday, no answer.

So call Monday and ask for one? Or has someone told you the case is closed?

AfaIk any specialist must be a GP first, then goes on and specializes.

Even a neurologist is not able to read MRI results in detail. These again are specialists (I know, my neurologist told me so )

However, I would discuss this situation with your own GP. He will be able to get the right answers to sort this out.

PS: If it's only an MRI your own GP wanted, there is no need for a neurologist. I was once passed on to a neurologist who did all his things. An other time - in an other case - I was passed on directly to a clinic only to have the MRI and the results went straight back to my GP, none were discussed with me in the clinic.

__________________
It's all a matter or perspective.
So move your butt and look at it from the other side

Nope more tests

MRI shows stuff, hence why I was sent to see a neuro.

I have the results and the pics. I have had mri's for 30 years so I'm a little more clued up than most

Not quite. Being a Family doctor/GP is in fact a speciality in itself that needs to be trained for, and many others, particularly surgical, would not need you to have done that first.

OTOH many GPs do go on to acquire other speciality qualifications too, and in some fields it's more likely than not that they've followed this route, even if not technically required to do so.

Then I hope you get to see someone that you want/need to see. My experience of the last three years of treatment in Switzerland is that you're treated as an object, not as a human being and I was usually excluded from diagnosese, prognoses and treatment decisions. If they need to do something they'll send you a letter.

Well yes, indeed. I thought about you today- on holiday in the Alps, an article in the local tourist magazine presented new GPs at the local clinic. One of them described his many years in specialisation - and then decided to change direction to become a GP - the reason given that previously as a surgeon, he only saw patients once or twice - then never again. He felt frustrated by this and decided to change tack in his career- to see patients a whole humans rather than bits and pieces. He however has not lost the specialisation experience and knowledge he previously had- and keeps up to date in that field constantly- and other colleagues refer patients to him.

After many years of ill health I know I need to push to get answers and rdvs. So many mistakes in their letters too, hopefully no one reads the records in an emergency since they are just wrong!


I understand people are overworked etc but a GP is not a neurologist and to not tell the patient? GP's usually do have the bigger picture I can see why he felt a difference but sone just like the cutting part hence go into surgery.

As said, I hope you get a diagnosis and a treatment plan soon.


Don't think you got the point I was making- many GPs have years of specialisation behind them- some were specialists in their field and decide to change the direction of their career later.

With Drs. now adays you need to take your life into your own hands. Ask questions and do your research on the web. Always ask the Dr. why and if there is an alternative. If he can not answer your questions go to another Dr.

Avaid operations unless absolutely necessary. Drs. Like to operate.

I’m a bit confused.
Don’t you live in the UK now?

OP's situation is complex, to put it mildly. Based on posts about traveling to the UK I think she's here in Switzerland for the most part.

Ah thanks.
I obviously got the wrong end of the stick from those posts as I thought she spent most of her time in the UK and was just visiting Switzerland to see her children.

Why nowadays? When did you not have to do this? Also it's possible that if your doctor doesn't have answers, that there is no answer.

btw - my doctor is intervention averse.

Many people seem to think that 'intervention' medicine is quality medicine. It certainly costs an awful lot more, and that is perhaps the reason. All the best doctors I have known see it completely 't'other way round', with an operation being the last resort.



The Swiss system seems to encourage intervention- as this is where the money is. I have heard several people in last few years say, not sure I need the operation, but as I keep paying insurance premiums - seems only fair that I do. Which is truly crazy thinking - especially when considering the side effects.