Debate (For): The Place of Entertainment Ultrasound in Obstetrics
ASUM has a policy that opposes the non-medical use of ultrasound in pregnancy; opposition is primarily because of potential bio-effects.
The confidence that diagnostic ultrasound does not produce harmful bioeffects is high; ASUM would otherwise oppose the current widespread use of pregnancy ultrasound, including Doppler, clinically plus for teaching and research.
All diagnostic examinations have an element of patient entertainment, today often using 3D; the increase in exposure to provide patient entertainment varies between practices. Most would consider enhancing the pregnancy experience to be an important part of a diagnostic examination; it would be considered inappropriate not to show women images of their fetuses.
It is ridiculous to oppose one (non-medical) midtrimester ultrasound examination in this environment. Opposition to the non-medical use of ultrasound on the basis of bioeffects fails.
Other objections to "shopping mall" ultrasound are similarly questionable:
They no more trivialize ultrasound than we do we all in our daily practices when we attempt to satisfy patient needs by demonstrating fetal images.
Concerns about missing abnormalities and potential communication problems are satisfied if there is appropriate information for customers in advance. Providers are unlikely to pretend that they offer a diagnostic service.
We need to be careful before encouraging legislation against "shopping mall" clinics, particularly as the practices used in these clinics are the same, to a greater or lesser extent, as those in diagnostic practices. We would be asking for legislation to draw a very fine line between medical and non-medical services.
The answer is not legislation to prevent "shopping mall" fetal ultrasound; the answer is for us to do more to satisfy the needs of our patients.