Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS News)   Mammogram tech gets a little behind in her work, decides to make stuff up   (cbsnews.com ) divider line
    More: Stupid, mammograms, food packaging, Environmental Working Group  
•       •       •

7213 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Apr 2014 at 7:16 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



48 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2014-04-16 01:48:45 PM  
Mammogram tech gets a little behind in her work

That must be one of those wide angle mammograms.
 
2014-04-16 03:11:04 PM  
6 months? F*ck her; she my have contributed to early, preventable death.
Manslaughter.
 
2014-04-16 03:32:22 PM  
Save the boobies!

i216.photobucket.com
 
2014-04-16 03:35:34 PM  
i216.photobucket.com

/seriously, that chick needs a coontpunt
 
2014-04-16 05:12:46 PM  

JoieD'Zen: 6 months? F*ck her; she my have contributed to early, preventable death.
Manslaughter.


I would accept welding two vices closed on her tits.
 
2014-04-16 06:03:02 PM  
They said Rapraeger three times...
 
2014-04-16 07:21:08 PM  
She should have been sentenced to prison because many lives were put at stack and two may have died because of it.
 
2014-04-16 07:26:54 PM  
DNRTFA, but I'd like to get a little behind in my work, if you know what I mean and I know you do.
 
2014-04-16 07:27:01 PM  

JoieD'Zen: 6 months? F*ck her; she my have contributed to early, preventable death.
Manslaughter.


Mamslaughter?
 
2014-04-16 07:28:03 PM  
Rachael Michelle Rapraeger, of Macon, entered nearly 1,300 negative mammogram results at Perry Hospital between Jan. 22, 2009 and April 1, 2010 that hadn't been reviewed by a radiologist.

Well, I think I see part of the problem. You're allowing a radiologic technician to decide whether a test is positive or negative, when the buck stops with the gatekeeper -- the radiologist. Mammograms and any other nuclear medicine needs to come across the radiologist's desk at the same time it hits the techs. The same tests need to be signed off by both the tech and the radiologist reading the results.

What she did was wrong and I think she's guilty of negligence and shouldn't even be allowed to resupply a coffee maker in a hospital after this.

But the radiologists are just as guilty as she is, for being farking lazy and allowing the techs to tell them which ones are positive and which ones are negative, or allowing a system to exist that allows them to be excluded from day-to-day radiology practice.
 
2014-04-16 07:29:39 PM  
More: Stupid, mammograms, food packaging, Environmental Working Group

I think I see what you did there, Fark Tags.
 
2014-04-16 07:32:10 PM  
Back in the days of witchcraft and voodoo, there used to be this thing called a second opinion. I'm glad modern medicine has abandoned that barbaric practice.
 
2014-04-16 07:33:25 PM  
Doesn't matter I have obamacare.

Replace 'em, charge it to Uncle Sam.
 
2014-04-16 07:34:44 PM  

JoieD'Zen: 6 months? F*ck her; she my have contributed to early, preventable death.
Manslaughter.


Murder 2.  There was the obvious potential outcome that someone could have died.
 
2014-04-16 07:38:07 PM  

Mr. Eugenides: JoieD'Zen: 6 months? F*ck her; she my have contributed to early, preventable death.
Manslaughter.

Murder 2.  There was the obvious potential outcome that someone could have died.


After Joint Commission is done ramming their fist up the hospital's ass during their investigation, the hospital is going to give the families a big farking pay-off before they get the chance to go to trial. I've (unfortunately) seen these incidents happen first-hand, and it always results in the fat cats on the board of directors writing a massive check to each family to shut them up.
 
2014-04-16 07:38:24 PM  
images.starpulse.com
will make up her work for free
 
2014-04-16 07:41:08 PM  

Weatherkiss: Rachael Michelle Rapraeger, of Macon, entered nearly 1,300 negative mammogram results at Perry Hospital between Jan. 22, 2009 and April 1, 2010 that hadn't been reviewed by a radiologist.

Well, I think I see part of the problem. You're allowing a radiologic technician to decide whether a test is positive or negative, when the buck stops with the gatekeeper -- the radiologist. Mammograms and any other nuclear medicine needs to come across the radiologist's desk at the same time it hits the techs. The same tests need to be signed off by both the tech and the radiologist reading the results.

What she did was wrong and I think she's guilty of negligence and shouldn't even be allowed to resupply a coffee maker in a hospital after this.

But the radiologists are just as guilty as she is, for being farking lazy and allowing the techs to tell them which ones are positive and which ones are negative, or allowing a system to exist that allows them to be excluded from day-to-day radiology practice.


This is what I was wondering, why was she able to enter a result AT ALL?  Was the hospital pressuring her to have results in so they could bill but the Radiologists were just too lazy to do more than one reading an hour and the admin was telling her to get things in or else?  I mean the tech's job should be done once they verify a clear image, then the radiologist reads and enters a result.
 
2014-04-16 07:42:22 PM  
Oh and don't click on that cool-looking giant squid on the right - it leads to an ANNOYING incredibly loud ad for some bullshiat quack bogus medical cure,

Really Drew, yes, I know you need to pay the bills but that crap is why some of your users put adblock on Firefox.
 
2014-04-16 07:46:04 PM  

DoBeDoBeDo: This is what I was wondering, why was she able to enter a result AT ALL?  Was the hospital pressuring her to have results in so they could bill but the Radiologists were just too lazy to do more than one reading an hour and the admin was telling her to get things in or else?  I mean the tech's job should be done once they verify a clear image, then the radiologist reads and enters a result.


I'm glad I'm not the only one. It sounds like the hospital had a grossly incompetent system in place for their radiology department. A tech should have never been allowed to 'sign off' on any test result without a radiologist reading the results.

We have quality assurance and fail-safe measures in place in the healthcare industry so things like this aren't allowed to happen to begin with. It's not an isolated incident, this is evidence of a severe dysfunction in their hospital's practice.
 
2014-04-16 07:47:18 PM  
"Up to six months in jail"

fark this biatch.  She needs to get longer than that.  She very well could have directly lead to peoples deaths.  This is just like that woman who was falsifying criminal lab tests a year or two back.
 
2014-04-16 07:52:12 PM  

Weatherkiss: DoBeDoBeDo: This is what I was wondering, why was she able to enter a result AT ALL?  Was the hospital pressuring her to have results in so they could bill but the Radiologists were just too lazy to do more than one reading an hour and the admin was telling her to get things in or else?  I mean the tech's job should be done once they verify a clear image, then the radiologist reads and enters a result.

I'm glad I'm not the only one. It sounds like the hospital had a grossly incompetent system in place for their radiology department. A tech should have never been allowed to 'sign off' on any test result without a radiologist reading the results.

We have quality assurance and fail-safe measures in place in the healthcare industry so things like this aren't allowed to happen to begin with. It's not an isolated incident, this is evidence of a severe dysfunction in their hospital's practice.


This really does stink of the hospital wanting to push through more results for billing while not paying for more Radiologists.   Anything that "looks" clear is just fast tracked by the techs.   Which then leads to the Admin pressuring the techs if they send too many to the Radiologists (which can slow down the process), so this girl just pushed a bunch through without looking at them and now she is getting pushed under the bus.

Just really bad practice.
 
2014-04-16 07:54:22 PM  

YOU GONNA



matchbin-assets.s3.amazonaws.com



GET RAPRAEGERED

 
2014-04-16 07:56:08 PM  
media.macon.com
But this disgusting hog might not fare well in prison.
 
2014-04-16 07:57:11 PM  
Let her clean Endoscopes for prisoners.
With her tongue.
 
2014-04-16 07:59:03 PM  

freetomato: But this disgusting hog might not fare well in prison.


She looked better on the back of the New Hampshire state quarter:

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-04-16 08:00:04 PM  

Mr. Eugenides: JoieD'Zen: 6 months? F*ck her; she my have contributed to early, preventable death.
Manslaughter.

Murder 2.  There was the obvious potential outcome that someone could have died.


Um, I think someone has to actually die before you can charge anyone with murder or manslaughter. That said, if any of those patients does have cancer and dies of it that should affect her punishment.
 
2014-04-16 08:02:36 PM  
Just to prove, WNL stands for "we never looked." The first rule of Medical Falsifying Club is never report a positive finding, it makes you easier to catch.
 
2014-04-16 08:21:41 PM  

Weatherkiss: Mammograms and any other nuclear medicine


Mammograms use x-rays. Nuclear medicine uses radioactive pharmaceuticals. They're completely different things.
 
2014-04-16 08:22:04 PM  
Would probably have been better off with this guy:

starfishproject.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-04-16 08:29:39 PM  

Weatherkiss: Well, I think I see part of the problem. You're allowing a radiologic technician to decide whether a test is positive or negative, when the buck stops with the gatekeeper -- the radiologist. Mammograms and any other nuclear medicine needs to come across the radiologist's desk at the same time it hits the techs. The same tests need to be signed off by both the tech and the radiologist reading the results.


I don't think that's what happened.  I think the radiologist read the results, she was simply entering them into the computer.

I think the office probably has some responsibility here, also--they probably overloaded her.
 
2014-04-16 08:34:33 PM  

Splish: Mr. Eugenides: JoieD'Zen: 6 months? F*ck her; she my have contributed to early, preventable death.
Manslaughter.

Murder 2.  There was the obvious potential outcome that someone could have died.

Um, I think someone has to actually die before you can charge anyone with murder or manslaughter. That said, if any of those patients does have cancer and dies of it that should affect her punishment.


You know how I know you dnrtfa?

To be fair, though 2 have died, it's not clear if from cancer yet.

Perhaps they shouldn't have plead her out before finding out?
 
2014-04-16 08:47:48 PM  
What a boob!
 
2014-04-16 08:50:01 PM  

GDubDub: Perhaps they shouldn't have plead her out before finding out?


Depends... I mean technically they could press manslaughter charges against her independent of the other charges that she already plead guilty to, if they felt like it.
 
2014-04-16 08:50:27 PM  

freetomato: [media.macon.com image 620x408]
But this disgusting hog might not fare well in prison.


She could be a hottie and I care not, send her to jail.  If my wife went untreated because of lazy, negligent actions of a medical professional like the women in the story, I would want the person who could've caused her death in jail.
 
2014-04-16 08:55:10 PM  

lack of warmth: freetomato: [media.macon.com image 620x408]
But this disgusting hog might not fare well in prison.

She could be a hottie and I care not, send her to jail.  If my wife went untreated because of lazy, negligent actions of a medical professional like the women in the story, I would want the person who could've caused her death in jail.


I was being facetious. She lives not too far from me. People here are calling for her head on a pike. All I can say is she had better move and change her name first chance she gets. The slap on the wrist she got is offensive on so many levels. If me or a loved one had been affected I would have to be restrained.
 
2014-04-16 09:24:20 PM  

Weatherkiss: Mr. Eugenides: JoieD'Zen: 6 months? F*ck her; she my have contributed to early, preventable death.
Manslaughter.

Murder 2.  There was the obvious potential outcome that someone could have died.

After Joint Commission is done ramming their fist up the hospital's ass during their investigation, the hospital is going to give the families a big farking pay-off before they get the chance to go to trial. I've (unfortunately) seen these incidents happen first-hand, and it always results in the fat cats on the board of directors writing a massive check to each family to shut them up.


But thats all they want anyway.
 
2014-04-16 09:42:31 PM  
My wife is a mammography tech, and she said she does not understand how this could have happened, thinks the radiologist(s) should have known something was up.  BTW, digital mammography helped save my wife's life, she had a mammogram where she worked in 2012 and was positive for breast cancer, was caught very early as a stage zero cancer.
my advice: women over 40 should get an annual mammogram, and it should be a digital one
 
2014-04-16 09:53:58 PM  
1.bp.blogspot.com

The boobies - save 'em!
 
2014-04-16 09:58:03 PM  
Worth saving.

i.imgur.com
 
2014-04-16 09:59:49 PM  

Mr. Eugenides: JoieD'Zen: 6 months? F*ck her; she my have contributed to early, preventable death.
Manslaughter.

Murder 2.  There was the obvious potential outcome that someone could have died.


Did anyone definitely die, and was there a clear intent on her part either that someone should die or that she knew specifically someone WOULD die, and she went ahead anyway? If not, then no degree of murder will apply here.

They'll be lucky to get gross negligence.
 
2014-04-16 10:20:59 PM  

Day_Old_Dutchie: Oh and don't click on that cool-looking giant squid on the right - it leads to an ANNOYING incredibly loud ad for some bullshiat quack bogus medical cure,

Really Drew, yes, I know you need to pay the bills but that crap is why some of your users put adblock on Firefox.


Ding. Ding, ding, ding. DINGDINGDINGDINGDINGDINGDING.

I wonder if the number of AdBlock users is leaving the "Some" area and moving to the "Most" region.
 
2014-04-16 10:30:09 PM  

Banned on the Run: Save the boobies!

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x750]


God, the veins are popping out.
 
2014-04-16 10:44:38 PM  

forteblast: Weatherkiss: Mammograms and any other nuclear medicine

Mammograms use x-rays. Nuclear medicine uses radioactive pharmaceuticals. They're completely different things.


A lot of hospitals have them right next to each other, and sometimes x-ray and radiology is lumped into the nuclear medicine department, or vice-versa. Kind of like cardiovascular is usually near respiratory. But yes, you are correct.

Loren: Weatherkiss: Well, I think I see part of the problem. You're allowing a radiologic technician to decide whether a test is positive or negative, when the buck stops with the gatekeeper -- the radiologist. Mammograms and any other nuclear medicine needs to come across the radiologist's desk at the same time it hits the techs. The same tests need to be signed off by both the tech and the radiologist reading the results.

I don't think that's what happened.  I think the radiologist read the results, she was simply entering them into the computer.

I think the office probably has some responsibility here, also--they probably overloaded her.


TFA says that the radiologists never read them. If they didn't, then people should be asking why. If they did, then people should be holding them just as, if not more accountable than her. She's at the bottom rung, so she's the one getting thrown under the bus, but to me it's pretty obvious this was a failure with the hospital for allowing this to happen to begin with.
 
2014-04-17 01:08:32 AM  
Weatherkiss:
TFA says that the radiologists never read them. If they didn't, then people should be asking why. If they did, then people should be holding them just as, if not more accountable than her. She's at the bottom rung, so she's the one getting thrown under the bus, but to me it's pretty obvious this was a failure with the hospital for allowing this to happen to begin with.


I agree.  It struck me as very odd the claim that she did this because "she" was behind at work.  If that's true, why is she doing someone else's job?  Techs don't read studies, they acquire images.  I suppose maybe she didn't do the tech documentation and wanted to sign off on the study so no radiologist would notice that, but it still seems like more work, not less.

Something smells fishy here.  I just don't see how this would happen without the radiologists and managers either being complicit or willfully ignorant.

Also, how much do you want to bet the radiologist billed pro fees for the studies they never read, but are listed as the reading physician on?  I wonder if we'll hear about some insurance fraud to go with the falsified medical records.
 
2014-04-17 01:17:59 AM  
Wait a second, you mean that literally every system that humans rely upon daily is built by slackers and lazy people who would rather get paid to do nothing than their jobs?
 
2014-04-17 01:49:40 AM  

Sum Dum Gai: I agree.  It struck me as very odd the claim that she did this because "she" was behind at work.  If that's true, why is she doing someone else's job?  Techs don't read studies, they acquire images.  I suppose maybe she didn't do the tech documentation and wanted to sign off on the study so no radiologist would notice that, but it still seems like more work, not less.

Something smells fishy here.  I just don't see how this would happen without the radiologists and managers either being complicit or willfully ignorant.

Also, how much do you want to bet the radiologist billed pro fees for the studies they never read, but are listed as the reading physician on?  I wonder if we'll hear about some insurance fraud to go with the falsified medical records


Exactly. I mean this would have had to go to billing, with all the appropriate codes, so both the radiology department and radiologists can get paid by the insurance companies or medicare. Even if the tech signed off on the paperwork to make it 'already read', why doesn't their medical records have a nice big red flag for that kind of thing, or an over-ride that only her superior would be able to access? A hospital that simply allows a tech the ability to sign off on that kind of thing is guilty of gross negligence. If the patients weren't billed, wouldn't that have been a big red flag as well? How do they simply not notice they weren't billed?

How do patients not get a follow-up from their doctor? I mean they go in for a mammogram and what? The next time they see their doctor the subject of their test is simply not brought up at all? How did nobody say something about their doctor not talking about their mammogram results? Even if it wasn't a radiologist who read it, the results would have been sent to the physicians to see for themselves and explain to their patients what is normal and what isn't. How did they simply ignore that?

Especially for the ones who are positive?

There are way too many questions in the air to definatively place all possible blame on the mammogram technician.
 
2014-04-17 03:02:40 AM  

El Supe: my advice: women over 40 should get an annual mammogram, and it should be a digital one


So I should use my fingers?
 
2014-04-17 05:33:14 AM  

Loren: Weatherkiss: Well, I think I see part of the problem. You're allowing a radiologic technician to decide whether a test is positive or negative, when the buck stops with the gatekeeper -- the radiologist. Mammograms and any other nuclear medicine needs to come across the radiologist's desk at the same time it hits the techs. The same tests need to be signed off by both the tech and the radiologist reading the results.

I don't think that's what happened.  I think the radiologist read the results, she was simply entering them into the computer.

I think the office probably has some responsibility here, also--they probably overloaded her.


This should have been an expected result of so many businesses chasing record profits in a recession the last 6 years, by laying off half the staff and overwhelming the rest. But somehow it's never the executives' faults that they illegally classified people as salary and threatened to fire them if they weren't twice as productive as anyone in company history ever had been prior to that.
 
Displayed 48 of 48 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report