Letters: A low score for doctor ratings
Re: Doctors’ Ratings Get an Incomplete Grade, Aug. 16, the article lasered right on target. Even independent sites can be misleading.
As an example, my practice received a one-star rating from a single reviewer in vitals.com. In the review, she complained that our staff did not know what we were doing since the lab people had trouble doing the lab test.
The fact was, she had an unusual problem that required an uncommon blood test of which the lab staff had no knowledge. Yet the blame was put on our practice.
On top of that, this person moved out of the state shortly after I saw her, and I ended up sending her unpaid bill to collection.
Thus I would urge consumers to view these rating sites, including those sponsored by the local medical societies, with a ton of salt. A high rating simply may mean that the doctor is likable or a good networking person. And a bad rating may have nothing to do with a physician’s competence or the clinical outcome.
As many astute patients have already found out, your primary care physician and your friends will probably be more reliable sources in locating a specialist.
John T Chiu, M.D.
Newport Beach
Freezing fragile eggs
I enjoyed your Aug. 16 article “Health Sense: Success Rate Elusive on Frozen Eggs,” but clarification is needed.
Human eggs are fragile whether they are freshly harvested or frozen and thawed. They are large, water-filled cells that require a meticulous preparation before freezing and subsequent thawing.
Vitrification uses such high and dangerous levels of cryoprotectant solutions that the egg cannot withstand exposure for more than 60 seconds and the embryologist processing the eggs has absolutely no margin for error. Some crystal formation is inevitable: To assume otherwise is less than accurate. It is just a matter of degree that determines if the extent of crystallization is lethal or not.
Patient selection is another matter. In vitro fertilization has taught us that nothing replaces young, robust eggs in our quest to achieve high pregnancy rates. It is absurd for patients and fertility clinics to expect high success when the eggs are suboptimal due to age-related deterioration. The annual data published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reveals that the best pregnancy rates are achieved in the 35-or-younger age group. It stands to reason that this subgroup has the best chance for success, whether fresh or frozen eggs are used.
Unfortunately for the consumer, the vast majority of clinics offering “egg-freezing” have never even attempted to thaw a single one of their patients’ eggs. This is a glaring example of why egg freezing is still considered “experimental.” Yet in the hands of experienced practitioners who practice the art of egg-freezing, the success rate in the favorable age group approximates those of a fresh IVF cycle.
Like many other areas of medicine, egg freezing and thawing should be left to those clinicians who practice it often and practice it well.
David Diaz, M.D., West Coast Fertility Centers
Newport Beach
Our letters page highlights selected reader comments on articles recently published in Health.
All submissions are subject to editing and condensation and become the property of The Times.
Please e-mail health@latimes.com.
