Sadhish Siva's Online Review Report Card

This doctor really works hard to improve the practice of radiology. He is passionate about what he does!

I usually do not let public reviews of me bother me but when my 13 year old daughter googled my name and this popped up I felt I had to defend myself. Although I am saddened the above patient felt this way about her follow up study, blaming the radiologist (me) in this case is the same as blaming a catcher in baseball for a walk the pitcher threw. I am not sure if the above patient knows the workflow of a radiologist, but we DO NOT order studies on patients and there is a legal rule called the Stark Law that prevents self-referral (i.e. ordering a study/procedure that would directly compensate the person ordering it). So to get blamed for the above scenario so I could "line my pockets" is quite a bit off the mark. As a radiologist I sit in a dark room in front of the reading monitors and read the studies as they are done. By the time I get a study the patient has already been scanned. Thus it is IMPOSSIBLE to "push back" on any follow up order made by her primary provider as it was already done by the time I even know about the study. On very rare occasions, an ordering provider does call me and ask for suggestions on what to order on a particular study and in that case I gladly give my expert opinion. Since the above reviewer did not leave any information I cannot say if this was the case or not. However if there were symptoms of hematuria (blood in urine) that might explain why this was the case as a noncontrast CT would have been helpful. Just because the study came back essentially normal does not mean that I should get blamed for the order or my interpretation. The vast majority of studies we read are to "rule out" something or do a follow up to see if something got bigger. The fact that it didn't (I presume) in this case does not mean the study itself was not warranted. Again I am getting my reputation attacked on something that was out of my hands. I also am amused that I got a 1 star rating for bedside manner (I would love to see how many patients actually have a radiologist come to the bedside for every study) as well as accurate diagnosis (which implies that my interpretation was wrong but then she goes on to say that it was a normal study read by me "completely clean" as she put it). If follow up is necessary I would have put it in my report so again a 1 star review in that category seems more like a vindictive statement than being something that truly reflects the quality of care provided. So to recap, I did not GIVE her two scans, I READ the two scans ordered. As a radiologist I do not order studies on patients but rather read the studies that other physicians/providers order to the best of my ability. I actually do care about radiation exposure to patients of any age and we do adhere to the ALARA guidelines by the government (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) to minimize patients to radiation. I hope this can reasonably clear my name from the above scathing review of me. Respectfully, Sadhish K. Siva, M.D.

I had a total of 3 abdominal/pelvic ct scans at MMC in a two month period. The follow up ct scan I was pressured into and it was not medically necessary but just to compare with the first but instead of one follow up CT Scan which I very hesitantly agreed to have done in the first place. Dr. Siva gave me TWO Scans-one with and one without contrast and billed me for the extra versus the other radiologist Andrew Fong who only gave me one CT Scan with contrast. To make a total of THREE in two months for minor inflammation. Sadhish K. Siva exposed me to DOUBLE the radiation as Andrew Fong for the same procedure because he did a double scan. One of the highest you can get on my entire abdomen. And for no good reason that I can think of besides money since my scan was completely clean. Andrew Fong also gave a more detailed and elaborate description of my scan results. I do not think this radiologist cares about exposing young people to excessive radiation unnecessarily. He should have pushed back on the follow up order given that the first showed nothing terminal or fatal like cancer or tumors. And I am a young parent of small children who depend on me to be around and not get cancer from unnecessary excessive radiation exposure. No one could tell me how much radiation I was exposed to either and this makes me question the safety of exposure being done at MMC. Why is it not automatically recorded? I am very disappointed and a bit traumatized from this experience.