They Also Serve     1/97

by Del Meyer, MD

As I begin my fourth year as the Editor of Sacramento Medicine, I feel compelled to step back a moment and look at what we are about, "how we serve," and "whom we serve." Feedback has come from members, nonmembers and lately from readers in other states--even from Canada. They must be reading the editorials on the WEB (delmeyer.net/meyer/del) since our subscription list doesn’t extend that far.

To give the journal greater substance, the committee has enlisted a number of members to write regular columns. This past year we welcomed Dr George Palma’s computer/cyberspace/telemedicine column which reports on timely issues that increasingly affect how we practice. George’s column is now syndicated to another society journal. Dr James Coyle’s "Other Voices" is in its second year and he keeps us apprised of the issues affecting the other county medical societies by reviewing the complementary copies of their journals. Dr John Loofbourow has been editing a column on Patient Profiles which are human interest stories with a practice related message rather than scientific case reports. Dr Eleanor Rodgerson’s running commentary on yesteryear has given many of us greater perspective on current practice situations. Eleanor’s prior experience in writing a regular column is evident. Dr Gilbert Wright favors us on occasion with his Curmudgeon Corner. The Hippocrates column, in its fourth year, has received wide readership and support while giving the journal a change of pace. The Book Review column is in its third year and has drawn considerable response with increasing submissions from a wider membership. We limit the books reviewed to those by doctors or about what we, as doctors, do. Selections from this column will now appear in another medical society publication as well as the growing number of our articles which have now been reprinted in other journals. The fact that our articles are reprinted elsewhere is one of the highest compliments that can be paid to our journal and the efforts of our editorial committee.

To give the journal greater depth, the committee has become more active in the process of planning, developing, and editing submissions. Some have written an opinion column about the submissions they have developed that month which we have called the guest editorial. This has made my job as editor a more manageable undertaking while carrying on practice responsibilities. Initially I spent over 40 hours a month just to make sure we had enough submissions to fill the journal on a monthly basis to prevent our entering the premorbid state of a bimonthly or quarterly publication. Special thanks are due to those members who have taken on a monthly topic and to Dr Ed Rudin who is always willing to do two or three. One member suggested that I could now take ten months off from writing editorials. After a straw poll of members regarding this suggestion we had a good laugh about it. I’ll be serving up eleven more editorials over the coming year.

When my predecessor, Dr Richard Johnson, briefed me, he mentioned that part of my duties was to attend every Board of Directors meeting in order to remain in touch with all issues coming before our society. I have used the same logic in maintaining staff privileges at Sutter and Mercy General because of the quality of their meetings and guest speakers even though I never admit there. I attend the American Medical Writers Assn conferences as well as the editorial workshops of JAMA and my specialty society journals at the ATS and ACCP. Johnson also mentioned that the editorial committee should remain at arms length to allow for open & objective discussions and minimize censorship. He cautioned me that I should remain sensitive to information that the executive committee may have to which I’m not privy, such as a court gag order on certain subjects or organizations. Hence, they are given a copy of all submissions.

Organized medicine is having some struggles with member retention. The back door losses sometimes exceeds the front door entries. The first step in problem solving is to find out what went wrong. This is not sour grapes, but rather ripe fruit fit for consumption by the members through our "forum" for "discussion, dialogue, and debate" as we strive for continued improvement. It is common practice whenever a key person leaves an organization to interview the departing member and identify the issues that precipitate the departure so that the organization can review what went wrong and make appropriate course corrections. We have yet to pursue a strategy such as this in connection with former members. And although we do receive occasional "parting shots’ from departing colleagues, we have only published one such response, and this after heavy editing to ensure political correctness with respect to the CMA.

We have printed all criticisms of the editor. If we are to lead an examined life, criticisms of the society and its officers should likewise be printed in our "forum" to allow "discussion, dialogue, and debate" to proceed. For after all, that is what the journal is all about. It is the path to self-improvement which can demonstrate to the thousand nonmember physicians and surgeons in Sacramento and El Dorado that we have an open and viable organization that is worth the very modest dues we are asked to pay.

Michael Nahrwold, MD, (Professor of Anesthesiology at Indiana University on the editorial board of The Medical Sentinel) stated, "They also serve who simply pay their dues." The Journal has a responsibility to those who have paid their dues for 10 or 20 or 30 years (10, 20, or 30 thousand dollars) to afford them a "forum" for our "discussion, dialogue and debate" of any professional or practice issues regarding membership. To that end we serve.

The Mission of our journal can be summarized by the following:

SACRAMENTO MEDICINE, the Official Journal of the Sacramento El Dorado Medical Society, provides a Forum for the Discussion, Dialogue, and Debate of Professional and Practice Issues and Ideas by and for the Membership.

The Journal has no official position. That can only be given by the president representing the board of directors. We hopefully provide some of the resources on which to base any official position to reflect member opinions.

We thank the committee that has served so well for the past three years. We’re sorry to see Bruce Spurlock leave for greener pastures and wish him well in his endeavors. We welcome Dr John Hendry to our ranks and the return of Dr Jack Ostrich.

We have several important tasks ahead of us. We need to increase our advertising revenue to put our journal on solid financial footing. We are considering the addition of several new columns. We will increase the availability of our articles to the many smaller societies who have difficulty obtaining medical writers. And we will increase our readership, both by subscription and on the internet, since nonmembers and the public are noticing a "new breeze on Elvas Avenue."

I believe the membership of our society supports our mission. We are riding the crest of a wave of acceptance as reflected by the recent survey which has given us a 75% approval rating. We will continue to strive to be worthy of that mandate during the coming year.