So, nice to meet you, Rob. Yeah, definitely. Rob, how long have you been involved with me? Yeah. Um, let's see. Well, I've been a member of Anna for, say, maybe, maybe 15. I don't know, 2006, maybe. Yeah. You look familiar to me. I'm sure we've run into each other at meetings or something. Maybe. I don't remember ever meeting you, but I've certainly heard about you, and I, um, I mean, I use your pedowitz criteria all the time in my practice, so I was very excited to talk to you. You're talking about the, and it's pedowitz, pedowitz. Pedowitz, pedowitz. Is that, you're talking about the compartment syndrome thing? Yeah. Oh, that's funny. Is that yours? I can't run away from that. I wanted to talk to you about that a little bit. It's not on the script, but it, I mean, you have something named after you, and it's used, and I think that paper was in 1990, which is a long time ago, and I wonder if you think the test of time. You know, honestly, I think it was an imperfect paper, and it was an improvement on what was out there at the time. I'm going to sneeze, sorry. But what's funny about it is I was doing my PhD work around the same time, which was this hardcore bench neurophysiology stuff, and that compartment syndrome paper was sort of a sideshow. It was an easy, Rob, go do this, write it up, and send it in. It was like so secondary to everything else I was doing, and it turns out that's probably the most important paper I've ever written in terms of citation impact. Just funny how it sticks. I don't think there's anything really good to take its place in all these decades. Yeah, not quite. It was interesting. The guy who was my mentor in Sweden sent me a PhD thesis from a woman in Sweden who just completed a bunch of studies on this topic, and she quoted the thing, and I wrote her back, and I know she was thrilled about that, but I think she's improving on it because she's looking at pressures in different compartments of the leg and between genders, and she's found some differences which are important. I mean, it's not like you'd expect all the compartments to have the same thresholds necessarily. Right, right. Yeah, so there's still work being done. Now, are you doing the testing in your office? I do. People refer to me because not that many people like paying the time out of their day to do that. Exactly, yeah. I see a lot of runners. I'm a runner myself, and so they sort of flock towards me, so that's how I ended up being kind of a... What do you use to stick the muscle? What do I use? I use a striker monitor. Because that's the other flaw in that paper is that we use a slick catheter, and I'm not 100% sure that it translates to the striker, and it's hard to get one-minute pressures with the striker because you're, like, sticking all over the place, so nobody ever actually studied that. It would be a good thing to know if it holds up with a different device. That's interesting, yeah. And I think you need to invent something better because nobody wants to get stuck, you know, three times. Exactly. Yeah. Exactly. Well, the problem also fundamentally when I was back in practice was the reimbursement for doing it really stuck, and it was such a time commitment and equipment and all that stuff that I just finally, like, gave up because it was killing my clinic practice. Yeah. The point is I admire you for doing it. Oh, yeah. Well, I'm glad we got to talk about that because you can see there's always a little twist. You think you know what you read, and then there's always a little twist to it. Yeah. I know this also was in our script, you know, because we're doing it in history, but I wanted really just to bring your history out a little bit. Can you just tell me briefly about your background, where you grew up, and how you ended up in California? Sure. I grew up up until fourth grade in New York and Long Island. Then my family moved to Southern California because my dad was in aerospace, and that's where the action was at that time. And so I finished high school in L.A. and then went to college at UCLA. And then I went down to San Diego for the medical school residency and just kind of stuck in San Diego. I like it out here, but a couple of other forays during my career later on to other cities, but pretty much Southern California since fourth grade. Yeah, yeah. Seems you have a home base there, huh? Yeah. Yeah, I like it. That's great. And did you say that you recently retired? Not so recently. I retired in 2014. Oh, really? It's been a while, yeah. Oh, good for you. When did you get involved with ANA first, initially? That's a good question. Probably in the mid to late 90s, because when I came back from my fellowship and joined the faculty, there were a couple of people in town here, Jim Tasso and Jim Esch, who were mentors, but also really involved with ANA. They were in the presidential line, and so they kind of got me involved with speaking at Jim Esch's shoulder meeting. And then I got involved with ANA and volunteering on committees and teaching courses and so on. So, yeah, it was a long, long involvement. Let's see, that would be the late 90s, 15, 20 years at least. What was your favorite part about being involved with ANA? Your favorite committees or your favorite volunteer things that you did? My favorite? Probably the most, well, I'll answer two ways. The most fun was probably being on the board of directors. And when I was on the journal, there was a trustees, you know, board. So because of that, I got to go to a bunch of the meetings of the board. They had the spring meeting that was separate from the other meetings. And they were really fun, and they were stimulating and, you know, talking about the future of ANA and the policies. So those were the most, probably the most fun. The most gratifying were probably the courses that I taught at, especially with the residents. They had a lot of impact. The residents, I think, got a lot out of it. It was fun to do. They were at a stage where they're receptive, if you know what I mean, to things. And I taught the residents' course for many, many years. And then we included as part of the residents' course for a number of years some research work that was trying to validate and test the Copernicus Project. If you're familiar with that, Rick Angelo was involved with that. Shoulder metrics and so on, and also with the FAST Project. And so I really got a lot out of that. The Copernicus Project was great because the people who were involved with that at the leadership level, which was Rick Angelo and Rick Ryu and Tony Gallagher and me, the four of us put a ton of work into that. But we really got to know each other. We were a good team. I think what we came up with was really important and valuable. But it was just a wonderful relationship working with those people. It was great. It was fun. Wow, that's great. And does that kind of correlate to your career as well, as far as in your clinical practice, teaching residents is a really important part of it to you and building things? Yeah. Well, I was always in academics. So I had resident teaching involvement and fellow involvement throughout my career. So teaching and research were just core for me. All right. So I'm going to start some of our required curriculum here. OK. We got to touch on that. What is one of your favorite lessons that you learned through Anna that you'd like to pass on to other people? I think it is that it's important to be courageous and a little cutting edge with pushing the envelope in terms of technology. Because in Anna's history, that was really the driving force. Our philosophy at first was this field that many surgeons thought was insane. And so the people who started Anna had to have that kind of pioneer spirit. And so that was a very valuable lesson. On the other hand, we started to learn and appreciate how we needed to validate and test and prove that what we were doing actually was what we were saying we were doing, if you know what I mean. So I think it's a two part lesson. One is push the envelope, be courageous, but at the same time, make sure that you're proving what you think you're doing. Yeah. Yeah, that's a good lesson. It is true. The spirit of Anna stands out the most is being courageous and trying new things and becoming an expert in that. All right, let's see here. What is the best piece of career advice anyone has ever given you? Wow, that's a good one. Well, probably it was my dad in the early. That's a funny answer, maybe. But in my early years, he always encouraged me to just feel confident that whatever I chose to do, I could do, you know. And so he instilled in me this idea that I could pick whatever I wanted and then go do it. And I think I also learned from him the importance of always doing what's right. You know, sticking with your own morals, your own ethics, you know, trying to steer your path, but always do the right thing. That's funny career advice because I know that you probably expect some specific mentor to come up with that. But I think it was instilled in me a little earlier. Yeah, I think, you know, maybe our most important mentors are our parents, right? I think so. Yeah. All right. Well, here's a good one. What piece of advice would you give your younger self if you could? Wow. Yeah, I know what the answer is. That's an easy one for me. I tended to be pretty brash. And I think if I had to look back, I'd probably be a little bit more of a gentler version of myself. You know, just try to take it a little easier on others and myself along the way. I probably would have saved a few scars. Yeah. That's the gift of wisdom as you get older, right? Kind of softens you up. You know, maybe it does. But unfortunately, that kind of wisdom comes too late. You know, you have to limit yourself to really believe it. Yeah, youth is wasted on the young, right? Exactly. Let's see what else we have here. Oh, I think we already talked about this already. Your favorite moments about your involvement with Anna. You talked about that. My favorite moments were interacting with the other people in the organization and the leadership, especially, and trying to plot out things that we thought might have an impact, you know, years from now, or maybe even decades from now. Those were sort of visionary discussions, and I got a lot out of them. How good do you think you were at that? Do you think you're pretty good at predicting which way things were going or which way they direct? Some of the things I think actually were pretty good. An example was with the simulation work that we did. Anna was pretty important with supporting that idea, and I think was one of the individuals who brought that to the organization. I saw that as an opportunity. In fact, I published on that in the early 2000s. It took a while for that to kind of resonate within the organization, but once it did, Anna embraced it and pushed it along. That was kind of the impetus in a way for the FAST program and obliquely for the Copernicus program, because in order to develop the metrics and test them, we needed some sort of a simulation approach, because you can't do that much work properly on live human patients. You have to use some other methods. So, you know, that simulation, that's what it's about. So I think that in that example, I saw the opportunity very early, and I was on mark. Yeah. And of course, there's other things that I've been wrong about. I mean, there's procedures and so on where I saw them, where I said, that's insane. There's no way that can work. And then a few years later, I was proven totally wrong. Yeah. Yeah. Do you see how many times the pendulum swings one way and the other and then back again? Are there things you could think of that have swung back and then back again? And if you would have stayed... Oh, gosh. A great example of that is open surgery for shoulder instability. You know, it was doing a Bristow procedure was the operation of the devil. You could never transfer the coracoid. It was ruining the shoulder. It's all arthroscopic. And then a few years later, you know, we got back to transferring the coracoid and then doing it arthroscopically, you know, and it's just interesting how things kind of swing back and forth. Yeah. My son is an orthopedic resident. He's in the middle of his residency, and we talk about some of the stuff that he's doing and the things that are interesting. And it puts a smile on my face because a lot of it doesn't change. It's like the discussions about DDT with total joint replacement. Oh, right. How many decades can we continue to have the same? Yeah. Right. Yeah. It's true. Yeah. I think, yeah, that has come complete circle in the past 30 years, I think. Okay. Well, would you change anything about your experience with Anna? Wow. I think that one of the areas that probably is worth looking at is the ability to facilitate sort of the entrance of new blood, young people, helping them to feel comfortable and assume leadership positions and getting on committees. I think it can be pretty intimidating in any big organization. Having said that, Anna is, compared to many of the other orthopedic organizations, great at doing this. I mean, you know, it's less intimidating and it's easier, I think, in the Arthroscopy Association, many examples that I can give. But it's still important. You know, you've got to get young people involved and interested and excited. And it's a little scary at that stage to look at all the people that are up on the podium. Right. They seem unapproachable, but they're not. They are approachable. Well, it's interesting because you are an academic and Anna has always kind of prided herself on encouraging people, private practice and non-academics to do things like that, unlike some other organizations. Yeah. You know, and in fact, that was one of the reasons why I think I had an easier time, because I was interested in Anna and I came from that academic orientation. And at the time that I was entering, I think they wanted that because they were going from that, what I talked about before, that cowboy thing to let's try to put a little bit more research into it and validate. So I was kind of useful at that moment in time to add to the mix in Anna. Yeah. I probably should know this because I should have done a little more homework in it. But what was your PhD in? It was granted from the University of Gothenburg in Sweden. And there they can grant degrees in orthopedic surgery. But the work was all on tourniquet, ischemia and compression. So it was neuromuscular research. And the way that that happened, the background of it was that in the program that I was training in San Diego, one year was required research. And I just happened to be placed with this fellow named Bjorn Rydbeck, a guy from Sweden who was doing a year sabbatical. And we worked elbow to elbow for a year. And he's a great guy. I still talk to him on Zoom. I love the guy. And so because of him, it facilitated this extra research time. And for a year, we lived in Sweden, my wife and me and my first child, my daughter. So that parlayed it into a PhD. It was completely unplanned. It happened because I was assigned with them. It's like how life works. Oh, that's so interesting. Yeah, it was wonderful. And we happened to be living there when the Berlin Wall fell. And then the USSR disintegrated. So the historical time in Europe, it was a really cool time to just be there. That's cool. That says something for kind of taking opportunities as they come and sort of going with things as they come. I agree with you 100%. I think, yeah, that's something that I would encourage anybody to look at. Be flexible enough to see a great opportunity and go for it. I wish everybody in our field had a chance to do what I did, just to live in a different place, experience a different culture. It's awesome. Not everybody can do it, unfortunately. Yeah, not everybody can speak Swedish either. Either can I. In fact, it's funny. When I got there, I asked people, do you speak English? And it was an insult. Of course they spoke English. So I had to learn quickly to ask, may I speak English? I asked for permission. Because otherwise I was really putting them down. Yeah, I think they have to speak English because nobody speaks Swedish. Exactly. Yeah. How does your PhD research translate? I know it's been some time to the new blood flow restriction PT that's catching on. I haven't followed this very closely. I've seen it. And I know that some of the strategies use tourniquets to create the ischemia. There's some logic to it, you know, you put a stress on the muscle and it responds, you know, maybe by getting better, but the risk probably is that there's a crush injury from the tourniquet itself. And so that was really the impetus and the thrust of this research I did was that it's not only the ischemic injury beyond the tourniquet, it's actually more the ischemia and compression injury under the tourniquet. Oh, I see. So I hope that this new field of, I guess, exercise physiology is paying attention to the tourniquet pressures because they could inadvertently do more harm to the muscle and nerve under that restrictive area. Oh, that's interesting. You haven't heard that before. What excites you about being an orthopedic surgeon? Oh, man. Well, there's two things. That's also an easy one for me. One is the cool stuff we get to do with surgery. We get to play with great toys and, you know, it's just wonderful technology. And the other part of it that's great is we get to make people actually better. I mean, genuinely improve their quality of life. So that's one thing I miss about being retired is the technical part of doing surgery. But I especially like just knowing that I made somebody better with what I did for them. Great, Angela. Yeah. This is maybe an important question for a lot of people is, how did you approach or how did you prepare yourself for retirement? I can't say that I did anything special, but I can say that it took a couple of years to adjust to the idea. I think everybody charts their own way of doing this. I wouldn't say that what I did was right or wrong. It's part of a change. One of the harder parts about retirement is that we get really connected to our identity as surgeons. And that ego gratification is pretty constant throughout our day to day. So an adjustment in retirement is learning to accept that that's not really there. Every moment of every day, I learned that I finally realized this. But I think when I would introduce myself as Rob, just my first name without doctor, without an explanation of what I do, I'm just Rob. Then I knew I was comfortable with retirement because I allowed myself to kind of separate from that very strong identity as a surgeon. But it took a while. Now, when you stopped working, was your wife also retired or? No, she retired a couple of years later. OK, so you had some time to put her on by yourself. Exactly. One of the solutions for that was we got a puppy. So I got to raise and train the puppy and spent a lot of time with him. That substituted a little bit. That softens your edges too. Let's see here. Well, it's good when we start touching this a little bit. But what how what influenced your decision to pursue your career in orthopedic surgery? Besides your dad telling you that you could do anything? Well, I remember this is, I think, a funny anecdote. And I was more influential in my life than I actually think it should have been. But when I was in college, I went and volunteered to watch a couple of surgeons. A couple of surgeons, you know, how you have to get some touch on medicine to write your essays and get into medical school, at least at that time, that was important. And I'm a pretty tall guy. And when I went to the OR with them, a pretty consistent response was, oh, you need to be an orthopedic surgeon. You know, it was like this old stereotypical big as Knox and half as smart kind of thing, which is, of course, not true. The best people get into orthopedics and anybody can do it. But it was the joke that they made at that time. And so when I was kind of approaching medical school, I had this in my head, like I'm supposed to be an orthopedic surgeon, you know. And so I steadily went through all the different specialties and eliminated them one by one. I don't like this. I don't like that. I don't like this. And I love orthopedics. I just love the clinics and I love the surgery. And so so it was like I was predisposed to having that as my future. Isn't it funny? Yeah, it is. I planted this seed and then I just was just reinforced once I got into orthopedics and did the rotation. I love it. Yeah, you do that. You're very impressionable. One or the other. It was probably that. What do you think was the most important innovation to orthopedics during your tenure? Well, it depends on how you define tenure. So I'm going to take it broadly to being from when I started training in medical school, because that's sort of when I and it was arthroscopy, actually, believe it or not. It that that was something when I was a student, was was really new. I mean, there were some descriptions of an arthroscope that they had, you know, from what Navi's work and, you know, I saw pictures of people peering down the eye hole. But but it wasn't until, you know, the the actual flexible light source and the digital imagery came on that I was able to really define what I was doing. You know, the the actual flexible light source and the digital imagery came on that it took off. And that was during the time that I was in school. And honestly, that was part of what drew me to orthopedics. I thought that was really, really amazing technology because I saw that that would allow this minimally invasive approach. I didn't have the foresight to appreciate how it would translate to so many other areas of medicine. But I think that minimally invasive surgery started in orthopedics. It really did. And it grew. It blossomed. And now it's spread to a lot of other specialties in really positive ways. So I think that's a huge innovation. It's what drew me in a lot of ways to doing sports medicine arthroscopy. When you think of and look back at it, are you surprised at how really rapidly it developed? It really didn't. Like in a blink of an eye, it seems it kind of developed. Well, no, I'm not really that surprised in retrospect because it was taking advantage of technology. It wasn't like this wasn't a good idea and wouldn't have been a good idea, you know, 50, 75 years ago. But it wasn't possible. I mean, we didn't have digital cameras and fiber optic light sources, you know, and the ability to put a rigid scope into a space. It just became available with sort of the computer era and the digital era. You know, when I was in medical school, I remember the first PC was introduced. I mean, we think about that as being like so automatic. I remember when the first cell phone was introduced. So from that perspective, once the technology was available, I think a bunch of really smart, entrepreneurial, innovative people just took advantage of it and ran. Yeah. Yeah, I think part of that, too, is that, like you said, being courageous. Remember first learning how to do an arthroscopic cuff, and the simplest things were so hard. How to manage your sutures. It was just so hard. You know. Exactly. I remember, actually, the first, this is a distinct memory. I was a junior resident working at a community hospital. It was not an academic center, but it was a place where they had really good orthopedic surgeons. We rotated there. And watching them do the first shoulder arthroscopy that they had ever done at that facility. They were so excited to be able to stick the scope in the shoulder. All they were doing was looking around. And it looked like a field of red. All I could see was blood. It was like, what are they doing here? But that was the first shoulder arthroscopy that they did. And one of the first in San Diego. So think about coming from that to you with the rotator cuff repair. Your challenge is suture management. Their challenge was just seeing something. Yeah. And now the joints are getting smaller and smaller. That's what I say now. Everything is easy once you know how to do it. It's just hard when you don't know how to do it. And you have to get to where it's easy. So you know how to do it. Yeah, that's true. And to use the rotator cuff example, initially, when we started trying to do rotator cuff repairs, it was really, really hard because we didn't have the tools to do it. Well, we were struggling just because of the instruments. That's what's also changed a lot. And many of the leaders in the Arthroscopy Association are responsible for that development because they work with the companies that are there to develop the products that make it easier for us. Yeah. Changed a lot of our just ability to pull it off. Yeah. And I think, too, more than thinking of the whole picture, like hypotensive anesthesia. What a huge difference when you realize if your anesthesia just keeps your pressure low, you could do the case better. It's just thinking about every angle of how you could make it better. I used to argue with the anesthesiologists and really get upset with them because there was a resident in the room and I would ask them to lower the blood pressure. The resident's response, because they didn't know how to do it properly using the proper drugs, their response was just to give more narcotics or more halothane or whatever they were using. And then it took forever and ever to wake the patient up. And so I didn't like, you know, insist, get the attending in here because they need to teach you how to do this safely and properly. It was essential. I couldn't do what I was doing if they were hypertensive. Yeah. And now it's automatic. I think everything is. Yeah, I think so. But it is a true team. All right, let's see what else here. Um, so what would you say to an incoming resident today about orthopedics and medicine? Um, well, I can I can put this in the framework of my son, you know what I would advise him and I would get the same advice to any person coming into the field. First of all, you have picked a great career. You have picked a great career. I mean, your career path is certain to be rewarding because. While the technology changes and while medicine changes, people will continue to age and get hurt. So you're always going to have work to do and you're always going to have the opportunity to make people better. And the second piece of advice would be and don't worry and don't complain about compensation and, you know, all of the rules and the changing reimbursement. I mean, you got to pay attention to it, but don't let that ruin your joy in the profession compared to the vast, vast majority of people. You have it great as long as you work hard and do a good job, you'll be secure. You know, you'll have a good career. But I just try to steer people away from this focus on woe is me. The money is bad. And, you know, just try to avoid that. It's kind of your blessings. Yeah. What is your opinion or impression about resident education, how it's evolved over the years with resident work hours and things available like simulation? Yeah. Yeah. You know, I've been out of touch with it a little bit because, you know, I've been out of touch with it for a while, but I was very involved as a program director. I was a residency director for a long time and then also a fellowship director. So I kind of saw the transition from these insane work weeks, you know, like I had when I was training and like we had when I was a program director. And then the 80 hour work week came in and I think it was detrimental in many, many ways. It was good because it was more humane and it's not right to work people until they're just exhausted and killed. That's not good. But the reason why it was potentially and maybe still not good. Number one, when an orthopedic surgeon gets done with training and is in practice, that person needs to know how to work when he or she is tired. It's not like most people are on call all night and working and take the next day off. There's some places where that happens, but you have to learn how to manage that exhaustion to be good at what you do. And the second downside is just the number of cases, just the raw touches. We know that education depends upon repetition and exposure. And one of the problems with the 80 hour work week is there's just less opportunity. And the last thing that that's a problem is that things have changed where there's a lot more management by faculty of residents all the time in the operating room, the supervision thing, which is really good and really important. But you also have to learn how to be independent and how to make decisions and how to make mistakes and how to get yourself out of trouble and cope with those things, which is one of the reasons why simulation actually is valuable. That allows somebody to safely do and repeat and make errors with no harm to. I think it's an important feature we overlook, but a surgeon has to learn how to make errors and deal with it. So anyway, there's been some unforeseen negative consequences of those changes. I don't know if there maybe you can tell me if we've figured out a way to compensate for them. I don't think so, but I do know that every year the rest, you know, the race has been so competitive for such a long time, and that's the quality of person that comes is just so high that they may not need as many hours to learn because there's just so sharp and they've been focused on this for a while. But I agree that some of the best learning was when you're up alone at night having to figure things out. You have to open a book and take a week. I was right before the eight hour work week. And I thought there was. There needs to be a number of hours, I think, maybe that may be a longer residency, but I don't think anybody wants that. Yeah, well, you know, another creative solution I've read about is changing the structure of medical school because there's there's some time in medical school that could be leveraged better once a person picks their specialty. It's kind of wasted time, and certainly the internship in orthopedics is improved because it's much more focused on what a surgeon needs, not what a general surgeon needs, but what an orthopedic surgeon needs. And that's good. It takes advantage of some of those lost hours. But, you know, on the working in the middle of the night thing, there's also a degree of confidence that it builds, you know, just feeling like I worked my way through this and I had a good outcome. And, you know, to do the job as a surgeon, you need to have some of that confidence. And I observed that some of the folks that were coming to me as fellows or even at the end of their fellowship, they just didn't have that solid confidence yet. So when are they going to develop it when they're in practice a year or two or three or five later? It has to happen sometime. Yeah, you have to learn how to learn. Yeah. Were you able to be exposed enough when you were in Sweden to compare their orthopedics compared to U.S. training? That's a great question. And honestly, not very much, because when I was there, I was in the lab and I was really not in the operating room very much. I went a couple of times, but I didn't really have a chance to compare their system. I think that it's more observational even than ours. Some of the European training systems at least have a reputation where trainees stand back and watch the master operate for a long, long, long time. Again, they have to eventually do it themselves and get confidence themselves. But I think it may happen later there. Yeah, interesting. Yeah. Well, so as you know, this recording that we're doing is for sort of the archives, and this is going to be recorded for ever, maybe. Is there a message? That makes me feel old. Thank you for... Well, is there a message that you would like to leave that, you know, not directed from our curriculum here, but that you wanted to leave as far as your experience with Anna and as your career went on? I think a message, a good message from my perspective is to approach the organization and the experience with a sense of enjoyment. I mean, it's a fun organization and the field is fun and interesting and exciting. So, you know, get out of it something that's enjoyable. And I think that the second aspect of that is that there are some really, really smart, innovative people that you can learn from. I mean, pay attention to what those folks are saying and doing because you can translate that into your own practice and your own experience. But the third thing is, at the same time, I think it's important to have a healthy bit of skepticism. Not everything that everybody says is right or makes sense, even if they're the most famous person in the world. And I think that it takes a while to develop that sort of polished judgment when you're listening to somebody that, like, I don't have to do exactly that quite yet. Like, it's OK to wait for a year or two and see how that works out. I don't think it's healthy to just always feel an urgency to be the first person to do the first thing and be so competitive that you accept everything just at face value. Because there's a lot of examples of ideas that have just been awful in retrospect. And so, you know, being trusting in your own training and your own intelligence to weave through what seems smart and may not be is worthwhile. Well, that's a great advice. I think that's a good way to end it. It's been such a pleasure talking to you. I'm so glad I got to meet you, Dr. Petterwitz. Likewise, likewise. Thank you for doing this. I hope it's fun for you. Oh, yeah, this has been a lot of fun. I'm going to go compare my Stryker monitor to the split catheter and see how it sounds. Feel free to get in touch afterwards if you want to further the conversation. I will. OK, great. Thank you very much. My pleasure.

Dr. Rob Petterwitz

Anna

orthopedic surgery

innovative colleagues

healthy skepticism

professional growth

critical thinking

independent judgment