Dr. Glen Arthur Brunk, MD

It was easy to get an appointment to see Dr. Brunk. Now I realize it's probably because no one else wants to be his patient! The staff in the Greenwood office of Urology of Indiana were unfriendly to the point of being rude. I felt as though I were interrupting their gossip time. The young man at the receptionist desk was rude not only to me but also to a frail, elderly man who had had surgery just 3 days earlier. The woman who checked me out never even spoke to me, but she found plenty of time to stop whatever it was she was doing to process me to gossip with the young man at the receptionist desk. Those two alone would be enough for me to never go back there. However, Dr. Brunk convinced me to avoid Urology of Indiana at all costs. He didn't even come in to the exam room at first. He sent in an intern to "get a good interview." After the intern left, I was left waiting for quite a while before the doctor decided to come in. Despite the "good interview" and the history and… symptoms I had provided, Dr. Brunk immediately decided that I have interstitial cystitis. IC, like fibromyalgia and IBS, are cop out diagnoses that doctors use when they can't or won't try to find out what's really wrong. I told the good doctor that I would not accept this "diagnosis" until every other possibility had been investigated and ruled out. He told me to cut acid out of my diet and I would improve in two months. He finally, begrudgingly, told me he would do a cystoscopy--without medication--just to prove to me that he's right. He seemed to think he was indulging me by doing a diagnostic test. Needless to say, I will not be returning to see Dr. Brunk, let alone allowing him to stick a cystoscope into my bladder without medication! I will continue looking for a doctor who will listen to me, who at least acts as though he/she cares, and who will take the time to try to understand me and explain to me what they are thinking. I would not recommend this doctor or his practice to anyone.

I found Dr. Brunk to be very kind andeasy going, would listen to me notpreach to me (like most other uroligist Iv been too see)He listened to suggestions that I had, I inform myselfabout the BPH vs cancer diagnosis.He pushed biposy of course, that howthey pay for their Porch cars, but whenI said I didn't want that due to thecomplications associated with proceedurehe said thats fine, my decision.He did a digital and found no abnormalities, and the free and attachedblood test was ok so we waited.Been to him about 5 times, sees to careand not rush into surgury which by theway, most of 5 urologist Iv been totried to scare me to death to do testsand suggested some pretty gross proceedures. This guy cars i think butbe very careful with urologists, doyour homework and don't get scared.Good luck.

I saw Dr. Brunk for my health concerns. He did a urinalysis and told me I was fine. I knew I was not because of my symptoms. He barely spoke to me, except to tell me I was fine. This was three months ago. I had to go to him again, because my symptoms were not getting better. Again, he looked at me like I was crazy and told me I was fine. I went to see a nother Urologist, and right away he looked at my urinalysis results and said I had an infection in my prostrate which would explain all of the syptoms I was having. I am now on some medicine and will hopefully be feeling better soon. Dr. Brunk not only left me with no answers, he caused me a great deal of stress and anxiety (which led to more doctor visits with various other doctors) because I had no answers for my symptoms. Needless to say, I would not recommend him under any circumstances.

My father has been a patient of Dr. Brunk since 1999. Since that time Dr. Brunk has never provided visual documentation to support his diagnosis and treatment. Recently my father had a surgery for the bladder cancer. It was supposed to be one-day hospital stay, but it turned into the two-week ordeal. During this time Dr. Brunk has not visited the patient even once. We were told he was on vacation. We specifically inquired about this issue prior to scheduling the surgery and were informed that the doctor was not planning on taking any personal days off after our surgery date. Dr. Brunk's associates visited my father in the hospital. The medication he was placed on - Cipro 500mg BID, but it did not help. He developed severe infection, but they were assuring us that it was nothing, until a week later when my father almost died from this infection. He developed sepsis, although they say it was unconfirmed, ended up with two blood transfusions, IV antibiotic. If it had not been for the… Internal Medicine doctor who was doing rounds during the time my father started convulsing and going into shock, we would have lost him. This IM doctor saved my father's life and we will be grateful to him forever. Dr. Brunk's associates tried to blame everything but themselves. After such extensive surgery they were supposed to put my father on IV antibiotics from the beginning. Cipro 500 bid is good for UTI, or cystitis, but not for such extensive procedure. When my father was finally discharged, we saw Dr. Brunk for post-surgery cystoscopy to see how the bladder looked. Not even once Dr. Brunk made or provided us or the oncologists with the pictures of the tumors before and after surgery, or of those numerous cystoscopies he had done on my father. We though that we were the only ones who did not get the supporting documentation- pictures of his tumors. Oncologists did not get anything either. They have been designing treatments based on Dr. Brunk's two-sentence reports: found carcinoma of bladder, multiple tumors. We had numerous CT scans and MRIs done, but they cannot as good of a picture as a cystoscopy picture and report would. After my father underwent chemo and radiation treatments,the only two sentences Dr. Brunk wrote in his report for oncologists after performing cystoscopy were: "great reduction in tumor", and "viable tumor". The doctors had no idea of what the tumor looked like before nor after treatment, which of the tumors the doctor was referring to, which of the tumors was left after the treatments, its size, and its viability/condition: was the tumor dying from treatments, or was it growing. Dr. Brunk may be a good doctor, but I have been very disappointed with his professionalism and documentation practices. I am sure that there is equipment that many doctors use, e.t. my ENT, to provide patients with visual proof of what it is they are treating. It is very important not only for the patient's confidence but for the patient's improvement continued treatment. And at this day and age not to have it is unforgivable. This kind of documentation can also protect you from liability. Doctor cannot possibly remember every patient's tumors. I would NOT recommend Dr. Brunk to my friends.