Portal Login:
  • Clients
  • Providers
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
    Portal Login:
  • Clients
  • Providers
  • About Mitchell MCN
  • Careers
  • MCNTalk
  • Contact Us

Mitchell MCN

The Power of a Second Look

  • Services
    • Independent Medical Examinations
    • Medical Peer Reviews
    • Bill Review Services
    • Utilization Reviews
  • Expertise
    • Short and Long-Term Disability
    • Workers’ Compensation
    • Auto/PIP/Casualty/Liability
    • Independent Review Organization Services
  • For Clients
  • For Providers
  • Your Exam
    • About Your Exam
    • About Your External Review
    • Contact & Scheduling
  • Schedule Now
  • About Mitchell MCN
  • MCNTalk
  • Careers
  • Contact Us

MCNTalk
News, Insights & Opinions

Home / MCNTalk / Reaping Royalties, Medicare Bounty

December 30, 2010

Reaping Royalties, Medicare Bounty

This article from the Wall Street Journal is important in a number of ways: Implant surgery is both highly expensive as well as hotly debated as to efficacy and indications. The article suggests that not only are the surgeons profiled therein highly compensated for their expertise in the operating room (and are not compensated nearly as well for declining to perform a procedure), but they appear to be receiving incentives from the device manufacturer for their relationship – one that is more than likely contingent upon continued use of and promotion of the devices.

The article discloses relationships of the sort that in the past were unreported but significant. Spine surgery is often suggested in workers’ compensation cases as well as auto accidents. The indications and cost of such procedures is highly relevant to those overseeing such claims.

Beyond continued scrutiny and perhaps regulation, what other suggestions are in order? One is that any patient should ask and have the right to know if their prospective surgeon is receiving compensation of any sort from device and pharmaceutical manufacturers, including the amount and the rationale behind the royalties. If surgery is proposed and a device by a company compensating the physician is to be used, it would be reasonable to get a second opinion from a physician who has no such interests.

47.608945-122.332015

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Email
  • More
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Print

Tagged: Cost Containment, Health Policy, Legal Issues, Regulatory Issues, Workers' Compensation Leave a Comment

Previous Post
Next Post

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

4 × five =

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • February Clinic Calendars Are Available
  • Mitchell MCN’s Client Portal Login Page is Changing
  • IRO Team to Host Webinar about Genetics on Dec. 5, 2019
  • December Clinic Calendars are Now Available
  • Mitchell MCN’s IRO Team to Host CEU in December

Archives

Footer


  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Quick Links

  • Services
  • Expertise
  • About Mitchell MCN
  • Careers

Division Headquarters

Mitchell MCN
1301 5th Ave., Ste. 2900
Seattle, WA 98101

See all offices

Email Us

General Inquiries: info@mcn.com
Sales & Marketing: marketing@mcn.com

Call Us

206.343.6100
800.248.6269

© Copyright 2021 Mitchell International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.