Search This Blog

Showing posts with label joint replacement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label joint replacement. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Tragic. High Cost of Failing Artificial Hips

To be filed under "Follow the Money." This has got to be horrendous for patients since you know that the insurance company's costs will be reimbursed first since they can hire more lawyers. And to have to be dealing with these kinds of financial issues and law suits when you're not feeling well. Horrible. Some excerpts follow. I've been following this story for the 6 months and it follows the typical trajectory of the companies ignoring complaints, blaming the physicians and then finally having to cop to the problem. Not good. Not good at all. Recent blog post on topic here.
The High Cost of Failing Artificial Hips
By BARRY MEIER

The most widespread medical implant failure in decades — involving thousands of all-metal artificial hips that need to be replaced prematurely — has entered the money phase.

Medical and legal experts estimate the hip failures may cost taxpayers, insurers, employers and others billions of dollars in coming years, contributing to the soaring cost of health care. The financial fallout is expected to be unusually large and complex because the episode involves a class of products, not a single device or just one company...

The incidents have set off a financial scramble. Recently, lawsuits and complaints against makers of all-metal replacement hips passed the 5,000 mark. Insurers are alerting patients that they plan to recover their expenses from any settlement money that patients receive. Medicare is also expected to try to recover its costs...
Still, some patients are weathering some of the financial impacts on their own. While Charmin McCune, a teacher in Wylie, Tex., is recuperating well from a recent replacement operation, she said that she and her husband, also a teacher, have had more than $12,000 in expenses that have not been covered by insurance.

Information on my practice here.

Friday, December 23, 2011

New Joint Implants no Better Than Older Ones

Filed under "Follow the Money"
December 22, 2011
New Models of Implants Not Better, Study Finds
By BARRY MEIER

A new study suggests that the recent technology for artificial hips and knees did not perform any better than older, less expensive designs.

The study, which draws on data from Australia’s orthopedic registry, covered implants introduced from 2003 to 2007 and was published this week. The findings are significant for patients in the United States because many of the new designs, like so-called metal-on-metal hips, are widely used here. Those implants, which have both a ball and cup made of metal, are expected to fail prematurely in tens of thousands of patients rather than lasting 15 years or more as artificial joints are supposed to do.
The Australian study showed that not a single new artificial hip or knee introduced over a recent five-year period was any more durable than older ones. In fact, 30 percent of them fared worse...


“Not only has the introduction of this technology been potentially detrimental to patient care, but the current approach may be an important driver of increased health care costs,” the review concluded...

That review, by researchers in Austria (mistake, should be Australia), found that surgeons involved in the original published reports are often involved in its development and may have a financial stake in them. In addition, such reviews tend to be short term...
This month, bipartisan legislation was introduced in the Senate that could force manufacturers to track the performance of implants like artificial hips after they have been approved for sale. Proponents of the bill acknowledge that the measure faces an uphill fight.
Both device producers and their allies in Congress have maintained that any additional F.D.A. regulations would slow the development and marketing of innovative products that benefit patients. For his part, Dr. Graves, the Australian official, said he believed that such arguments were misleading.

Where have we heard that before?? That regulation will somehow damage innovation, or hurt business and job creation? Just about every time any sort of regulation is proposed, that's when.
Info on my practice here.