has been to a number of other doctors or have previous surgeries, you're going to go through your systems review and that should be on the case history. Then you have to pick the appropriate tests to run on the patient. As Dr. Sam said, the government has given us leeway to use the term PART which he elaborated on. I guess I step back and I tell all the doctors that I'd like to them to turn the magic prism. What I explained with the magic prism is let's say you've got a 72-year-old woman that comes in and she has a history of osteoporosis or osteopenia and she's been on the drug Boniva for a number of years. It'd be prudent, in my opinion, for the doctor to take an x-ray if the patient had that type of history because, again, you're looking at a patient that has had a long history of demineralization. They're on medications. To just say you're going do PART or something from a malpractice point of view, from an attorney point of view, from the attorneys I have talked to, they look at it like no x-rays no defense. Again, they have to turn the magic prism so not only do we have to do a good job as a chiropractor, we have to also to protect ourselves, and again, follow the things that ChiroSecure tells the doctors in the different programs and seminars. Ken, I’m so glad that you brought up the point about x-ray because I know Sam talked about PART and that certainly one of the options. We also, again, grew up on, in a time where x-ray was the gold standard in being able to see and analyze that patient from a chiropractic perspective. It's something that I always recommend is that the doctors take x-rays. Not everyone does but I go out on a whim that is my recommendation. I know that some of the newer doctors or as they're graduating, we're finding that less and less of them are going into practice with x-rays. That should not hold somebody up in these types of situations from at least sending them out if there's enough red flags that Ken was just talking about, to send them out to an imaging center if the x-ray is unique to tell you the information that's appropriate so that you can proceed ahead because he's right. We're talking about Medicare reimbursement or audits. At the same time, we always have to look at protecting the patient, and therefore, making sure the doctor is reducing their risk while practicing because we will be the best of defending of you if you wind up with a claim. I just rather be proactive and have you practice in a way that doesn’t lead to a claim. I hope that that wasn’t missed in the conversation here. Sam, let's come back for a minute because you review for the doctors, their patient files and do reviews of your own all the time for these doctors. I'd encourage anyone that wants to get onboard to contact you because your network that you offer up is essential. It's so dirt cheap for doctors to have peace of mind. In the terms of your reviewing the files, is there something that you think is like the number 1 thing that these doctors seemed to be missing in terms of their documentation. What are they failing at? That's a good point. The things that they fell at are pretty common. I would say for the most part, it's just failure of documentation in general. I do want to piggyback just quickly before I get more detail there. Here would be my point. If you have a 65-year-old or older person coming to the office and you are not
Dr. Hoffman:
Dr. Collins:
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online