Contact

Press articles on hip resurfacing

March 10th, 2010

Yesterday’s (9 March 2010) Daily Mail and New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/10/business/10device.html) had articles about problems with hip resurfacing. Here is an extract of the Daily Mail article:

‘As fears over these issues grow, sales of resurfacing implants in Britain have fallen. Surgeons say patients with pain-free resurfaced hips should have no cause for concern, but younger women are being counselled against it because surgeons have no way of predicting those who will be affected. However, the surgery remains an option for younger, robust men who appear to fare best with it. Kevin Jervis, 49, a police sergeant from Norwich, was a perfect candidate. He lived in continual pain so intense he couldn’t put on his own shoes, so had both hips resurfaced in 2003.  He has since gone on to achieve the highest Tae Kwon Do ranking, and says hip resurfacing has given him back his life.

Jeremy Latham, consultant orthopaedic surgeon at Southampton General Hospital, says: ‘Some orthopaedic surgeons who do a lot of hip surgery have some concerns about resurfacing. But this needs to be kept in perspective.

‘Hip resurfacing remains a good option for the right patient. I think we need carefully to screen and select patients so we can tailor the best procedure for every patient.’

The New York Times article is mainly concerned with an implant called the ASR.  I have never used this device, and it is no longer being sold.

There are some concerns about soft tissue reactions to metal ions, but the vast majority of patients who have had a resurfacing are very happy with the outcome and can look forward to many years of pain relief and excellent function. If you have had a hip resurfacing and are experiencing problems such as pain, or it doesn’t ‘feel right’, you should speak to your surgeon and ask for advice.

| Comment (0)

Private Health Insurance – important information

March 8th, 2010

About 11% of the people in the UK have private health insurance. There are many providers of this type of insurance, and they are understandably keen to grow their business whilst maintaining profitability. Over the last few years there has been increasing pressure from the insurers to move to ‘managed care’ which inevitably reduces the ability of patients to choose their specialist and preferred hospital. The following information from the Federation of Independent Practitioner Organizations (FIPO) explains what this might mean, and how to ensure that you get what you want. If you would like more information about this please contact me.

‘INFORMATION ABOUT REFERRING PATIENTS IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR
To All General Practitioners March 2010

Dear Doctor,
You may receive this letter more than once from various consultants and if so please accept our apologies. FIPO represents the profession in the independent sector and we are writing out to General Practitioners about some changes in the way in which certain insurers may deal with their subscribers when you refer them to a specific consultant.
Some insurers are implementing a ‘preferred provider’ strategy and whilst this may only affect a few patients who you refer for a private consultation or treatment you should be aware of the potential implications. It is possible that attempts will be made by the insurer at preauthorisation (when the patient phones the insurer to obtain authorisation to see the consultant you have recommended) to deflect the patient towards certain other consultants even though a specific consultant has been chosen by you, the GP and/or the patient. In some cases, the patient may have been under the care of their consultant for years and is then sent elsewhere. The reasons given for this deflection may vary but often it is stated that the consultant’s fees are too high.
Your patients should be warned to ignore this type of diversion as patients should always be able to obtain a fee estimate before deciding for themselves if they wish to proceed with their first choice of consultant.
Be aware that this is not in any way an attack on any specific insurer nor is it our intention to advise patients to change their insurance company. We are only asking that you warn your patients of this possibility. It applies to all specialties and whilst at the moment only a small number of patients may be affected there is an increasing trend towards this type of American styled “Managed Care”. All professional bodies have made it clear that patients should have the right to see the consultant of their choice and that they should not be diverted for any reason by the insurer. We hope that these types of restrictive networks do not take root because if they do then continuity of care and choice for GPs and patient will be significantly restricted.
In summary, please reinforce this message to your patients when you refer them for private treatment and make sure they insist on seeing the consultant of their choice. More information and also the FIPO Patients’ Charter can be seen on our website (www.fipo.org) and this defines the correct relationship between patient and doctor.
Thank you for your help
From the FIPO Board’

| Comment (0)