Dr. Fife,
I wanted to provide some follow up on the “Tale of Two Wounds”. Eventually, Wound #1 cost Medicare (and the taxpayer) almost half a million dollars whereas Wound #2 cost less than 1% of that. And since the patient is responsible for 20% of those Medicare charges, Wound #1 cost the patient (or the secondary insurance) $99,760, whereas Wound #2 cost the patient $900.
I did not make much money treating Wound #2, but the PT and NP who treated Wound #1 made a total of around $124,700 each (they arranged a 50:50 split of the discounted pricing from the distributor). Given the potential revenue that these products represent, I understand why they are used unnecessarily and why manufacturers and clinicians are fighting so hard to keep the price per cm2 as high as possible.
However, what I don’t understand is how the price per cm2 of amniotic products can differ by over 1000% if they are all “minimally manipulated”?
I hope the reimbursement changes suggested by CMS will at least ensure that the cost of these products will be reasonable, but I am sure that lobbyists will have their way.
Thank you,
Ward Bowron, PT, DPT
wbowron@wyomingwoundcare.com
The post A Follow Up on the “Tale of Two Wounds” and the Madness of Skin Sub Pricing appeared first on Caroline Fife M.D..