首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Anesthesia Progress >Who should determine the medical necessity of dental sedation and general anesthesia? A clinical commentary supported by Illinois patient and practitioner surveys.
【2h】

Who should determine the medical necessity of dental sedation and general anesthesia? A clinical commentary supported by Illinois patient and practitioner surveys.

机译:谁应该确定牙科镇静和全身麻醉的医疗必要性?由伊利诺伊州患者和从业人员调查支持的临床评论。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Many third-party payers try to deny benefits for dental sedation and general anesthesia. The term "not medically necessary" is often applied to these services by third-party payers. The label is poorly defined and varies from payer to payer. This paper uses original practitioner and patient opinion surveys to support the position that the definition of medical necessity is solely the joint responsibility of the patient and his/her physician. These surveys also support the argument that both patients and practitioners view dental sedation and general anesthesia as a medically necessary procedure if it allows a patient to complete a medically necessary surgical procedure that he/she might otherwise avoid.
机译:许多第三方付款人试图否认牙科镇静和全身麻醉的益处。术语“在医疗上不是必需的”通常由第三方付款人应用于这些服务。标签的定义不明确,付款人之间存在差异。本文使用原始从业人员和患者意见调查来支持以下观点:医疗必要性的定义仅是患者及其医师的共同责任。这些调查也支持这样的论点,即如果患者和从业者允许完成镇静和全身麻醉是他/她本可以避免的医学上必要的外科手术,则这是医学上必要的过程。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号