My daughter had dental work years back. Now part of it is left and
it's bothering her. They say they need to remove two mollars (?) in
order to take the old dentistry out or something will happen like the
teeth leaning in on each other or some such thing.
They say because they have to cut into the gum it's dental surgery.
Because of that, they say they have to use anesthesia. Supposedly the
anesthesia is the reason it's going to cost into the thousands, which
is absolutely an insane amount of money for removing two teeth.
I had a tooth removed once where they called it dental surgery and I
didn't use anesthesia. I refused it. Still the bill was an insane
$500!
Is there some law that says they have to use anesthesia? I think they
have just pulled the wool over my daughter and her mother's eyes when
some kind of local anesthetic will be fine.
Polite thoughts welcome. I want my daughter to have the care she needs
without my wallet getting raked over the coals.
D.
darlin - 22 Dec 2007 03:30 GMT
In article <85f2ba62-1f10-4188-aeb1-
f8bd63a5e1ae@b40g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, geermeister@gmail.com
says...
> My daughter had dental work years back. Now part of it is left and
> it's bothering her. They say they need to remove two mollars (?) in
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> have just pulled the wool over my daughter and her mother's eyes when
> some kind of local anesthetic will be fine.
The oral surgeon downtown, here, just gives you a local anesthetic and
IV sedation when he has to dig a wisdom tooth out. He calls it "going
to sleep" but it doesn't really put you all the way out, it just makes
you verrrrrrrry calm and relaxed and when you come out of it you can't
quite recall everything that happened. Somebody has to drive you home
afterward because you act kinda drunk for a few hours after you "wake
up".
I forget what he charges, but I think it's around $100 for the local and
another $300 for the IV. ...That's for the entire visit, not per tooth.
(And I think he charges roughly $300-800 per tooth for the actual
extraction, depending on how hard it is to dig out of your head. So,
'round here, two surgical extractions with local anesthetic and IV
sedation would probably be a total of about $1400 plus/minus $400.)
Jeffrey Krantz - 26 Dec 2007 01:46 GMT
General anesthesia is not a requirement most of the time. THAT having been
said, some patients will not tolerate procedures so as a matter of comfort
they are "put to sleep". Unfortunately, that extra cost is not in order to
make a profit for the doctor, but to cover the malpractice insurance.
In the NYC area, I [who do not do general anesthesia] pay about 5K year for
malpractice insurance. If I was to do general in my office, that number goes
up to 32K/year. Guess who pays the difference??
letsconnect - 26 Dec 2007 05:25 GMT
Single-drug IV sedation is very safe. I've heard that malpractice
insurance is pretty costly in the US though. It would be good if the
rates of malpractice insurance for straightforward single-drug
(midazolam) conscious IV sedation were a lot lower than for
potentially more dangerous "mixers", to reflect the actual risk
involved. That might make IV sedation more easily available, more
attractive to dentists, and maybe cut down on the use of GA.
> General anesthesia is not a requirement most of the time. THAT having been
> said, some patients will not tolerate procedures so as a matter of comfort
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> malpractice insurance. If I was to do general in my office, that number goes
> up to 32K/year. Guess who pays the difference??
Jeffrey Krantz - 27 Dec 2007 03:50 GMT
I will admit to now knowing much IV sedation: that been said, it does not
matter in the US whether you use a single drug or a cocktail, your
malpractice zooms
> Single-drug IV sedation is very safe. I've heard that malpractice
> insurance is pretty costly in the US though. It would be good if the
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>> goes
>> up to 32K/year. Guess who pays the difference??