Guest guest Posted February 14, 2004 Report Share Posted February 14, 2004 > Well...coding it as a THR does smell suspiciously like insurance > fraud. ================== It might qualify as fraudulous *if* the word " THR " would be used. However I believe that is not the case based on my experience. Here is my story: I was so (positively) surprised (but skeptical) when I heard from the OS office that the request for my Resurf was approved, that I contacted my insurance to hear it " from the horses mouth " . Reason for my skepticism was that a friend of mine (who had, I thought, the same insurance coverage) had been rejected and ended up going to Belgium. Anyway I was careful not to mention " resurfacing " and extracted the following information: the approval was for procedure 27130 which means " arthroplasty " . So no misinformation involved here as far as I can tell. Now about the money issue. I gave a detailed breakdown of the cost and payments of my bills in msg #22797. Hospital bill included the C+ prosthesis and was paid in full! The OS's fee was " discounted " fiercely. That may be the issue why OS's want a different code. Ed Mont RC+ Nov 03 PS. I was just going thru the motions exploring if I were a good Resurf candidate and finding out more about the procedure. But I was resigned to maybe have to wait another year till Resurf was FDA approved, or maybe even having to go to Belgium. Imagine my surprise.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.