This document was distributed in 1999 as a 2-page handout at a presentation to an insurance group given by VAT’-TECH medical director Frank Tilaro, M.D. The FDA’s 510K clearance to market the device does not permit the manufacturer to represent that VAX-D therapy affects disc metabolism or is “approved for lumbar disc herniations, degeneration, by effecting lumbar decompression,” as stated below.
- Dozens of lower Courts as well as all appellate court decision have upheld that VAX-D is different than traction.
- Medical Technology Group (5) National utilization and review company that reviews new technologies and reports findings to subscribing insurance companies. After an extensive study, they published a four part review of their findings.
- VAX-D is different than traction and should have a separate identifiable code and separate relative value.
- BLUE CROSS/ BLUE SHIELD OF MINNESOTA
Has offered VAX-D providers a contract with a different relative value and procedure code than traction.
- Relative Value for Physicians (RVP) (6) the most widely used proprietary relative value system. The only independent relative value source established other than medicare. Utilized by approximately 50% or insurance companies/HMO’s to determine reimbursability. Has established a preliminary code, separate from traction, in January of 1999.
- Has established a relative value of 28 compared to traction which is, 6 after extensive review of the technology.
- Based criteria on
- Time it takes.
- Skill involved.
- Risks to patient.
- Risks to provider
- Severity of illness.
- Written opinions of two local Medical Doctors whom we utilized for case studies.
- No previous U & R has been performed locally, regionally or nationally by ally independent entity that continues to describe as traction after review of all data.
This article was posted on May 4, 2000.