PubMed · 14671784
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Anne Bender. 2003. Good practice.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14671784/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Medieval (12th-14th century) medical literature suggests that care of the teeth was largely limited to non-invasive treatment. Cures, mainly for toothache and "tooth worm" were based on herbal remedies, charms and amulets. Bloodletting was advised for certain types of toothache. There is also documentary evidence for powders to clean teeth and attempts at filling carious cavities. Surgical intervention for oral cancer and facial fracture is also known. Post-operative infection and abscess formation can be identified and early forms of false teeth are mentioned.
This final addresses eliminating the requirement for TRICARE preauthorization of inpatient mental health care for TRICARE/Medicare eligible beneficiaries where Medicare is primary payer and has already authorized the care; approving a physician or other health care practitioner who is eligible to receive reimbursement for services provided under Medicare as a TRICARE provider if the provider is also a TRICARE authorized provider; and, expanding the TRICARE Dental Program (TDP) eligibility for dependents of deceased members.
OBJECTIVES: To examine how pricing policies were contrived in general dental practice in terms of fee-for-item and hourly rate and how these were affected by specialist status and the level of private care provided in a practice. DESIGN: A postal questionnaire. SUBJECTS: Members of the British Society for General Dental Surgery working in dental practice. RESULTS: Out of 160 eligible members, responses were received from 124 members (78%). Fifty-seven respondents claimed to specialise in one or more fields of dentistry. The majority of respondents consulted fellow colleagues or partners for advice on fee setting. A minority took external advice. The charging method varied according to the item of treatment with fee-for-item used predominantly for items such as a new patient examination, and hourly rate used more for items such as a direct composite restoration. Seventy-one respondents stated that their practice was 80-100% private treatment and these practitioners were significantly more likely to charge by hourly rate than fee-for-item for many items of treatment. Specialist status did not have any effect on charging method. The most important factors related to the setting of fees-for-item or hourly rate were clinical time spent, practice overheads and laboratory costs. CONCLUSIONS: This project has taken the views of a large group of experienced general dental practitioners, many of whom work purely in the private sector. The most important factors affecting fee setting were clinical time, practice overheads and laboratory costs. The method of charging was most affected by the proportion of private treatment provided by the practice.