Banner
Home → Focus

Focus
Interview Exclusive - Albert Santalo, CEO, CareCloud Print E-mail
Written by Jeffrey Herschler   
Thursday, 11 November 2010 11:06

An experienced entrepreneur, Mr. Santalo founded CareCloud in 2009 with the vision of becoming a healthcare information technology leader focused on eliminating the waste and inefficiency in the healthcare industry today. Previously, Mr. Santalo was Founder and Chairman of Avisena, a software-enabled revenue cycle management company in the healthcare industry where he worked from 2001 to 2008. He is the lead inventor and has a U.S. patent for Avisena's Accounts Receivable Management Methodology. He holds an MBA from FIU.  CareCloud was founded with the explicit goal of uniting a disjointed healthcare industry by giving providers good cause to snap out of their software-imposed quarantine. The firm is striving to replace legacy practice management applications with online solutions that are lightweight, intuitive, and most importantly, connected.  Launched with $2.8 million, the firm just completed its second round of fundraising and has collected an additional $5 million (click here to see the full story published in SFBJ).  I had an opportunity to interview Mr. Santalo (AS) on October 20 and had a chance to learn more about the company as well as his views on health policy and the economy. Below is an excerpt from that conversation.     

Thanks for visitng FloridaHealthIndustry.com!

Jeff Herschler (JH)

JH        Congratulations on the $5 million.  How will you spend it?

AS        Product development, programming, increased sales capacity, corporate infrastructure and staffing will be the main focus.  We are hiring.  We have 52 or 53 employees currently and will add 23 more this quarter.  Our firm intends to hire 50 more in the first half of 2011 and an additional 75 in the second half of the year.

JH        Impressive.  Now let's back up a step.  Can you explain to our readers what CareCloud does?

AS        We are a medical practice automation platform based in the cloud. Additionally we offer revenue cycle management services. Unlike legacy software solutions there is no upfront cost and you pay as you go. The CareCloud community is a social network connecting patients, physicians, practices and payers.  The solution is safe, secure and HIPAA compliant.

JH        You mentioned a social network.  Is CareCloud a FaceBook for healthcare stakeholders?

AS        In many respects, yes.  We utilize Facebook-like methods to engage doctors and patients in a secure, social network-like technology environment.

JH        The business plan's foundation is on cloud computing.  Isn't it possible that cloud computing is just another technology fad?

AS        No way. The benefits of cloud computing, otherwise known as Internet-based computing, are too great to think it will ever go away - it's not just another Internet bubble; it's the future of IT.  Physicians realize that to optimize their practice, they must embrace technology.  We offer that technology but you don't need to be a techie to use it.  It's also very accessible because it's a pay-as-you-go model.

JH        The medical home and the accountable care organization were two pillars of healthcare reform.  Can your technology help transform these ideas into reality?

AS        Without a doubt.  These two related concepts put the burden on primary care to keep patients healthy.  The systems in place now are practice centric.  CareCloud's solution is patient centric and cross-practice centric.

JH        The Republicans have added Healthcare Reform Repeal to their platform.  What are their chances of success?

AS        Pretty decent. We'll see what happens now that the Republicans have taken control of the House.

(see related article from CNN.com Repeal 'Obamacare': GOP will try at least posted 11.03.10) 

JH        You launched in the depths of the Great Recession.  What's your view on the economy now?

AS        I think high unemployment is going to be with us for a number of years.  Millions of jobs were lost and now Americans have to retrain for new jobs.  Corporate balance sheets are healthy and the economy is back on a growth track.  Entrepreneurial activity creates jobs but entrepreneurs are also looking to reduce cost by automating and off shoring jobs. 

JH        These are pretty typical elements of the business cycle.  Why do you think unemployment is going to be so hard to solve this time around.

AS        Technology and innovation developments are evolving at a rapidly accelerated rate. This exponential change means some workers are going to be left behind if they do not retool.

JH        To what extent is the government responsible for transforming healthcare delivery?

AS        We need a national infrastructure for financial, administrative and clinical transactions.  The government needs to create the environment for capitalists to build that system. 

JH        Why hasn't the free market been able to do it without government help?

AS        Providers are fragmented and haven't been able to act in a unified manner.  Payers benefit from complexity and disorganization.  They are models of efficiency when collecting premiums but become mired in bureaucracy when it comes time to reimburse.  The whole health system is weighed down by antiquated technology.  We deal with one insurer that accepts submissions using a modem. The mentality is that healthcare is a zero sum game but really it needs to be about the patient.

JH        The prophets of doom would have us believe the nation is headed for ruin.  The reasons for our ultimate bankruptcy are healthcare inflation, unfunded government liabilities and an aging population.  How does healthcare IT prevent the Armageddon prediction?

AS        25 to 50 cents of every healthcare dollar is spent unnecessarily. The culprits are administrative waste, fraud & abuse and redundant care.  Well designed healthcare technology, properly implemented, can solve all three problems.

 

Last Updated on Friday, 19 November 2010 15:46
 
PHYSICIAN PRACTICE MERGERS ON THE RISE AGAIN?! Print E-mail
Written by Michael Casanova   
Thursday, 09 September 2010 10:55

One essential skill of leaders and leading health care consultants is their ability to identify market forces that are driving meaningful change. An emergent trend that deserves close scrutiny is the transformation of the solo practitioner and the small group practice.  Health care reform appears to be speeding up the process of consolidation within the physician group practice sector.  The era of the traditional solo and duo medical practice model that we have come to trust may be going the way of the dinosaur.  More importantly, if the consolidation trend continues it will be particularly evident in the S. FL Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). South Florida has been acknowledged as a mature and heavily penetrated managed care market, dominated by a "small groups" marketplace. The physician delivery system is characterized as disorganized, and heavily dominated by traditional solo and duo medical group practices across the landscape. Put simply South Florida is an ideal market for practice consolidation.

According to a study released in August by the Center for Studying Health System Change, physicians in solo or two physician practices decreased from 41% in 1996-97 to 33% in 2004-05, while the proportion who practice in larger groups of six to 50 grew from 13% to 18%, representing a 38% increase. These statistics demonstrate a definite trend toward large group settings and away from the traditional practice model of the past.

By the same token, there exists very little that has not already been tried in the empirical past. Much like the days of the Nixon administration (circa 1970's) which spawned the creation of DRG's forever changing the reimbursement landscape away from cost reimbursement to perspective payment systems (PPS), today we see more sweeping changes toward more preventive measures and coordination of care across the entire health care spectrum. The root cause driving these changes remains the same threat of an unsustainable health care system or lack thereof depending on one's point of view. Particular perspectives notwithstanding, the traditional one or two physician medical practice models are clearly no longer viable and may be headed for obsolescence. Even a cursory review of history proves that either one adapts, changes and evolves or be selected for extinction.

Not many would argue against characterizing the current healthcare scene as unstable, with rapidly intensifying competition, increasing costs, shrinking profit margins, and intensifying challenges with regard to compliance with consumer expectations. All these forces point toward an unsustainable system and possible medical Armageddon unless all participants in the health care transition re-tool and compromise for the greater good and mutual survival.

It does seem that once again the circumstances of history do repeat themselves. Today physicians' interest in merging with other physicians who may share a common vision is re-emerging. I recall the group practice merger activity of the 90's, and what a disaster that was for most.  One may argue the 90's mergers only left a -$21B hole in the U.S. economy.

Unlike the merger craze of the 90's, this time around is characterized by sober thoughts of self preservation. No doubt this is due to a series of dream shattering economic realities caused by "irrational over exuberance" over a series of decades. We experienced  economic bubbles that began with an S&L bail-out (circa 1980's), followed by a dot-com burst, followed by deficit spending, and arriving today at another housing melt-down combined with massive bailouts all financed and collateralized (i.e., backed by) the "untouchable, sacred" Medicare fund locked box. We have arrived at that point where we can no longer kick the perennial can down the road. Unlike the past, today's practice consolidation isn't driven by caviar dreams and champagne wishes of easy life, but by  survival. No doubt the economist would argue the life cycle model, (i.e. things are born, mature, and either they evolve to another level or they terminate) is just running its course.

           Click here to finish the article

Michael Casanova is a Miami-based healthcare author, executive, and consultant working closely with physicians, medical groups, hospitals and payors.

 

Last Updated on Sunday, 07 November 2010 10:35
 
The Pros and Cons of Health Information Technology Print E-mail
Written by Todd Demel,MBA   
Friday, 20 August 2010 10:16

Health information technology(HIT) comprises systems such as the electronic medical record (EMR),computerized physician order-entry (CPOE), and decision support systems that integrate and improve access to health and patient-related data. The adoption of such technologies is a complex process for a number of reasons. Perhaps the primary roadblock to or disincentive for adoption is that it is one of the most expensive capital investments for any healthcare organization. Physician perception varies widely as to whether or not implementing HIT is desirable,affordable, or even feasible.  However, the case is strong for adoption of health information technology as it offers many clinical and economic advantages.

Advantages:

Coordination of Care - HIT enables a framework for the coordination of care thereby encouraging patient-physician partnerships. In this environment, a team of practitioners works together, moving beyond the paradigm of mere episodic visits.

Decision Support -Physicians currently face a myriad of clinical challenges, including many thousands of possible diagnoses that can be treated by various procedures and different drugs, all of which present potential adverse side effects. Such systems serve to integrate and improve access to health and patient-related data.

Access to Information - HIT enables users to retrieve and store vital medical and patient information which allows patients to be notified of recalls, side effects, and interactions associated with medications they may be using.

Reduction of Costs - Electronic Medical Records can reduce filing and transcription costs. By minimizing the need for paper clinical records, practices can reduce the support staff traditionally needed to perform filing and transcription duties. The potential savings here can be substantial.

Decreased Duplication - The implementation of information technology has been shown to significantly prevent the duplication of imaging and laboratory tests.

Improved Coding - There is potential to substantially impact coding accuracy and revenue capture.

Fears & Concerns:

Despite the many benefits of healthcare information technology, many physicians are hesitant to switch to an electronic system. While insufficient financial resources may be the biggest impediment to implementation, negative perception is another contributing factor. Among the concerns expressed by physicians is that, if it is poorly designed, a computerized physician-order entry system could increase medication errors. There is also a fear that, due to the capacity to copy/paste parts of the electronic record it may be too easy to avoid taking a complete patient medical history. And this in turn could lead to inaccurate assumptions about a patient's condition. Since EMR utilizes templates, physicians may also feel restricted when speaking with patients which could impact the accuracy of diagnoses.

Another negative perception related to the implementation of HIT is that, while providers will inevitably bear disruptions to their established system, payers and patients will gain most of the benefits. So, while physicians and health systems must incur the cost and associated learning curve, insurers get to enjoy the substantial cost savings resulting from automated record handling and having to pay for fewer unnecessary tests.

Equally disconcerting to physicians is the fact that many HIT implementation programs have either been fraught with complications, or failed altogether. Inadequate project management is likely the cause of such breakdowns with many projects running late, or over budget. In some cases, the technology may lack features it was expected to have. The culprits often contributing to these problems include poor planning, miscommunication, mismanagement, overspending, as well as rejection by users.

Achieving Successful Implementation: 

Planning - It is critical that during the planning stage physicians are engaged and participate in the process of design and widespread use of HIT. Physician input is critical to the project's success, and the design of the system should incorporate physician input each step of the way. The practice should designate a specific physician champion, an individual with good leadership skills, as they will be able to achieve buy-in from other physicians and staff.

Resources - Allocation of sufficient human and financial resources must be committed to the effort. Both physicians and clinical staff members should be part of this group.

Project Manager - This individual should initiate and assist in the selection of a system vendor.

Equipment - Determine whether the work environment can accommodate a wireless set-up. Investigate the type of hardware that will be compatible with the vendor's software and serve as the best fit for the providers. Consider logistics with respect to workflow and space capacity in the office. Other equipment such as fax machines, scanners, and printers will need to interface with the system. So, all of these details need to be considered with respect to compatibility and design. 

Framework - If the change is to be sustainable, there should be a logical framework established. For example, this could entail having teams first perform the groundwork, and then embed the change.

The team needs to create a sense of urgency for change by stressing the advantages of the technology. The vision should be clear and uplifting and the group guiding and championing the process should consist of respected individuals who can align resources to achieve the stated objectives. The advantages of an electronic system should be emphasized to everyone, highlighting some of the following benefits:

     Clinical decision support tools - available at the point of care to increase accuracy of order sets.

     Customization - enabling patient-centered care, tailored to individual needs, where necessary.

     Efficiency - greatly improved transmission times in sending orders to receiving departments.

     Clinical Database - enabling staff to continually review and analyze orders and outcomes due to the quality and depth of data collected on an ongoing basis.

The message must be communicated ongoing, through multiple channels such as medical staff and other department meetings so that all employees become aware of the efforts and objectives. Removing obstacles wherever possible will empower people and facilitate the use of the system. Addressing concerns and problems as they arise will also go a long way towards expediting implementation. And creating short-term wins along the way can provide momentum. For example, displaying a quality dashboard that reflects early stage improvement in patients, or one that provides a snapshot of outcome data along with benchmarks will demonstrate to physicians the actual impact the technology can have.  Momentum must be maintained throughout the change process as a new culture is gradually born. This can be achieved by getting physicians involved as much as possible during all stages of the implementation process.

Strategies for Success:

Selecting the Right System- Poor choices can lead to numerous problems including disruption of patient care as well as physician dissatisfaction. The purchase decision should be aligned with the clinical strategic vision and consider the system's feature set, ease of use, as well as the satisfaction rate of other similarly-situated users. One of the best ways to evaluate an installed HIT system is by visiting the sites of clients currently using the vendor's product. In this way, the functionality of the system can be observed in various patient care areas during peak times. 

Forging a Partnership - It is important to establish a strong working relationship with the system vendor you ultimately choose to do business with. Because a vendor relationship extends well beyond the adoption and implementation phase, consideration should be given to the degree of a vendor's trustworthiness. Support will certainly be required after the initial purchase phase and expectations should meet with the promises that were originally made by the vendor at the time of sale. Issues will inevitably arise, and a positive vendor relationship can ensure that problems are resolved quickly and that needed support is always available.

Pricing - During negotiations, products, services, and support should be scrutinized with the vendor. The purchase price of the system must include ongoing maintenance, support, and upgrades. 

Physician Preparation - After submitting a proposal, vendors can be invited to perform a demonstration for the medical staff. Identify workflows and clinical processes that may be streamlined, and schedule meetings with physicians so that strategies can be discussed. Since trained physician users can be invaluable champions of the HIT effort, provide mandatory training sessions for physicians and their assistants.

Projections - Implementation will impact patient volume until all functions of the practice have adapted to the accompanying changes. Therefore, physicians should be prepared for an initial decrease in productivity. Since this will necessarily impact revenue, appropriate budgetary decisions must be made. Cash flow projections for practice revenue should be run based on decreases ranging from 25% to (worst case scenario) 40% on a monthly basis for the first 90 days. 

Going Live - Lighten the schedule with respect to elective clinical procedures for the first month after the go-live date to accommodate initial system inefficiencies. Once the system is in place, offer periodic refresher courses. Track metrics with respect to quality, billing accuracy, and user satisfaction. Then display this data on a dashboard and distribute for monthly review by physicians and management staff. 

While implementation of new technology throughout an organization is inherently disruptive as it inevitably places additional burdens and workflow challenges on staff, strategies such as those described above can be employed to make the transition successful. Commitment across the team of physicians and staff will contribute greatly to a smooth transition as well as a positive return on investment. 

About the author:  Mr. Demel oversees Business Development at MF Healthcare Solutions and also serves as Membership Chair-Elect for the South Florida Healthcare Executive Forum.  He has over 20 years experience in healthcare operations, practice management, and marketing, with emphasis placed on outstanding client service. Possessing both operational and financial backgrounds, the MF Healthcare Solutions management team has vast experience in a range of healthcare industry settings. The combined expertise enables the firm to offer specialized and effective physician practice management services. For more information, please visit: www.mfhealthcare.com or contact Todd Demel at (954) 475-3199. 

Last Updated on Sunday, 29 August 2010 12:36
 
Case Study: Disability Claims and Disputes Print E-mail
Written by Jeffrey Herschler   
Saturday, 31 July 2010 15:33

medical-examThe aging of America is sure to result in an increase in disability claims. Debilitating conditions tend to manifest themselves during the aging process. Nowhere is the trend more imminent than in Florida’s healthcare workforce where the average physician is in his or her early fifties. The typical administrator is in his or her mid forties. Meanwhile the insurance industry is grappling with an investment portfolio hammered by the Great Recession and some poor underwriting criteria in the past that resulted in under pricing. Therefore, another trend to beware of is an increase in disputes as insurers attempt to mitigate the influx by denying claims. Below are two case studies that illustrate the challenges faced by disability policyholders who claim benefit.

Disability Case Study #1: 

REGISTERED NURSE

Scheduled exam with non-doctor

This firm represented a registered nurse who applied for and received disability income benefits based on a total disability due to cervical and lumbar disk herniations. During the course of the claim, and while the insured was being paid monthly disability income benefits, the carrier scheduled a functional capacity evaluation ("FCE"), to be conducted by a therapist. The key to success in this case was the firm's careful review of the disability income insurance policy and experience in handling such disputes. The policy provided that the insurance company had the right to require the insured to undergo a medical examination conducted by a physician of its choice. There was no provision in the disability policy providing the insurance company the right to conduct a FCE or such an evaluation by a non-medical doctor.

On behalf of the client, the firm filed a lawsuit in Federal court seeking a declaratory judgment, injunction and recovery of attorneys' fees and costs. The declaratory action sought the judge's decision on the insurance carrier’s right to require the client to undergo a FCE by a non-doctor in order to continue to receive monthly disability income benefits. The injunction sought to prevent the insurance company from requiring the client to undergo a FCE in order to continue to receive monthly disability income benefits. When the insurance company was served with the lawsuit, it cancelled its scheduled FCE. Thereafter, the insurance company requested that the law firm dismiss the lawsuit. The firm advised the insurance company that the case would be dismissed if the insurer agreed in writing that it did not have the right to pursue a FCE under the terms of the policy, and would never seek to schedule a FCE. The insurance company would not agree to same. Thus, this case is pending a decision by the court.

Disability Case Study#2:

ORTHOPEDICSURGEON

Client's Rights under Florida Law -Videotaping IME

The firm represented an orthopedic surgeon who owned a disability insurance policy insuring him if he became unable to perform the material duties of his own occupation. The surgeon developed carpal tunnel syndrome and was unable to do what he previously had spent his days doing, which involved spending approximately 90% of his time performing surgery. He filed a claim for disability income benefits. The insurance carrier accepted the claim. During the time the insurance company was paying the surgeon benefits, the insurance company scheduled a independent medical evaluation ("IME") for the surgeon, which is in fact an insurance exam with rarely any independence. The insurance company advised the surgeon that he was required under the terms of the policy to attend the evaluation alone. The insurance company also advised the insured that it could terminate his claim if he failed to cooperate. The surgeon contacted the law firm to handle this matter.

The key to the law firm's success was a careful review and understanding of the terms of the policy and Florida law. While the disability policy contained a provision permitting the insurance company the right to require the insured to attend a medical evaluation performed by a doctor of its choice, it did not provide that the insured must attend the evaluation alone or that benefits could be terminated based on the insured's demand to have a third party present at a IME, including a videographer. The law firm advised the carrier of client's willingness to cooperate and attend an IME, as long as it could be videotaped by a professional videographer. The law firm received a copy of the doctor's qualifications and proof the doctor had malpractice insurance.

The insurance company argued that there was no right to have the IME videotaped. The firm responded by providing Florida case law addressing the right of workers' compensation and personal injury claimants to have a third party, be it an attorney or videographer, present at a medical evaluation, considering the adversarial nature of the IME. The law firm went further and advised that it would be filing a declaratory action so that a judge could determine whether under the terms of the policy the carrier had a right to refuse the videotaping of an IME and would seek costs for going through the process. The carrier finally agreed to allow the videotaping of an IME prior to institution of a lawsuit.

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Thanks to the Wagar  Law Firm for contributing the case studies.  Contact or visit www.WagarLaw.com

 

Last Updated on Sunday, 22 August 2010 15:00
 
FTC Announces New Guides on Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising Print E-mail
Written by Jeffrey Segal, MD JD & Michael J. Sacopulos JD   
Monday, 12 July 2010 10:20

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on October 5, 2009 released "Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising."  This is the first update the FTC has made on this topic in approximately thirty years.  Much of the new Guides address social media.  With an increased number of healthcare practices and hospitals embracing an Internet presence, the FTC Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsement and Testimonials in Advertising may have broader ramifications in the healthcare industry than might be suspected. 

Medical Justice's General Counsel, Michael Sacopulos, sat down with FTC Assistant Director of Bureau of Consumer Protection, Rich Cleland, to discuss the impact of the new Guides on the medical community.  Below follows a portion of the conversation between Michael Sacopulos (Medical Justice-MJ) and Rich Cleland (Federal Trade Commission-FTC).

MJ:                   The FTC recently published final Guides governing the use of endorsements and testimonials in advertisements.  How, if at all, do you foresee these changes will impact medical providers?

FTC:                             

Medical providers in terms of their promotions are subject to the FTC Act.  Therefore, all of the Guidelines could theoretically apply to promotions advanced by medical providers.

MJ:                   The Guides used to allow for a disclaimer of "results not typical."  The revised Guides no longer contain this safe harbor.  How should health care providers that perform aesthetic procedures, and advertise via testimonials and photographic results adjust to the revised Guides? 

FTC:                 One of the things that are going to be different has to do with the impression left from the ad regarding the typical experience or results.  Not only is it advisable to indicate that results may vary, I would go beyond that and try to identify factors that may account for the variability of results.  Ultimately, it all depends on the wording and layout of the advertisement.   

MJ:                   Just to be clear, does the Commission consider a photograph an endorsement? 

FTC:                 Depending on its use, a photograph could be well be considered an endorsement, even if it is not accompanied by text. 

MJ:                   There are a variety of Internet physicians "rating" sites.  Some provide critiques of cross-industry such as Angie's List and Yelp.com, where as others are specific to the medical field such as DrScore.com and RateMDs.com.  Because of the anonymity of those who post on these sites, there is a general fear that the sites are being manipulated either positively or negatively.  Is this generally a concern for the FTC?  If so, can you generally describe the FTC's approach to this situation? 

FTC:                 There are two issues here.  If a physician goes onto a rating site and posts a glowing review of his or her services and does not disclose his or her identity that would be a violation of the FTC Act.

Secondly, negative comments about an individual would not be considered an "endorsement."  However, should the negative comments be posted by an ex-spouse or former employee posing a patient, this would be considered deceptive.  Deceptive comments in this forum would also be considered a violation of the FTC Act even though this is not specifically addressed in the recent Guides.

MJ:                   Does the FTC have legal authority to determine the identity of anonymous bloggers? 

FTC:                 If the anonymous blogger in question is relevant to an ongoing investigation of the FTC, the FTC has the legal authority to determine the identity of the blogger.

MJ:                   The revised Guides provide additional information on what the Commission considers a "material connection."  More specifically, a "material connection" is a relationship between an advertiser and endorser which a third party consumer would not expect.  If a physician reduces his or her standard fee for a procedure for a specific patient, would that fee reduction be considered a "material connection" between the physician that patient? 

FTC:                 The answer is yes.  However, it may be helpful for me to give you a factual situation where I don't think a disclosure would be required. Let's say I went into a doctor's office and I don't have insurance, the physician goes ahead and treats me and decides that since I don't have insurance, the physician will cut the [fee in] half.  I'm so elated that I go on Craig's List and post a comment on how wonderful the doctor is.  This is not the kind of endorsement that would be covered under the Guides. If, on the other hand, the physician tells me that he will take $500.00 off of the charges if I will appear in an advertisement for his practice, this is clearly an endorsement that would be covered under the Guides.   I am getting something in exchange for the price reduction.

MJ:                   Are there any other areas of concern for the FTC when dealing with individual medical practitioners?  If so, please share those.

FTC:                 I don't think that there are any specific areas of concern for the FTC at the moment.  However, the issue of 'before and after' pictures on cosmetic surgery may become of interest.  The idea of manipulating things or doing something at the core would be prohibited by Section 5 of the Guides.  For example, digital alteration of before and after photographs would be a violation of the FTC Act.

Given the recent revisions in endorsements and testimonials concerning advertisements, medical providers would be well advised to review their websites and all advertising to verify compliance.  Any endorsements by individuals who have received compensation now require a disclosure.  Further, before and after photographs should be accompanied with a disclaimer noting that results vary from patient to patient and should list several factors accounting for variability of results. Finally, if a medical provider believes that he / she is a victim of malicious and false online postings, the FTC may provide assistance.  Should you have additional questions and concerns about the new FTC Guides, you should contact legal counsel.

About the Authors

Jeffrey Segal is a board-certified neurosurgeon who was educated at the University of Texas and the Baylor College of Medicine, earning  Phi Beta Kappa and AOA Medical Honor Society recognition. Dr. Segal is the founder and CEO of Medical Justice.

Michael J. Sacopulos is a partner with Sacopulos, Johnson & Sacopulos of Terre Haute, Indiana.His area of practice concentrates upon healthcare litigation including medical malpractice defense and third party payor issues.   He is General Counsel of Medical Justice Services, Inc.

 

Click here for information on Medical Justice. 

Contact via email info@medicaljustice.com or call 877.MED.JUST (877.633.5878). 

Last Updated on Monday, 12 July 2010 10:46
 
<< Start < Prev 101 102 103 104 105 106 Next > End >>

Page 104 of 106


Banner
Website design, development, and hosting provided by
Netphiles