Ensuring an Accurate Graft Count

Amazing

Bleeping simple idea!!!

A fellow poster touched on this but I feel that its not really EGO that would be a factor, but their professional credibility(more diplomatic way of saying it lolol) would be challenged/questioned.

I do not for a minute think that any clinet is looking to pull a blanket over peoples heads as that is very VERY serious in such an industry, but I have to admit… That it wouldnt be a bad things for Dr’s to take the innitiative to put a clients mind at ease…

Even if they have NO INTENTIONS of any malicious or slightly less thourough work… accidents (as even Dr’s are human) do happen and their is a chance for a man made error on the count

If I were a clinic I would thrown one in the session just to entertain teh customer… whats it to me??? I just want to earn his business… what do I care if im being watched to make sure hes getting what he paid for…

Just my $0.02

Im interested to see what happens with this

GREAT THREAD

Cheers

MoM

» »
» » if the doctor doesn’t want to use the device for whatever reason, I
» doubt
» » he will use it even if the patient is willing to purchase one himself
» and
» » request that it be used on him on the day of the surgery. I think
» either
» » you convince the doctor to use it in the first place or you can forget
» » about it.
»
» Ipod, you bring up an interesting point. Some doctors are
» creatures of habit and hesitate to pick up on new technologies. For over
» 30 years physicians used plugs to perform hair transplants. Eventually, a
» small group of physicians began to adopt a new method of hair restoration
» surgery, using Follicular Units. However, most physicians refused to
» evolve for over a decade. Then these reluctant physicians gradually began
» to lose patients to those physicians who used follicular units, which
» astute patients recognized as a far superior technique. Gradually, more
» and more patients began to demand follicular units but only after many
» years of pressure from patients did most physicians adopt a better, more
» aesthetic result. Some physicians have, for years, put off change
» especially change that forces the physician to expend more money or change
» the way they practice medicine. In the end, it is the patient and consumer
» advocates who influences what physicians use. Do you think most physicians
» today would use microscopes without the effort by consumer advocates such
» as Spencer Kobren? If everyone had waited for physicians to make the move
» on their own, they’d likely still be using plugs and no microscopes.
»
» Patients have a lot more influence than they realize. If patients demand
» that doctors use CIDs to ensure a completely accurate count, physicians
» will either need to adopt the technology, or risk becoming obsolete. Most
» top hair restoration physicians will immediately recognize the value of the
» CID to their practices and, more importantly, their patients; others will
» take more convincing. Some physicians, not current on the latest industry
» news, might not even be aware that such a device exists. This is one of
» those cases where, I believe, patients can educate and influence doctors
» for the better good of the industry as a whole.
»
» I’d love to hear others’ thoughts on this issue!

i think the #1 question is whether the doctor feels comfortable using the new instrument, the patients can demand all they want, if the doctor can’t adapt or use the new tool properly, the patients will get poor growth in the end.

» i think the #1 question is whether the doctor feels comfortable using the
» new instrument, the patients can demand all they want, if the doctor can’t
» adapt or use the new tool properly, the patients will get poor growth in
» the end.

This is a good point. The CID might have a different ‘feel’ than what physicians are used to when they make their incisions. I still believe the benefits of utilizing Counting Incision Devices warrant all physicians to at least try to incorporate them in their procedures.

Ensuring universal ease of use was one of Dr. Cole’s primary concerns in developing these devices. This is why physicians can load them with their own blades or needles of varying gauges, based on what they are most comfortable and experienced using. Of the physicians who have tried the Counting Incision Device, we’ve received extremely positive feedback. They’ve been described as well-constructed, ergonomically designed, accurate and easy to load and use.

As an example of why the CID can be so invaluable, we had a patient in yesterday who was here for a repair procedure. He had gone to a ‘chain clinic’ previously for a strip procedure. In addition to his hairline having a toothbrush-appearance and pitting throughout the recipient area, Dr. Cole immediately noticed the low density of transplanted hairs. The patient had been told he had received (and paid for) 1,000 grafts; in reality, he probably only received 700 to 800. This disparity, intentional on the part of the clinic or not, meant the patient easily paid $1000+ just for grafts he didn’t even receive. This is obviously on top of the thousands he paid for a poor quality procedure he ended up regretting.

Obviously, this is an extreme example but it’s something that occurs every day to one degree or another. Whether miscounts are intentional or not, a huge percentage of patients have overpaid for grafts they do not receive. Even if you trust your surgeon fully, having him or her use a CID ensures that there is no degree of human error in the count and that you are paying for only those grafts you actually receive.

» As an example of why the CID can be so invaluable, we had a patient in
» yesterday who was here for a repair procedure. He had gone to a ‘chain
» clinic’ previously for a strip procedure. In addition to his hairline
» having a toothbrush-appearance and pitting throughout the recipient area,
» Dr. Cole immediately noticed the low density of transplanted hairs. The
» patient had been told he had received (and paid for) 1,000 grafts; in
» reality, he probably only received 700 to 800. This disparity, intentional
» on the part of the clinic or not, meant the patient easily paid $1000+ just
» for grafts he didn’t even receive. This is obviously on top of the
» thousands he paid for a poor quality procedure he ended up regretting.
»
» Obviously, this is an extreme example but it’s something that occurs every
» day to one degree or another. Whether miscounts are intentional or not, a
» huge percentage of patients have overpaid for grafts they do not receive.
» Even if you trust your surgeon fully, having him or her use a CID ensures
» that there is no degree of human error in the count and that you are paying
» for only those grafts you actually receive.

Well, maybe he did receive the grafts but they never grew, that’s also a possibility.

I think it’s a novel invention.

At the same time, if one doesn’t trust his clinic of choice to count the grafts correctly, how could one trust the clinic to get them to grow correctly?

Just sayin’.
:wink:

» I think it’s a novel invention.
»
» At the same time, if one doesn’t trust his clinic of choice to count the
» grafts correctly, how could one trust the clinic to get them to grow
» correctly?
»
» Just sayin’.
» :wink:

This is very true and a good point- if a doctor is dishonest or poorly skilled, having an accurate graft count will by no means ensure a successful procedure. Dr. Cole designed his CID device with skilled, reputable doctors in mind. No matter how meticulous a doctor is, or how experienced his surgical staff, basic human error will almost always produce an inaccurate graft count. The CID is an instrument designed to help both doctors and patients: to free doctors from worrying about the count so that they can concentrate on performing the best transplant possible, and to give patients piece of mind that they are not being charged for more than they receive.

Bottom line: regardless of whether or not a doctor agrees to use a CID, it’s important that you trust the surgeon and clinic you ultimately select. An accurate graft count cannot make up for a poorly performed procedure.

» I may be wrong here but all of this seems a distraction.
»
» The Fus can be counted by the technicians who prepare for implantation.
»
» More importantly, the far bigger question is how many actually grow!!!
»
» This instrument counts how many holes are made. That is it! will the holes
» be filled with grafts? That is another question.

Shouldn’t it be quite easy to spot if there are holes without grafts? Can’t the patient look at the mirror after the surgery and check himself?

» Shouldn’t it be quite easy to spot if there are holes without grafts?
» Can’t the patient look at the mirror after the surgery and check himself?

It might be hard to tell looking at your own head but, yes, it would be fairly easy for someone who knows what they are looking for to tell if an incision was missing a graft. Also, since the CID helps keep a much more accurate count throughout the procedure, the doctor is better able to plan, and less likely to excise or cut more grafts than needed (or, conversely, not enough).