China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Forms of Business Arrangement
Published in Christopher Locke, Private Medical Practice, 2018
There is also a potential ethical difficulty in such arrangements. If the company or an unqualified member of the company derives profit from professional fees earned by a medically qualified member of the company, this could be regarded as fee-splitting (seeChapter 8). However, if the whole of the profits of the company are paid to its employees as salary or pension contributions, so that the company shows no profit, this problem should not arise. The defence organizations also point out, with regard to any form of company in which a medical person is a director, that personal immunity from claims may well be a delusion, because creditors, banks and mortgagers are likely to seek personal guarantees from those directors, and so the idea of limited liability will thereby be nullified.
The Radiological Expert
Published in Michael J. Thali M.D., Mark D. Viner, B. G. Brogdon, Brogdon's Forensic Radiology, 2010
There are further standards concerning the relations between the hiring attorney and the expert witness. Counsel must respect the expert's independence, cannot dictate the expert's opinion, and must explain to the expert his impartial role as an assistant to the trier of fact. Also, counsel is warned against paying excessive or contingency fees in order to influence expert opinion or testimony. Fee splitting, or sharing of fees between counsel and expert, is explicitly forbidden.8
Review: the reemergence of brachytherapy as treatment for non-melanoma skin cancer
Published in Journal of Dermatological Treatment, 2018
Koji Ota, Tony Adar, Laura Dover, Amor Khachemoune
EBT’s high reimbursement rate may also have a role in its recent increase in popularity compared to other new superficial radiation therapy (SRT) options (29). The high reimbursement pattern of EBT is based on cost per fraction. EBT has also seen an increased use in hospital setting for other types of cancer, namely for treating breast cancer intraoperatively; however, most of these treatment usually involve one fraction, rather than 6–8 used in EBT for NMSC (29). It should be noted that EBT requires a radiation oncologist be present to oversee the treatment, requiring some form of fee splitting between the dermatologist and the radiation oncologist. On the other hand, SRT does not due to their lower treatment energy and dose rate allowing dermatologists to use the machine without supervision of a radiation oncologist. Despite this split in fee that would occur with EBT, the high reimbursement rate allows this to be economically viable (29). The American Academy of Dermatology issued a position statement in 2013 regarding EBT stating concern for rapidly increasing CPT code for superficial radiation therapy that could cause scrutiny from federal agencies and private insurances, as well as EBT devices being marketed as “technologically advanced devices with significant current and future revenue streams (34).”