Advocacy for SCS

[lobelsteve]

https://www.ipsismed.org/news/658307/IPSIS-Facilitates-Successful-Washington-State-SCS-Coverage-Review.htm

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[au bon pain]

https://www.ipsismed.org/news/658307/IPSIS-Facilitates-Successful-Washington-State-SCS-Coverage-Review.htm

SIS is advocating SCS for “Nonsurgical Refractory Chronic Back Pain”?? Would love to see the FactFinder for that indication…

 

[MitchLevi]

Nonsurgical refractory back pain will drive outcomes into the dirt.

 

[au bon pain]

Nonsurgical refractory back pain will drive outcomes into the dirt.

The idea that a vague dx like this warrants an implant is wild. Only meaning I can infer from it is that the patient hasn’t shopped enough surgeons.

 

[lobelsteve]

In a state where SCS was not allowed for any reason, SIS was able to convince the state to conditionally allow SCS for FDA approved conditions. This is a big win for patients in Washington state.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

Its wild that a state can dictate what treatment you can get.

 

[drusso]

In a state where SCS was not allowed for any reason, SIS was able to convince the state to conditionally allow SCS for FDA approved conditions. This is a big win for patients in Washington state.

Leftist/collectivist politics heavily influence WA State health policy That is part of why SCS is not covered--Nanny Knows Best.

I'm happy to see Brett Stacey, Jennifer Lee, IPSIS, PSPS, ASIPP, NANS, ASPN, ASA, AAPMR, and others stepping up for access to pain therapy. It's a rare demonstration of what we can accomplish when groups set aside a little ego and greed to get something done for patients.

Gary Franklin, PROP, Washington L&I, et al. are all steeped in therapeutic nihilism for treating pain and have long advocated for and passed off dressed-up Christian Science theories of chronic pain as ACTUAL public policy--pain is imaginary, it exists "in your head," it's a social condition, etc.

Imagine what our specialty could do with this alignment on SOS d(f), site-neutral payment, etc.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

Leftist/collectivist politics heavily influence WA State health policy That is part of why SCS is not covered--Nanny Knows Best.

I'm happy to see Brett Stacey, Jennifer Lee, IPSIS, PSPS, ASIPP, NANS, ASPN, ASA, AAPMR, and others stepping up for access to pain therapy. It's a rare demonstration of what we can accomplish when groups set aside a little ego and greed to get something done for patients.

Gary Franklin, PROP, Washington L&I, et al. are all steeped in therapeutic nihilism for treating pain and have long advocated for and passed off dressed-up Christian Science theories of chronic pain as ACTUAL public policy--pain is imaginary, it exists "in your head," it's a social condition, etc.

Imagine what our specialty could do with this alignment on SOS d(f), site-neutral payment, etc.

Bruh, lets not bring politics into this... NY, NJ, and CA are heavily liberal and all have SCS approved for decades.
Not everything is about liberal vs conservatives.

 

[paindoc007]

They will never love you back

 

[drusso]

Bruh, lets not bring politics into this... NY, NJ, and CA are heavily liberal and all have SCS approved for decades.
Not everything is about liberal vs conservatives.

I'm not talking about the usual D versus R you say potato and I say pototoe type nonsense. I mean honest to goodness Leftists.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

I'm not talking about the usual D versus R you say potato and I say pototoe type nonsense. I mean honest to goodness Leftists.

you mean social justice warriors? yeah I dont much care for them either. they can get off my lawn

 

[bedrock]

Bruh, lets not bring politics into this... NY, NJ, and CA are heavily liberal and all have SCS approved for decades.
Not everything is about liberal vs conservatives.

You’re fairly early in your career to make assumptions re political pressures on pain procedures.

The heavily liberal granola states of both Oregon and Washington have denied SCS and other interventional pain treatments on a state wide level for years, while simultaneously legalizing drugs in the case of Oregon.

There is a reason this type of legislation didn’t happen next door in Idaho.

 

[drusso]

You’re fairly early in your career to make assumptions re political pressures on pain procedures.

The heavily liberal granola states of both Oregon have denied SCS and other pain treatments on a state wide level for years, while simultaneously legalizing drugs in the case of Oregon.

There is a reason this type of legislation didn’t happen next door in Idaho.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

You’re fairly early in your career to make assumptions re political pressures on pain procedures.

The heavily liberal granola states of both Oregon and Washington have denied SCS and other interventional pain treatments on a state wide level for years, while simultaneously legalizing drugs in the case of Oregon.

There is a reason this type of legislation didn’t happen next door in Idaho.

what about the liberal granola states of NY, NJ, CA? Looks like those pain procedures have been going strong in all those states?

 

[bedrock]

what about the liberal granola states of NY, NJ, CA? Looks like those pain procedures have been going strong in all those states?

🤦🏼‍♂️

 

[Ducttape]

what about the liberal granola states of NY, NJ, CA? Looks like those pain procedures have been going strong in all those states?

Agree. SCS, Intracept, minuteman, vertiflex, SU fusion all strong here in NY.


Tho those of us in NY and NJ are more likely to think of pizza and wings than granola.

 

[Agast]

New York is not liberal granola, there’s a healthy bastion of wealthy conservative money keeping it more moderate