Involvement of techs during surgery

[farmcat]

I understand that most clinics are using techs in a lot of the procedures being performed. Although I can understand why these doctors want/ need to use techs, it also means when a patient goes to a clinic for a particular doctor's work, they are really only going to this doctor "in name", there is truly no way of knowing who is going to be doing a lot of your surgery.

 

I was thinking that maybe along with the graft count and pre/ post op pics, surgeons should include the names of the assisting techs and a short description of their involvement? I know this could add a lot of work to the documentation, but if techs are going to be doing a lot of the work, it would be reassuring to be able to follow their work/ consistency as well. Then possibly when scheduling a surgery, a patient could be informed of all parties that will be working on them and also be able to search the tech's work by keyword search to see how consistent their results are as well? Any thoughts or ideas?

[FUE2014]

Yeah it's a good idea and will improve transparency for the patient.

 

Has been discussed here before too:

 

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/172708-techs-qualifications-experience-disclosed.html

[farmcat]

Thanks FUE....just read through that thread, many good ideas! I think it is a great idea to be able to find info about the techs on the clinic's website, but would also like to see the tech's information and involvement listed in the description on each transplant case presented to the forums. I realize that the tech involvement is probably crucial to the transplant doctor (for fatigue, etc) but feel that as a result, tech involvement can affects outcomes as much if not more than the doctor's work.

[1966kph]

Hello farmcat.

I dont know what thread you are eluding to but I've basically been saying the same thing that the role of each individual involved in the procedure should have their skill set and experience made available on websites so prospective patients are aware of what they bring to the table.

I think with the amount of tech involvement I see no reason why this should not become the norm for clinics to do.

 

(QUOTE=farmcat;2416510]I understand that most clinics are using techs in a lot of the procedures being performed. Although I can understand why these doctors want/ need to use techs, it also means when a patient goes to a clinic for a particular doctor's work, they are really only going to this doctor "in name", there is truly no way of knowing who is going to be doing a lot of your surgery.

 

I was thinking that maybe along with the graft count and pre/ post op pics, surgeons should include the names of the assisting techs and a short description of their involvement? I know this could add a lot of work to the documentation, but if techs are going to be doing a lot of the work, it would be reassuring to be able to follow their work/ consistency as well. Then possibly when scheduling a surgery, a patient could be informed of all parties that will be working on them and also be able to search the tech's work by keyword search to see how consistent their results are as well? Any thoughts or ideas?

 

Have a nice day

[farmcat]

This is the thread 1966:

 

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.co...disclosed.html

 

FUE2014 posted it above......it would be great to include this information in the cases presented, would be peace of mind to prospective patients

[KO]

While I like max disclosure, realistically you are IMO asking too much. It's a struggle enough to get clinics to post photos properly, Bernstein for example just shows a front shot. This is another layer of complication.

[1966kph]

Unless barriers are asked to be taken down they will remain.

They are going to be doing a ht on you and when asked who will be doing the work you are paying for I don't think it is a unreasonable request that the information be readablly available.

Why would they not?

Have a good weekend

[hairweare]

No clinic that I am aware of promotes the fact that techs play a leading or substantial ancillary role in their procedures and some webpages are in fact either inaccurate or misleading. The physician who I consulted with for all three of my strip procedures did not inform me that on the day of surgery one of his associates whom I knew nothing about would be doing the procedure in his absence. Lack of transparency has been and unfortunately continues to be an issue that remains widespread within the industry.

[Blake Bloxham]

A lot of clinics do share information about their technicians. Many post short "bios" on their website and share how many years they've worked in the field. Transparency is always important! Especially when many technicians play a big role in the procedure.

[FUE2014]

What someone could always do is start contacting these clinics and ask for this information re a little bio of each tech - name, experience, number of years with surgeon, role in surgery etc - and this information could be added to a sticky thread here which could evolve over time. It should't be a big undertaking and most clinics would be prepared to share this information I am sure.

[Sean]

No, not many clinics post detailed info about techs.

 

Example (if it is my surgery):

Need to know what surgical process they are involved in?

What percentage of surgery they will undertake?

Are they students or freshly grafuated?

Do they have 15 years of experience equating to maybe the age of the clinic?

What are the FUE patients they worked on and can we see donor extraction photos and outcomes if each?

Will there be more than one technician doing a surgical role in my procedure and can the sam questions be answered for that tech as listed above?

 

I can keep going. A lot of questions need to be asked when a non surgeon is involved in an artistic process such as fue which requires a lot more care when extracting. See when it is FUT the strip is given to tech to dissect and make grafts after the surgeon has extracted the strip. But in FUE extraction you are asking a tech to surgically score a hole hopefully in the right angle with the right depth and pressure without risking nerve or graft damage and minimizing scarring. Thats a lot of things to observe when you dont have a microscope to seperate grafts or can figure out direction of grafts unless you are a well trained surgeon. I heard in the US only doctors can extract FUE grafts but it seems like in Canada docs can have their inexperienced techs extract FUE.

 

This surgery isnt a game. If you pay prime dollars for a forum recommended doctor, then you should get prime service. A doc should be involved in your surgery throughout with some assistance of techs in non surgical roles. It shouldnt be techs taking a surgeons role and have the surgeon guide them and go to other rooms to do the same for other patients. Especially, when you are paying over $4 per graft FUE. Then what is the damn reason someone should pay a clinic over $3- $4 per graft if techs are doing the extracting? There is a lot of legal concerns begind this too.

 

Bottom line is if you pay premium for doctors based on forum representation and recognition then you should get premium service that is personalized for you on day of your surgery. You got doctors in Europe and Turkey charging like $1-3 per graft for personalized one on one services with minimal use of techs and this whole over $6-7 per graft fue in north america just gets me thinking. Here you have more tech involvement it seems and you will pay over $6-7 per graft fue via motorized fue or etc while the physician attends to multiple patients on day of your surgery.

 

Think about it folks. You are pying for premium services, not a hair mill like service, so you deserve the best. Grafts are priceless, this isn't about buying a car, it is actual surgery. Techs are there to assist and not to perform most of the procedure you pay a premium for.

[KO]

 

Think about it folks. You are pying for premium services, not a hair mill like service, so you deserve the best. Grafts are priceless, this isn't about buying a car, it is actual surgery. Techs are there to assist and not to perform most of the procedure you pay a premium for.

 

I couldn't agree more, and your experience along with hairweare's experience makes me wonder why certain posters continue to promote technician run clinics, and blame the patient for not "walking out".

[1966kph]

There are a awful lot of people seem more than happy with the results gained at the hands of techs.

Results are what matters I think we would all agree on that.

If your happy to have techs involved then that is fine if your not that is fine.

I think the biggest issue is that it is all made clear before you get in the chair or preferably in writing before you pay the deposit.

If you went to buy a Porsche and paid your deposit then they brought out a fiat you wouldn't stand for it would you?

Its only by people demanding change that change comes about and sometimes you have to fight for change.

If you insist that the doc does your procedure then stand your ground and demand that you get what you have paid for.

The amount of tech involvement seems to have escalated in the last half dozen years or so or is it that we are just becoming more aware of the amount of tech involvement?

Have a good day

[Sean]

Issue is that there are docs that have techs do extractions that are recommended here, but you wouldnt expect it as doctors themselves are recommended on forums versus techs. After you spend time and travel, you realize the doctor can have inexperienced tech extract your fue and doc can even change the day of a two day procedure to one day for his/her benefit. Once you pay a nonrefundable scammish deposit and waste time transferring your money at less than favorable exchange rates and travel, you think you are good to go by a recommended doc but might get screwed over. I think everyone needs to see the actual surgical consent forms, and have everything in writing that a patient only wants a doc to extract and etc, before they even pay any cent towards any deposit for fue. Thats how it should be for any patient and even law firms and officials i work with suggest doing that and keeping all documentation and recordings. They even suggest patients with not so great results to inform fda, ftc, and medical boards versus informing forums due to marketing and financial interests involved where monetary refunds may be rare. I know for one thing, the FTC may be monitoring for deception and marketing fraud and reviewing doctors big time. Not sure of the details, but it is wise for patients with norwood levels similar to those marketed in posters that have less than favorable results, should send them and report the doc with adequate documentation.

[1966kph]

I think that the forums are one of the best ways by which drs and clinics can be scrutinised in full view of potential customers.

If we voice our concerns in big enough numbers about the ways clinics operate then we will be heard and if by voicing these concerns it effects their reputations and ultimately business they may change their ways.

We can but try.

Have a nice day

[Sean]

I think that the forums are one of the best ways by which drs and clinics can be scrutinised in full view of potential customers.

If we voice our concerns in big enough numbers about the ways clinics operate then we will be heard and if by voicing these concerns it effects their reputations and ultimately business they may change their ways.

We can but try.

Have a nice day

 

Absolutely, well put, agreed. it also helps reporting individually to med boards, ftc, fda and meaningul organizations that have the power to penalize unethical and untested processes, or inclusive of inexperienced techs involved in surgical roles.

[PupDaddy]

The issue goes beyond techs doing extractions.It goes to techs actually cutting the recipient incisions into the patient's scalp -- the task that defines the artistry, skill, and talent of the hair restoration surgeons recommended here.

 

The issue also involves the lack of credibility and illegalitty of the clinic that 1966kph promotes so vigorously here. Let us not forget that the clinic's representative first claimed that the doctor who owns the clinic performs the hair transplants from start to finish, and to drive the point homoe emphasize that Turkey's medical rules and regulations only permit aesthetic surgeons to perform hair transplant operations. Only after some patients off the clinic spilled the beans did the clinic's representative fess up and admit that technnicians -- not the doctor whose name is on the door (who actually spends his days doing nose jobs, face lifts, and other cosmetic surgeries) -- perform the clinic's hair transplants from start to finish. This clinic's represetative then quickly changed his story to claim that the doctor-ower "supervised" the technician-performed hair transplants. That revised story was quickly brought into doubt after a patient of the clinic disclosed that the doctor lefft the premises to go home while this patiennt was still being (illegally) operated on by the clinic's technicians.

 

If there was nothing untoward about technicians performing hair transplants -- including cutting the graft recipient incisions into the patients' scalps, using a motorized needle drill no less -- then why the efforts to mislead and deceive?

 

I don't think this forum needs to be in the business of recommending or otherwise promoting illegally operating hair mills offering techician-performed hair transplants as a sideline to plastic surgeries. If hair transplant patients want to risk their precious, finitie donor follicles to such clinics and have technicians illegally perform cosmetic surgery on them in exchange for bottom-dollar pricing, that's their business (there are reportedly 500 such shady outfits doing business in Turkey at any given time). But imo, a forum such as this one, which purports to screen and recommend the best of the best hair transplant surgeons, need not and should not involve itself in promoting this cut-rate underbelly of the hair transplant world.

[1966kph]

Pup I do not promote anything other than the right for us as individuals to choose were we go and who does what to us should be totally made clear.

I also did not realise that we were talking about one clinic inparticular or yeh were not are we?

When have I ever said that anyone should ever go to said clinic? Thats right never so how am I promoting it?

If I'm promoting I'm doing a poor job.

Look through my post history and you will see I have advised people to go to lots of clinics but never the one I get accused of promoting. Lol

I promote freedom of choice nothing more nothing less.

Have a good day

Edited January 4, 2015 by 1966kph

[KO]

Every time they are criticized you ride to the defense of Maral Klinik like a white knight, and when Dr AEK criticized them, you continued to harass him, accusing him of illegal behavior (would you do the same for Maral?), when BUSA criticizes Maral's graft placement, of course you had to immediately compare it with Karadeniz's placement.

 

You seem to think that techs doing the bulk of the work is some sort of revolutionary development that the old guard wants to resist, but you don't realize that this is a problem that many people have long complained about for years. There is a reason many of us are insistent on the doctors doing the bulk of the procedure, but you simply refuse to acknowledge our POV, and yet you claim to have no agenda. Cool story bro.

 

 

The most foolish statement I have seen from you is the suggestion that patients simply walk out of the clinic. After they have been sedated, after they have paid a non-refundable fee. One patient was promised that X would extract his grafts, instead he got a technician who was doing it for the first time. Another patient has no idea that the doctor he registered with is not the one doing his surgery. Another patient signs up for a doctor and on the day of the op, finds out that "the techs could do it because they're better". When you have the doctor doing the bulk of the procedure, these problems are greatly mitigated, you just don't seem to grasp that, why? I don't know. Instead you keep going, "clinics should be clear about it" No kidding?

[1966kph]

When have I said you should have tech do your work? Never

You choose were you want to go and were ever it is good luck to you.

Was the placement example comparison I gave BUSA inaccurate? I presume you had a look at them do you not agree they have a similar graft pattern placement?

I have not so much defended the clinic but the people that chose to go constantly have people go there not to support but to knock their choice of clinic.

When you go for a ht ko I may or may not come to you thread but it would only be to support whether the results are good or bad.

I hope that marals patients whose threads you have had a hand in turning to crap will show you the same respect as I will.

They dont need to do it but do for the benefit of others regardless of whether you despise the clinic or love it show respect to the thread starter.

If you are so concerned that you are going to get a inferior job done because the doc who is meant to be doing the work isn't which are you better doing sitting in the chair or losing your deposit?

Please try and remain civil when talking to me or anyone else that is not much to ask is it?

I do not pretend to know it all do you?

Saying people dont know jack. WTF and such shows to me that your incapable of having a adult conversation unless you can express what you have to say by such terminology.

Have a nice day

[KO]

"If you are so concerned that you are going to get a inferior job done because the doc who is meant to be doing the work isn't which are you better doing sitting in the chair or losing your deposit?"

 

The point is that not everybody wants to question their surgeon. There is a lot of emotional investment into this procedure, and not everybody simply thinks to chuck away $20,000 (would you?), and finally, because people tend to trust the surgeon's experience, so when the doctor says "this tech will do the extractions", chances are they will simply do what they are told. That is why people don't simply walk out of the OR. They either don't know any better, or simply do not have energy to do so.

 

Would you walk out of a transplant after paying 20k to get it done? Of course not. You have not had a transplant and you have noted you'd never pay this much money, so the emotional investment would be pretty high.

[1966kph]

I agree with all of that and this is why I said that you should get it in writing exactly who is going to be doing what and both you and the dr should sign the same piece of paper stating as much then when it transpires that it differs in any way to your agreement you have the right to refuse the procedure.

If the dr has signed a peice of paper offering a full refund if the agreement is not fulfilled in its entirety then you should be covered.

But maybe as importantly if all this happened and they refused a full refund you could announce it on every hair loss forum going which they would definitely not want.

Have a good day