Family Foot and Ankle Associates of Maryland

Your letter was received on Friday, March 17"We are disappointed that a patient felt compelled to contact youOur practice has been serving the Greater Washington DC area for over years and we pride ourselves on not only providing excellent medical care but also following all safety and sanitation guidelinesThe item at the center of the complaint is an [redacted] Hybrid Night Splint, which is a piece of Durable Medical Equipment (DME)DME is not returnable once it leaves the office because we are unable to reuse it and give it to another patientThe complaints made to the Revdex.com are inconsistent with her prior grievances which were discussed with her and the insurance company.After reading the Customer's Complaint I noticed it is filled with multiple inaccuraciesWe attempted many times to resolve this problem directly with the patient, but unfortunately our phone calls were not returnedThe most important point I would like to make to you and the Revdex.com is to summarize the context of a three-way call I had with the patient and her insurance company on Friday March 10, 2017.The patient, instead of returning our calls to try and help her better understand the matter, turned to her insurance company for help resolving this matterThe insurance company set up a conference call between all parties around noon on 3/10/During the call the representative for insurance company asked both sides to explain their point of view on the issueThe insurance representative listened to both sides, and made some suggestionsDuring the conversation, the insurance representative informed the patient several times, that she had changed her story multiple times during the conversationThe patient was extremely unhappy on the phone, because she was not hearing what she wantedThe conversation cinded with the insurance company representative informing both parties the following:The claim was Submitted properly and she is responsible if there is any balance oncethe claim is processed (i.edeductible, coinsurance) The device is not returnable All treatment received was well within the standard of care for her medical problem This patient sought medical care regarding a condition which had been ailing herAfter discussing the nature of her condition and a physical examination, a diagnosis was given and a treatment plan was discussedThe treatment plan included stretching therapy use of a night splint, icing, NSAIDs and custom orthoticsStretching therapy was initiated the same day with various stretching modalities discussedThe [redacted] Hybrid Night Splint (the item of complaint) for evening and non-ambulatory use was explained and dispensed that day as wellCustom orthotics was discussed with the patient to consider at a future visit after we verify insurance benefits concerning this custom made deviceOrthotics was not casted, dispensed or billed to insurance on this initial visit, as is listed in the complaintAt the conclusion of the appointment, the above treatment plan was mutually agreed upon and she accepted the device in question ( [redacted] Night Splint)All services performed on her date of service were billed to her insurance company in accordance with the contract between the insurance company and our medical practiceI have to assume that the patient was upset with her insurance company's stance on the issue, which led her to contact your organization later that day.Please feel free to contact me with any further questions or concerns.Sincerely,Sharon C***

Your letter was received on Friday, March 17". We are disappointed that a patient felt compelled to contact you. Our practice has been serving the Greater Washington DC area for over 40 years and we pride ourselves on not only providing excellent medical care but also following all safety and...

sanitation guidelines. The item at the center of the complaint is an [redacted] Hybrid Night Splint, which is a piece of Durable Medical Equipment (DME). DME is not returnable once it leaves the office because we are unable to reuse it and give it to another patient. The complaints made to the Revdex.com are inconsistent with her prior grievances which were discussed with her and the insurance company.After reading the Customer's Complaint I noticed it is filled with multiple inaccuracies. We attempted many times to resolve this problem directly with the patient, but unfortunately our phone calls were not returned. The most important point I would like to make to you and the Revdex.com is to summarize the context of a three-way call I had with the patient and her insurance company on Friday March 10, 2017.The patient, instead of returning our calls to try and help her better understand the matter, turned to her insurance company for help resolving this matter. The insurance company set up a conference call between all parties around noon on 3/10/17. During the call the representative for insurance company asked both sides to explain their point of view on the issue. The insurance representative listened to both sides, and made some suggestions. During the conversation, the insurance representative informed the patient several times, that she had changed her story multiple times during the conversation. The patient was extremely unhappy on the phone, because she was not hearing what she wanted. The conversation cinded with the insurance company representative informing both parties the following:1. The claim was Submitted properly and she is responsible if there is any balance oncethe claim is processed (i.e. deductible, coinsurance) 2. The device is not returnable 3. All treatment received was well within the standard of care for her medical problem This patient sought medical care regarding a condition which had been ailing her. After discussing the nature of her condition and a physical examination, a diagnosis was given and a treatment plan was discussed. The treatment plan included stretching therapy use of a night splint, icing, NSAIDs and custom orthotics. Stretching therapy was initiated the same day with various stretching modalities discussed. The [redacted] Hybrid Night Splint (the item of complaint) for evening and non-ambulatory use was explained and dispensed that day as well. Custom orthotics was discussed with the patient to consider at a future visit after we verify insurance benefits concerning this custom made device. Orthotics was not casted, dispensed or billed to insurance on this initial visit, as is listed in the complaint. At the conclusion of the appointment, the above treatment plan was mutually agreed upon and she accepted the device in question ([redacted] Night Splint). All services performed on her date of service were billed to her insurance company in accordance with the contract between the insurance company and our medical practice. I have to assume that the patient was upset with her insurance company's stance on the issue, which led her to contact your organization later that day.Please feel free to contact me with any further questions or concerns.Sincerely,Sharon C[redacted]