Knowledge is power: Providing previsit insurance coverage information of body contouring procedures to improve understanding and satisfaction in the massive weight loss patient

INTRODUCTION

Because of the prevalence of obesity worldwide, the rates of bariatric surgery are increasing. Bariatric surgery is covered by insurance; however, often, a surgery to correct massive weight loss surgeries is not covered despite patient perception.

METHODS

One hundred patients were identified by their initial visit to the institutional Life After Weight Loss center. Fifty of them were randomized into receiving previsit educational materials about their individual insurance plans. All the patients were surveyed to assess whether this education improved their understanding and overall consultation experience.

RESULTS

Although a majority of patients believed "panniculectomy" would be covered by insurance, most subjects overestimated insurance coverage for other procedures. Nearly all respondents (93.8%) agreed that previsit educational material improved their understanding and the satisfaction of the visit.

CONCLUSION

Many patients believe body contouring procedures to be covered by insurance, although most are not. By providing patients with their individualized insurance plans, patients report improved understanding and overall satisfaction with the consultation.

Arm Contouring in the Massive-Weight-Loss Patient

Brachioplasty is an increasingly popular procedure performed for improved arm contour in the massive-weight-loss population. There are challenging deformities presented in this population, such as redundant skin, posterior arm lipodystrophy, and loosening of fascial layers of the upper arm and chest wall that must be addressed to achieve successful contour of the arms. Common complications can be minimized with meticulous technique and knowledge of surgical anatomy. Additionally, brachioplasty can be combined with liposuction of the posterior arm as a safe and effective method for arm contouring without a higher risk of complications.

Blindness following facial fracture: treatment modalities and outcomes

Blindness is an uncommon, yet documented complication of facial trauma. Numerous case studies, series, and retrospective analyses have been published, with a reported incidence around 3%. Hippocrates first noted the association between maxillofacial trauma and blindness; millennia later, this was expounded upon by Berlin, who discovered such trauma may directly lead to fracturing of the optic canal. As diagnostic modalities such as computed tomographic scanning evolved, particularly over the past few decades, more specific, in-depth reports analyzing maxillofacial trauma and subsequent sequelae have emerged. It is the goal of this article to examine the current literature for those publications that have addressed the issue of blindness following facial trauma (including operative interventions) and create a concise review for maxillofacial surgeons.

Improving Outcomes in Bilateral Breast Reconstruction Using Autogenous Tissue

Bilateral breast reconstruction utilizing autologous free tissue transfer is a complex procedure with multiple options for donor tissue available. This study set out to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing bilateral breast reconstruction with muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps versus those undergoing bilateral reconstructions utilizing procedures which aim to minimize abdominal donor site morbidity in the form of deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) or superficial inferior epigastric (SIEA) flaps. A retrospective review identified 31 patients and 62 free flaps for bilateral autologous breast reconstruction at our teaching institutions in Rochester, NY. Patients receiving procedures which aimed to minimize donor-site morbidity experienced a shorter length of hospital stay versus those patients undergoing bilateral free TRAM procedures (P = 0.0494 by t test and P = 0.0389 by parametric test). There was no significant difference in complication rates between these 2 groups. Other demographic and premorbid factors showed no difference between groups. Here, we demonstrate that bilateral autologous breast reconstruction with flaps which minimize donor site morbidity are a safe and effective option for bilateral reconstruction. Furthermore, patients who received bilateral breast reconstruction with abdominal wall sparing techniques (DIEP or SIEA flaps) had a significantly shorter length of hospital stay, with no significant difference in complication rates when compared with patients undergoing bilateral free TRAM procedures.