cost limitation

​

I avoid the so-called "shotgun diagnostics" and run the risk that my measures will not be judged as thorough enough. But I would also like to proceed economically in your interest and avoid a cost explosion. That's why, in consultation with you, I proceed successively and do the follow-up diagnostics only when it is justified by the preliminary findings. In consultation with you, a decision will be made as to whether a diagnosis should be made that does not bring any benefit for the therapy. For example, if you have a significantly elevated level of ferritin, you can do a genetic test for iron storage disease. This also makes sense in young patients because there could be a defect on both chromosomes. More often, however, we find a defect on just one chromosome in older patients. This leads to iron accumulation. The gene test then has practically no meaning for the therapy. Dietary iron intake should be reduced and ferritin can be reduced through chelation therapy, regardless of whether there is a genetic defect or not. I am happy to arrange for the test to be carried out if the patient wishes. However, if he wants to save the money, that is not a problem. The attitude and the financial means of the patients are very different. In the end, the patient decides what to do with my recommendations. The disadvantage of less diagnostics is that something important can be overlooked. More diagnostics than recommended just increases the costs. For some patients, the last point mentioned does not seem relevant and would like to have a higher diagnostic effort right away. Of course I can easily fulfill the wish. In the end, the patient also determines this part of his journey. 

​

​