Jackson Jambalaya

Wouldn't it just be easier for the Legislature to mandate that ALL doctors join the state's prescription monitoring program instead of what's in place now? Of course, you'd have to get it past the MSBML/MSMA/MPHP machine.

I guess this is a stupid question, but: If a doctor has me on pain meds following surgery and my pain has continued through my post surgery followup visit and well into the second month, and he has me pee in a cup, wouldn't anybody with walking-around-sense expect that I will test positive for opioids?

11:49, I take hydrocodone daily for spinal pain not remedied by surgery or PT or chiropractic care. While it doesn't relieve my pain completely, it does at least allow me to function most days vs staying immobile. I have taken this medication daily for some time now, and my prescriber screens me regularly. My [lay person] understanding is that those tests obviously aren't expected to turn up a 0 level of the narcotic, but rather to detect misuse and abuse of same. I have to think that I speak for many of us who depend on these types of medications just to live somewhat normal lives--we don't mind the regular screens. I *want* my prescriber (or anyone else) to be completely assured that I am not misusing or abusing my prescription medication. I have no firsthand knowledge of this whatsoever, but what I was told just last week is that Mississippi's opioid deaths are primarily due to heroin or fentanyl, often somehow purchased on the internet--not the Lortab or Norco that poor schleps like me are carefully rationing just to get through the workday without having to leave early. I know it's a complicated situation, but there are definitely several sides to it, and not all pertain to abuse or misuse.

Guilty until proven innocent. That is the Marshall Fisher way.

A couple of other reasons are to make sure you are not mixing with and / or abusing other med your doctor prescribing isn’t aware of.
And, also to make sure you still have SOME in your system and aren’t selling them on the street.

Because, of course, if you don't have SOME in your system YOU MUST BE selling them on the street. NO QUESTION, YOU MUST BE selling them on the street.

Have any of you experienced this drug-screening process yet? I did, several months ago....not for a refill but for the initial prescription. I was not prepared for the cost....which was well over $400. So, yeah, I'd say the "economic impact" for "those affected" is going to be substantial. ....and very likely to force people to chose between constant, debilitating pain or paying the rent. And some will opt to buy from the local street corner vendor since the overall cost for that option is probably less than the cost of getting them legally.

The reason for the drug screen is to see if you are taking any unprescribed drugs. I had to choose between weed and the pain pills. With some of the higher quality medical grade weed on the street that gives you the same relief, it's much easier to get the weed and it's not addictive.

Marijuana is psychologically addictive.

I thought we were concerned about the poor not being able to access medical care/medicine. A $400 out of pocket charge for a drug screen is not realistic for a lot of people. Will insurance/Medicare/Medicaid cover this cost of getting access to pain meds? Will patients be arrested/turned in if their drug screen turns up something else? Will patients be turned away if their tests show no opioids in their system? Who is keeping up w/ all that? Patients are getting the shaft...again.

$400 - a bargain!!

https://www.ajc.com/lifestyles/health/patient-blindsided-$17,850-urine-test-that-insurer-said-was-worth-100/a3CNMfN4GwBqh7fVeJADdM/amp.html

@ 1:41pm

So is Jackson Jambalaya. You can probably make a case for anything you enjoy as being "psychologically addictive".

Its all about the money...my last DT for a scheduled visit had increased 55% from the last DT 3 months ago. Due to a high deductible, it makes the cost of the scheduled visit 8x what the 1 prescription costs. Meanwhile little is being done about the heroin crossing the border.

Bankrupt states are looking at this as the next Tobacco jackpot lawsuits. In sept of 2017, 41 state AG were looking at manufacturers as targets for lawsuita.

If I have to pay 400 for a drug test for ANYTHING out of pocket, I’m f’n moving. I have the resources to do so. You can have your fantasy socialist collective police state plantation. My fire eating ancestors wouldn’t have stood for this crap, you damn carpet baggers.

This is a tax. Malaysia, Mexico, etc. all have cheaper costs of living AND healthcare. Expatriation is on the table while you’re taking our rights away.

The Secretary of State has issued a very important statement. Please see this quotation: "It is roughly estimated that most point of service urine screens cost less than $5. per screen inasmuch as a full quantitative urine analysis [sic] is not necessary."

Because insurance companies (and Medicare) do not pay for services which are not reasonable or necessary, this means that patients should not be billed more than $5 for the "point of service" urine screen. Patients can carry the Secretary of State's announcement with them to the doctor's office.

"Point of service" urine drug screens are not a defined services in CPT (Current Procedural Terminology, the accepted AMA coding book). From a scientific perspective, these not to exceed "$5" tests are practically worthless. There are so many false positives and false negatives as to be considered about the as good as flipping a coin.

Physicians, patients, and the public should be alarmed by the Secretary of State's lack of medical knowledge. The descriptor "...a full quantitative urine analysis" is not a medical or scientific term and usually refers to looking at the urine for white blood cells, bacteria, and the like.

In summary, it appears a very poor test (e.g., urine dipstick) will be performed in the office. These tests will have many false positives and false negatives. No confirmation tests "are necessary." The test will not cost the patient more than $5. Stupidity prevails.

"Mexico, etc. all have cheaper costs of living AND healthcare. "

Right, that's why there are 30 million or so undocumented Americans living in Mexico right now,enjoying that high quality (and free!) health care. Nobody from Mexico ever comes here, do they? /sarcoff

6:49 - don't you know? You haven't been told? Our MS SOS knows all! His opinion trumps all other. How dare you question his medical knowledge, or his absolute total background in insurance payments. I cannot believe KF even allowed such heresy.

6:49’s sarcasm prompted me to chuckle, but more often than not, Delbert IS correct at the end of the day. The comment caused me to think of times when he’s been wrong and I can’t recall any. Commenters, any examples? Looking for serious help here as I ponder 2019 and lean towards Dilbert.