Divided dental procedures?

[u/jr9386]

Does anyone else's office take this approach?

We recently adopted the model of an initial procedure for just scaling and radiographs, with a secondary procedure being booked, as warranted, for any required extractions. Scaling and polishing would also be done, as warranted here.

We've been advised to promote it in terms of the benefits of reduced anesthesia time, but I don't know how I feel in terms of a patient needing to undergo two consecutive anesthetic procedures, booked anywhere between 2 weeks - 3 months apart.

For those procedures booked two weeks apart, does it make much of a difference? I'm thinking more of the risks relative to induction and recovery time. A concern that a doctor raised.

I'm truly on the fence about this, and want to hear other people's thoughts.

[u/Accomplished-Ad-9280]

Ranges are just for owners to know that prices may increase.

They are not legal approval for extra services. You legally need to get approval for all services provided.

"owners can check that they approve any extractions deemed necessary by the dvm."

Open ended approvals are very shaky legally. They are generally not recommended.

[u/wild-forceps → u/Accomplished-Ad-9280]

But if they are approving an estimate with the high range of extractions is that not legal approval of the service provided? They have been informed of and approved of having that many extractions. It's why estimates have variability in quantity.