Showing posts with label injectables. Show all posts
Showing posts with label injectables. Show all posts

Thursday, July 14, 2011

Guidelines for Injector in Aesthetic Medicine

Updated 3/2017-- all links (except to my own posts) removed as many no longer active. 

There is a great article in the “throw-away” MedEsthetics magazine (July/August 2011 issue) written by Padriac B. Deighan, MBA, JD, PhD.  You can read the entire article here (pp 16-20; online issue).   If you employ any practice extenders in your office or run a medical day spa, you will find the article useful.
Deighan categorizes injectables in three ways:  botulinum toxins, dermal fillers, and sclerotherapy.
Botulinum toxins are prescription only drugs which are available to physician offices and via pharmacies, but not directly to non-physicians.  In other words, a registered nurse can inject neurotoxins under physician supervision, but cannot acquire them.
Botulinum toxin injection is considered a medical procedure which should only be provided in a medical setting by a trained and licensed provider (ie physician, registered nurse, nurse practitioner or physician assistant). 
Deighan notes that a medical spa is a medical setting ONLY if it is owned by a physician.  He recommends against Botox parties in patient’s homes, even though a physician can legally provide this service in that setting.
……
Injectable dermal fillers are not prescription drugs, but are medical devices
As such, they are delivered pursuant to the practice of medicine and all state and federal guidelines.  This is a distinction without difference because, although they are not prescriptive, medical devices – as categorized by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) – can only be utilized in a medical facility and delivered to patients by an appropriate medical provider.
Non-medical day spas or even medical day spas without physician supervision should not be injecting dermal fillers.
……
Moving on to sclerotherapy used most commonly to treat leg veins but also other areas.  Sclerotherapy is the introduction of a foreign substance into the lumen of the vein to cause thrombosis and subsequent fibrosis.  The injected solution falls into three types:  Chemical Irritants (glycerin, polyiodinated Iodine), Hypertonic solutions (Hypertonic-saline 11.7%, Hypertonic-glucose), and Detergent sclerosants (Sodium morrhuate, Sodium tetradecyl sulfate, 0.25% -3%, Ethanolamine oleate, and Polidocanol foam, 0.5-5% ).
Deighan states that saline is not considered a medical device or product, but the others are and therefore are subject to medical practice guidelines for the particular state and must be delivered in a medical setting.
…….
Please go read the article for his take  on CMAs (certified medical assistants) and cosmetic medical procedures.  Here’s part of it:
Recently, many CMAs have wrongfully asserted that they are allowed to inject and, therefore, have been injecting botulinum toxins, dermal fillers and sclerosants.  CMAs are marginally trained, non-medical personnel………
It will also be a huge problem in any professional negligence claim, because there will be no coverage for such a loss.  An insurance carrier will not provide a defense or indemnity for any claim related to these procedures. …….
He extends this same stand to “certified” technicians. 
For example, some “certified laser technicians” and their employers incorrectly believe that the designation “certified” elevated their stature and allows them to perform medical services.  Certified Laser Technician, Certified Medical Esthetician, and Medical Esthetician are not categories of medical providers. ……..



Related posts:
Medical Spa Regulations (March 26, 2009)
Medical Lasers and the Law (March 25, 2009)

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Injectables Roundup

Updated 3/2017-- all links (except to my own posts) removed as many are no longer active and it was easier than checking each one.

I have come across some interesting articles recently regarding injectables.  Let’s begin the non-controversial one: Behind the Lines by Linda W. Lewis, Nov/Dec 2010 MedEsthetics (pp 32-.  This one notes several filler discontinuations:
Johnson & Johnson (jnj.com) withdrew porcine collagen-based Evolence in November 2009; Allergan (allergan.com) discontinued its human and bovine collagen fillers, CosmoDerm, CosmoPlast, Zyderm and Zyplast, late last year and will stop distribution by the end of 2010.
The article mentions the latest filler introductions:
Juvederm XC from Allergan and Restylane-L and Perlane-L from Medicis (medicis.com).  These products differ from their predecessors only in the addition of lidocaine to the formulations.
Much greater changes are on the horizon, however, as manufacturers seek approval for exciting new products like Novabel (Merz Aesthetic, merzaesthetics.com) and Aquamid (Contura, aquamid.com).
The article also mentions that some physicians are using Restylane SubQ in buttock and breast enlargements.  This leads me to the next article (full reference below):   Macrolane(TM) for breast enhancement: 12-month follow-up.  The Swedish study used a new formulation of a stabilized hyaluronic acid-based gel of non-animal origin (NASHA(TM)-based gel) called Macrolane(TM) VRF30) in their open-label, multicentre, non-comparative study.
The aim of this study was to develop a reproducible technique for injecting NASHA-based gel posterior to the mammary gland (subglandular injection), and to assess treatment safety and efficacy. The feasibility of dual-plane submuscular injection was also explored.
Twenty-four non-pregnant, non-breastfeeding women (mean age 37 years) with small breasts were recruited, 20 of whom underwent subglandular injection.   Patients were treated in groups of four to enable step-wise revision of the injection technique. Safety and efficacy assessments (12-month follow-up) included adverse event (AE) reporting and the Global Esthetic Improvement Scale, respectively.
It’s a small study with the authors reporting 83% satisfaction in the post-procedure breast appearance at 6 months, 69% at 12 months.  I find it interesting that the most commonly reported adverse event was capsular contracture.   Obviously,  larger studies are needed before this can be routinely recommended to patients.
……………………….
Dentist are “pushing” their scope of practice beyond the teeth/dentition to include Botox and fillers.   While dentists may know how to do injections well and should know facial nerve/muscle anatomy well, I personally feel this is beyond the definition of dental practice.  I suppose it will be up to state dental and medical boards to work this out.
 The Evolving Role of Dentist in the Injectables Business by Jeff Frentzen, PSP Blog  leads you to the full article: The next revolution in dentistry: facial injectables by Bruce G. Freund, DDS, Oct 25, 2010.

REFERENCE
Macrolane(TM) for breast enhancement: 12-month follow-up; Per Hedén; Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery: POST ACCEPTANCE, 14 October 2010; doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318200ae57; Original Article: PDF Only