Among the many different treatments that have been created since the development of medicine, there are those that are considered controversial. This is due to the emergence of several areas of concern related to the effectiveness or usefulness of treatment for patients. Another aspect is the increased level of risk for both medical professionals and healthcare organizations. Thus, one of these methods becomes craniectomy or trepanation.
First of all, it is essential to determine what benefits and adverse effects the trepanation procedure has on patients. Among the harmful effects that stand out from the use of this method, one can single out “craniotomy is associated with an increased chance of subdural hygroma and/or hematoma collection and shunt malfunction” (Lee et al., 2017, p. 303). Moreover, an improperly performed procedure can leave the patient disabled or bring an infection to the brain.
Despite the controversial nature of this treatment, it has several advantages. Among them is the fight against epilepsy, getting rid of the tumor, and draining a brain abscess (Cserpan et al., 2022). Thus, several strategies can be used to advocate for a legislative change in the state of Florida to influence insurance coverage for this treatment. First, it may be the use of social media to spread awareness about the beneficial side of the operation. Moreover, direct lobbying is possible, implying an appeal to the legislator for forgiveness about the voice. Other strategies include conducting in-depth research to provide information, engaging in partnerships, and conducting conferences and trainings.
In conclusion, despite the controversial nature of some treatments, their use may have several health benefits. In the case of craniectomy, it can help in the fight against epilepsy, reduce the number of brain abscesses, and treat the tumor. Several strategies can be implemented for its implementation in the legislation, including direct lobbying, research and educational work, and involvement of stakeholders.
References
Cserpan, D., Gennari, A., Gaito, L., Lo Biundo, S. P., Tuura, R., Sarnthein, J., & Ramantani, G. (2022). Scalp HFO rates decrease after successful epilepsy surgery and are not impacted by the skull defect resulting from craniotomy. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 1-10. Web.
Lee, Y. H., Kwon, Y. S., & Yang, K. H. (2017). Multiloculated hydrocephalus: Open craniotomy or endoscopy?. Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society, 60(3), 301-305. Web.