Re: Cad CaM Responses #1

Re: Cad CaM Responses #1

CAD Email

3/29/2001

Dear Ron & Mike,

Our center is a combined clinical and Central Fab business, both dedicated
to prosthetics. Like the staff at American, we found ourselves knee deep in
plaster and were also skeptical of Cad devices. Our research lasted over two
years (everyone at Shapemaker, Vorum, and BioSculptor knew us very well). A
comment from Alan Finnieston: if you are nervous about technology and feel
you are better the old way, try this. Take the computers away from your
office staff and give them back thier old IBM seletrics! Do you think they
can perform as well?, made me really think!!! Needless to say, we were
skeptical to computerize our office as well. We decided to take the plunge.
Today we are a complete BioSculptor center, complete with virtual casting as
well as a laser imager. Our center also supports Tracer Ak sockets to
measurements, Shapemaker and any other files in AOP format. However
BioSculptor is our mainstay, with all files eventually downloaded into it.
Our fabrication would be lost without it. We have had CFab clients here who
either own or have worked on other systems, who are just amazed at what
BioSculptor can do. We can fabricate an average custom AK/BK check socket
(examine,image,manipulate,carve,mold,trim, put in box) in under one hour. On
many occasions we have casted patients and fit thier check sockets the same
morning! Today alone we imaged, manipulated,and carved two AK'S, four BK'S,
and two AK'S to measurements (this was also a patient care day for us as
well).

We are addicted to Cad, and like the staff at American, have found many
improvements in our socket fits. Another little nice touch is how we can
individualize models for various clients with thier own landmark buildups,
trimlines, etc. Prosthetists all have variations in the way they modify.
Once learning our clients preferences, we create templates just for them.
This way we can create a model designed just for them. We have found that
the right Cad system can act like a prosthetist, when operated by a
prosthetist. Like any other software, it takes time to learn. We have found
it a very powerfull tool!!

No,Cad cannot possibly modify all aspects of our needs. But neither can
other tools or methods in our profession! This is why we have lab's full of
tools and equipment. We are not a profession of quick fix answers, but
rather one of creativity.

Glenn Hutnick, CPO
GFH Laboratories\Hutnick Rehab Support Services
Holbrook, New York


----- Original Message -----
From: < <Email Address Redacted> >

To: < <Email Address Redacted> >
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 9:38 PM
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] Cad CaM Responses #1


Hi Mark.
I have been reading the responses to your CAD-CAM post for the past several
days. I thought it time to throw in my $.02 worth.
I purchased a complete Bio-Sculptor suite 5 years ago. The reason (other
than
the fact that like most prosthetists, I love gadgets) was to become more
efficient with regard to my plaster room. The “white pit” had become the
bottleneck in our small but busy P&O (heavy P) facility. I was spending
several hours every weekend in the plaster room. In a good week, I would
modify the models the same week they were casted. In a bad week, they were 2
weeks old. I often found myself trying to remember, “Who is this person I am
working on?” I was painfully aware that my well-paid technicians were often
standing around with nothing to do because my partner and I had not been
able
to do the model mods, due to clinics, seeing patients and returning
telephone
calls and running the business end, there were no hour or more blocks of
time
during business hours. I researched CAD for 2 years prior to deciding on
Bio-Sculptor. B-S is clearly the most intuitive CAD program available today.
It literally thinks like a prosthetist! The tools you use are so similar
that
there is a very short learning curve to get up to speed with it. After the
installation of the system, we committed to it 100% No double model
comparison period, but a full commitment to CAD. After all, the money I had
spent represented the largest business purchase I had ever made. For the
first month, I often found myself muttering, “this would be so easy in
plaster”, but we kept on with it. After all, for a 2-practitioner facility
the expenditure of $ 160,000 to replace $3.00 Sureform files was no small
commitment! After about a month, we started to understand the system and our
check sockets were starting to look reasonable. We then worked to
standardize
our casting techniques so the CAD work was quantifiable. Within 6 months, I
can honestly say that our initial sockets were every bit as good as we had
done by hand. I was completely happy! I was no longer spending my weekends
in
the plaster room! It was a rare occasion that the models weren't carved the
day they the casts were taken. I was 100%satisfied with the system by that
time. At the same time we were doing some aggressive business development
and
we were becoming busier and busier. We brought in another experienced CPO
who
was Shapemaker experienced. He was able to adapt to BS very rapidly. He was
also amazed at the accuracy of the BS carver and with the simplicity of the
software. After about a year to 18 months, we were noticing that our initial
sockets were routinely fitting with a sheath or one ply. A BK fitting was
taking no more than an hour (including alignment) and it was a rarity that a
second check socket was required.
We now have increased our professional staff to 7 practitioners. Five of
them
are prosthetists. Of these five, all are extremely enthusiastic about our
CAD-CAM program. All of them are experienced prosthetists who used to work
in
plaster. None of them would want to go back to it. We routinely deliver a BK
from 2 weeks of casting. The practitioner time (the most expensive commodity
in your office) has been cut in half and we are delivering a superior
product. We have, on numerous occasions, delivered prostheses “next day”
while the client is in rehab and speed is an issue. We do this without ever
breaking a sweat.
I often chuckle that one of our prosthetists will leave a fitting room with
an initial check socket in hand, complaining, “It fits in a 3ply. Wonder
what
wrong?”
I am in agreement that “what a prosthetist does, he does with is hands.” I
think this is the reason I have avoided the “wand-toy”systems being hawked
out there.
Sorry this post is so long, but this is actually an abbreviated story. I
would welcome interaction from progressive prosthetists who are interested
in
our experiences.
I am amazed that this technology has not set our small industry on fire.
We have increased our gross sales 400% in the past five years and our bottom
line by a corresponding number.
By the way, when we have do have to produce a plaster model for whatever
reason, I find myself saying “This would be so easy in CAD.”

Ron Kidd, CPO
American Orthopedics
Columbus, Ohio