Hi Rachel,

As there are dozens of options between keyboard and eye tracking that might be right for these patients too, my hope is these evaluators are finding a head tracker, touchpad, joystick, ergo mouse, mouse or foot trackball better meet these patients needs, at this time, but are getting them devices that can upgrade to eye tracking if they eventually need it. 


Sincerely,

Amy Roman, MS, CCC-SLP
Augmentative Communication Specialist



Forbes Norris ALS Research and Treatment Center
2324 Sacramento Street
San Francisco, CA 94115
Cell (415)518-0592
Fax (415)600-3778


From: Rachell Westby <xxxxxx@alsinfo.org>
To: "xxxxxx@alsa.simplelists.com" <xxxxxx@alsa.simplelists.com>
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 10:43 AM
Subject: RE: eye gaze funding?

Thank you Amy!  This is good feedback.  We are running into PALS being denied an eye gaze (by evaluator not Medicare) because the person is ambulatory or because the person can still use some fingers despite not being able to independently dress or grip a writing utensil.
 
As far as “fatigue” in reports, there seems to be a difference in opinion among vendors/vendor provided reviewers, but I agree there has not been a problem with stating and explaining muscle fatigue in the past.   
 
Best Regards,
 
Rachell
Rachell Westby, M.C.D., CCC-SLP | Assistive Technology Program Manager
The ALS Association – DC/MD/VA Chapter
8100 Three Chopt Rd Suite 147| Richmond VA 23229
T: 804.477.8728|C: 804.912.5758
E: xxxxxx@alsinfo.org| ALSinfo.org
                                             
                                                                                   
 
 
Join us for Walk to Defeat ALS® and Team Challenge ALS this Spring!
For more information or to register, visit www.ALSinfo.org  
 
From: xxxxxx@alsa.simplelists.com [mailto:xxxxxx@alsa.simplelists.com] On Behalf Of Amy Lustig
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 1:26 PM
To: xxxxxx@alsa.simplelists.com
Subject: Re: eye gaze funding?
 
I haven't had any denials for eye gaze equipment, but I have not submitted any requests in the past couple of months.

I do my best to describe the justification in functional terms. If I use the term "fatigue ", I will specify that it is muscle fatigue, not a lack of energy or attention on the patient's part. I don't use any sort of mobility rating as there's really no necessary relationship between ambulation status and speech clarity.

Where I'm running into trouble is being unable to justify purchases for patients who have intelligible speech but who are essentially paralyzed otherwise. I think an eye gaze interface is a perfect solution but Medicare will not cover it unless there's a speech issue as well.

Sent from my iPhone

On May 19, 2017, at 1:07 PM, Rachell Westby <xxxxxx@alsinfo.org> wrote:
Good afternoon,
 
These questions are coming in from different parts of the territory we cover, and I wanted your feedback. 
 
Is anyone experiencing any trouble with eye gaze funding within the last couple of months?   Especially involving the word “fatigue” in the device submission report.
 
Has anyone had any concerns over writing a funding report to cover an eye gaze device for a person who has limited mobility with steady decline?   What would your advice be to SLPs who are experiencing difficulty defining the line of how much mobility has to be lost before an eye gaze is appropriate?  
 
Is anyone using a physical/mobility rating scale in their device submission reports to define when someone is eye gaze eligible?   
 
Best Regards,
 
Rachell
Rachell Westby, M.C.D., CCC-SLP | Assistive Technology Program Manager
The ALS Association – DC/MD/VA Chapter
8100 Three Chopt Rd Suite 147| Richmond VA 23229
T: 804.477.8728|C: 804.912.5758
E: xxxxxx@alsinfo.org| ALSinfo.org
                                             
                                                                                   
 
 
Join us for Walk to Defeat ALS® and Team Challenge ALS this Spring!
For more information or to register, visit www.ALSinfo.org