The $75 Patient and the 10% Attorney Fee
Dr. C contracts with HealthLeads Marketing. HealthLeads runs radio ads calling Dr. C 'North Dakota's #1 chiropractor' and promising 'guaranteed migraine relief in four visits or your money back.' Dr. C pays HealthLeads $75 for each new patient who mentions the ad. The ads run for six months and generate 140 new patients. Separately, a personal injury attorney refers patients to Dr. C; Dr. C pays the attorney's office 10% of collected fees as 'lien management.' Dr. C also advertises a 'free X-ray with every new-patient exam' but does not disclose that the X-ray is billed to insurance when medically indicated. A competing chiropractor files a Board complaint.
1. Analyze the $75-per-patient and 10% attorney arrangements under North Dakota fee-splitting and professional-conduct rules.
Read the worked answer
The 10% attorney payment is the clearest violation. Paying a referral source a percentage of collected fees is classic fee splitting and is prohibited because it creates a financial incentive to refer and can corrupt clinical judgment. Calling it 'lien management' does not cure the arrangement unless the attorney actually provides separate, documented services at fair market value-unlikely here.
The $75-per-patient payment is also high-risk. If HealthLeads is paid only when a patient mentions the ad, the payment is tied to patient acquisition rather than to fair-market advertising services. That structure can be treated as impermissible fee splitting or a referral payment. The Board may also see it as misleading if patients are not told about the financial arrangement. Both arrangements should be terminated, and billing records should be audited.
2. Evaluate the advertising claims and the 'free X-ray' offer.
Read the worked answer
The claim that Dr. C is 'North Dakota's #1 chiropractor' is an unverifiable superiority claim likely to mislead. The guarantee of 'migraine relief in four visits or your money back' promises a specific clinical result that cannot be guaranteed for every patient; it creates false expectations and may induce patients to forgo appropriate care. Professional advertising must be truthful, not deceptive, and must not promise cures.
The 'free X-ray' offer is misleading if the X-ray is later billed to insurance when medically indicated. 'Free' must mean free to the patient, or the material conditions must be clearly disclosed. Billing insurance for a service advertised as free can also raise insurance-fraud concerns. Dr. C should revise the ads, disclose all conditions, and retain substantiation for any comparative claim.
3. What corrective steps and Board outcomes are foreseeable?
Read the worked answer
Dr. C should immediately terminate the per-patient marketing and attorney-payment arrangements, stop the challenged ads, correct the 'free X-ray' disclosure, and audit billing and referral records. Dr. C should self-report before the complaint is litigated, cooperate, and consider refunding or crediting affected patients where appropriate. A compliance plan should separate bona fide advertising payments from referral compensation and require written fair-market-value agreements.
The Board may investigate the referral and billing practices, subpoena records, and impose a reprimand, fine, probation, suspension, or ethics CE. Insurance carriers may audit and seek repayment. Because the conduct combines advertising and fee splitting, the Board may treat it as unprofessional conduct even if no patient was physically harmed.