What will care for my joint cost?

Why can two written prices be far apart?

Clinics may use similar names for different joint treatments. One amount may cover the exam and first treatment, while another includes later visits. An x-ray may be a separate charge, so compare only fully listed prices.

The number of sore joints can also affect the total. Care for one knee isn't care for both knees, and each may have its own charge. A shoulder exam may differ from a hip exam. Ask which joint, treatment, and later visits the amount covers.

What belongs in the written total?

Get one written amount before agreeing to any treatment. It needs to list the exam, x-ray, treatment, and later checks. It also needs to say if another treatment may be discussed. This helps prevent a small early price from becoming a larger bill.

Read the total at home when you aren't rushed. Circle every charge that doesn't make sense, then ask what it pays for. Clinic staff can explain whether that amount covers one visit or several. A clear answer is as important as the dollar amount.

How can I tell whether the cost fits my budget?

Start with the full total instead of the first payment. Ask your health plan what it will pay before expecting financial help. Don't borrow money because someone promises a certain result. Compare the expense with care already discussed by your doctor.

Take written questions and soreness notes so clinic staff understand what daily tasks have changed. Keep doing safe exercises while you think about the cost. Take enough time to decide whether the entire amount fits your budget. QC Kinetix offers concentrated PRP, or platelet-rich plasma prepared by concentrating platelets from your blood, among its non-surgical regenerative treatments.

Sources

1. An analysis of 38 businesses advertising stem cell and exosome products for COVID-19 found listed prices from $2,950 to $25,000 with an average of $11,322 - a direct measure of what this marketplace charges for products with no regulatory approval.

   Turner L, et al. — Businesses marketing purported stem cell treatments and exosome therapies for COVID-19: An analysis of direct-to-consumer online advertising claims. Stem Cell Reports, 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.stemcr.2023.09.015.

2. In orders issued 26 December 2024 and announced 8 January 2025, a federal court permanently banned the co-founders of the Stem Cell Institute of America and their companies from marketing any regenerative medicine treatment, and ordered $5,155,146 in refunds and civil penalties. The court found on summary judgment that they published false and misleading advertisements about the efficacy and approval of stem cell injections for osteoarthritis, neuropathy and joint pain; their clinic charged up to $5,000 per injection and the customers were almost exclusively elderly and disabled people.

   US Federal Trade Commission — Stem Cell Institute Co-Founders and Companies Banned from Marketing Stem Cell Treatments and Ordered to Pay More Than $5.1 Million for Refunds and Civil Penalties. , 2025.

3. In October 2018 the FTC settled charges against a California physician and two companies that earned at least $3.31 million selling 'amniotic stem cell therapy' between 2014 and 2017 - initial injections cost $9,500 to $15,000 with booster treatments at $5,000 to $8,000 - for advertising, without evidence, that it treated Parkinson's disease, autism, macular degeneration, cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis and osteoarthritis.

   US Federal Trade Commission — FTC Stops Deceptive Health Claims by a Stem Cell Therapy Clinic. , 2018.

4. A 2016 analysis of internet marketing found widespread direct-to-consumer promotion of unapproved stem cell interventions by businesses based in the United States - not only in countries with lax medical regulation - and concluded regulators must better oversee the marketplace.

   Turner L, et al. — Selling Stem Cells in the USA: Assessing the Direct-to-Consumer Industry. Cell Stem Cell, 2016. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2016.06.007.

5. Hundreds of US businesses and clinics market unproven and unlicensed stem cell-based interventions, and many of them appear to violate the federal regulations that govern human cell and tissue products.

   Turner L, et al. — The US Direct-to-Consumer Marketplace for Autologous Stem Cell Interventions. Perspect Biol Med, 2018. DOI: 10.1353/pbm.2018.0024.

6. A systematic analysis of 243 clinic websites offering stem cell therapies found routine use of hype language and inconsistent disclosure of the experimental or unproven status of what was being sold, with complementary and alternative medicine practitioners heavily represented.

   Murdoch B, et al. — Exploiting science? A systematic analysis of complementary and alternative medicine clinic websites' marketing of stem cell therapies. BMJ Open, 2018. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019414.