Naomi Hersh, DDS

Naomi Hersh, DDS, is a dentist in Norwalk, CT. She has 19 years of experience. Prescription records include medications often used for dental or oral infections. Publicly available payment records include payments involving pharmaceutical companies and dental device or oral healthcare companies.

What is your opinion of Naomi Hersh, DDS? Rate this provider below so other people can make informed decision.

English

Based on the training and education, Naomi Hersh, DDS may treat patients with the following conditions. Please always check with Naomi Hersh, DDS directly about which exact conditions she treats.

Amoxicillin

(These can include payments from pharmaceutical companies, medical device companies, and other companies.)

Naomi Hersh, DDS has received over $111 in payments from medical companies (72% less than the average Dentist in Norwalk, CT)

GC America Inc. - $12.96 payment for Food and Beverage on 03/14/2023

GC America Inc. - $12.60 payment for Food and Beverage on 08/31/2022

Dexcel Pharma Technologies Ltd. - $21.46 payment for Food and Beverage on 12/04/2019

Straumann USA LLC - $50.00 payment for Education on 10/09/2018

Dentsply Sirona Inc - $14.49 payment for Food and Beverage on 01/17/2018

Dr. Naomi Hersh's care leaves a strong impression of thoroughness and candor. Feedback describes a cleaning that stretched past thirty minutes, during which the dental technician attended closely to every tooth. Honesty stands out as another quality, since the care is described as straightforward, with no pressure to diagnose cavities or to recommend work that was not needed. That sense of integrity appears to be a large part of why some patients are willing to travel considerable distances, even across state lines, to see her. Overall, the feedback conveys an impression of high-quality service. The sharpest criticism concerns cost. It is alleged that insurance does not cover the full charge, that the practice bills the full fee, and that the patient ends up paying roughly what the insurer would have paid, leaving the practice with a larger share. Discount arrangements are mentioned as a possible workaround, yet the same out-of-pocket amount is said to result. The critic concludes that financial gain is the central motive, an interpretation that seems to stem from frustration with billing rather than from any documented review of her clinical judgment.